Using games to understand the mind

Kelsey Allen, Franziska Brändle, Matthew Botvinick, Judith E. Fan, Samuel J. Gershman, Alison Gopnik, Thomas L. Griffiths, Joshua K. Hartshorne, Tobias U. Hauser, Mark K. Ho, Joshua R. Leeuw, Wei Ji Ma, Kou Murayama, Jonathan D. Nelson, Bas Opheusden, Thomas Pouncy, Janet Rafner, Iyad Rahwan, Robb B. Rutledge, Jacob Sherson, Özgür Şimşek, Hugo Spiers, Christopher Summerfield, Mirko Thalmann, Natalia Vélez, Andrew J. Watrous, Joshua B. Tenenbaum and Eric Schulz ()
Additional contact information
Kelsey Allen: DeepMind
Franziska Brändle: Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics
Matthew Botvinick: DeepMind
Judith E. Fan: Stanford University
Samuel J. Gershman: Harvard University
Alison Gopnik: University of California, Berkeley
Thomas L. Griffiths: Princeton University
Joshua K. Hartshorne: Boston College
Tobias U. Hauser: University College London
Mark K. Ho: Princeton University
Joshua R. Leeuw: Vassar College
Wei Ji Ma: New York University
Kou Murayama: University of Tübingen
Jonathan D. Nelson: University of Surrey
Bas Opheusden: Princeton University
Thomas Pouncy: Harvard University
Janet Rafner: Aarhus University
Iyad Rahwan: Max Planck Institute for Human Development
Robb B. Rutledge: Yale University
Jacob Sherson: Aarhus University
Özgür Şimşek: University of Bath
Hugo Spiers: University College London
Christopher Summerfield: University of Oxford
Mirko Thalmann: Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics
Natalia Vélez: Harvard University
Andrew J. Watrous: Baylor College of Medicine
Joshua B. Tenenbaum: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Eric Schulz: Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics

Nature Human Behaviour, 2024, vol. 8, issue 6, 1035-1043

Abstract: Abstract Board, card or video games have been played by virtually every individual in the world. Games are popular because they are intuitive and fun. These distinctive qualities of games also make them ideal for studying the mind. By being intuitive, games provide a unique vantage point for understanding the inductive biases that support behaviour in more complex, ecological settings than traditional laboratory experiments. By being fun, games allow researchers to study new questions in cognition such as the meaning of ‘play’ and intrinsic motivation, while also supporting more extensive and diverse data collection by attracting many more participants. We describe the advantages and drawbacks of using games relative to standard laboratory-based experiments and lay out a set of recommendations on how to gain the most from using games to study cognition. We hope this Perspective will lead to a wider use of games as experimental paradigms, elevating the ecological validity, scale and robustness of research on the mind.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-01878-9 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:nathum:v:8:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1038_s41562-024-01878-9

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/nathumbehav/

DOI: 10.1038/s41562-024-01878-9

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Human Behaviour is currently edited by Stavroula Kousta

More articles in Nature Human Behaviour from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().