Are gamers smarter?

[Elric]

In the sense that gaming is an intellectual hobby, those who game are probably somewhat more inclined to intellectual hobbies as a whole. This probably reflects the fact that gamers are more intellectual, which probably reflects the fact that gamers are smarter. But this is a rather weak chain with rather minimal implications for the intelligence of gamers. An argument involving creativity (that gamers are more creative) would be more plausible, especially given the number of other creativity oriented activities that gamers engage in.

Everyone who has some small niche of intellectual ability and/or expertise probably considers themselves above average in intelligence. People do not really think about themselves as a whole in assessing their strengths and weaknesses- they look at what they are good at and like to do. Thus, it is no surprise that something like 80% of college students consider themselves smarter than their average peer. Average has come to imply a negative and getting a “C” is a mark of Cain.

If I get triple-bogeys regularly in miniature golf, I could take this as evidence that I am a terrible miniature golfer and thus a terrible athlete. Or I could reassure myself that I never play golf, don’t particularly enjoy it so I shouldn’t define my athleticism based on it. On the other hand, if I am a veritable wizard at miniature golf, I will probably take this as evidence that I am a good miniature golfer and a good athlete. I like miniature golf and I play it often, so I can define my athleticism by it.

Plus, intelligence has something of an odd meaning anyways. If you were a ranger, you would probably consider those incapable of learning how to identify a creature by its tracks dumb. On the other hand, a bard might consider intelligence the ability to learn to identify chords of music. For the wizard, intelligence will be the ability to memorize tomes of ancient arcane knowledge written in long-dead languages. Each is likely to consider himself more intelligent than average.

 

[Creamsteak]

The bad news is, the research showed that--contrary to, and with all respect to, Mr. Gygax's claims--gamers are not any smarter, on average, than non-gamers of comperable backgrounds and education levels.

Why would we be smarter than people of comparable backgrounds and education levels? That doesn't make any sense to me...

I would think that more of us reach higher education levels than the population as a whole... I mean, theres more gamers at college than there were at highschool.

 

[Hardhead]

I know a couple very smart gamers. Also, one of the dumbest people I know is also a gamer.

I wouldn't guess that gamers are any smarter. But that's just a guess.

 

[Trainz]

[...]The world is absolutely full of stupid people. And odds are, you and I both are some of them.

My new sig. Brilliant.

 

[Trainz]

I agree with the concensus (sp?) that gamers are not more gifted than average peep-holes in the domain of intelligence. I, too, have met very different dudes in my gaming past.

My best friend, who is also my prime RP'ing partner, is a gifted genius. He's a great computer programmer with undeniable intelligence (coder of Interactive Dungeon).

He's a gamer.

I also used to game (a few games only, thank god) with the most absolute moron I have ever met. We still make jokes about that guy 15 years after. He was (is ?) an idiotic despacable guy. No game-balance. Had to lie his way through everything, such was his lack of intelligence. Especially when such lying was unecessary.

He's also a gamer.

I want to add a little something that is not meant as an attack at all, just a little observation: it is elitist and patently wrong to even consider that some aspect of a given group (such as gamers and intelligence) is better than the common folk.

Being a gamer, computer geek, and especially a musician, I too, sometimes, have that gut feeling that because of what I do and whatever success I achieve because of it I am somewhat better in some aspect than the common folk. As soon as I have that feeling I quiet it down and chase it away. It is wrong. It is not wrong to feel good about yourself, it is not wrong to be glad of your successes, but it is WRONG to think you're better than someone else.

Look at my new sig, compliments of the Sigil.

 

[NiTessine]

Well, I like to think so.

'Intelligence' is too nebulous to measure, I think. There's mathematical intelligence, creativity, 'social smarts', and so forth. According to two separate IQ tests, my IQ is a hair above 130. This would place me well above the average of 100. But, during my years in high school, I've repeatedly demonstrated an amazing lack of skill in anything mathematical. None of the nine gamers at our school have ever managed to grasp Swedish, despite being fully fluent in two other languages.

And still, for our random shortcomings, we do tend to get grades from the high end of the scale. Of course, I do realize that grades are not an accurate measure of intelligence, but none of us are very diligent when it comes to schoolwork, so that's probably not it.

Then again, this might be just my ego talking. *Shrug*

 

[Scarbonac]

So are gamers smarter?

Christ, no.

 

[Creamsteak]

It is not wrong to feel good about yourself, it is not wrong to be glad of your successes, but it is WRONG to think you're better than someone else.

Damn. I must be absolutely evil.

Edit: To clarify, I don't feel good about myself or very proud of my successes, but I do think I'm better than a LOT of people.

 

[fusangite]

I would put the question this way: do players of amateur sport have above average athletic abilities? do amateur musicians have above-average musical talent?

No doubt some people in amateur sports leagues have below average talent in athletics; similarly, no doubt, some amateur musicians (and I'm sure we all can remember a few individuals of this ilk) have below average musical talent. Similarly, I am sure that many gamers have below average literacy and numeracy skills.

However, it does seem to me that enjoying a passtime and being good at the skills associated with it are not wholly disconnected. While we can find many individual amateur musicians of below average musical talent, it seems quite a stretch to me for people to argue that having some innate musical ability has no statistical relationship whatsoever to wanting to spend one's time playing music.

While not being a necessary condition for attraction to a hobby, having an above average proficiency with the skills associated with the hobby does seem to be one of the factors that would attract people to said hobby. It seems to me that some people attracted to a hobby are going to be attracted to it because they have some degree of innate talent with the skills set associated with the hobby.

So, to argue that gamers have identical literacy and numeracy skills, on average, to the population at large is essentially the same as arguing that proficiency at a hobby is never a factor in whether someone chooses to take it up. Even if only 20% of gamers are attracted to gaming, in part, because of their proficiency with the literacy and numeracy skills required to practice it, this is sufficient to make the argument that, on average, gamers are more literate and numerate than the population on average.

Furthermore, even if you try to make the case that proficiency at a hobby has nothing whatsoever to do with people's attraction to the hobby, you must contend with another problem: in order to play D&D, a minimum set of literacy and numeracy skills is required. While most people have the minimum necessary skills, a minority do not. That minority is automatically disqualified from gaming. So, supposing that you need to be in the top 90% of the population in terms of literacy and numeracy in order to become a gamer, the barriers to entry will guarantee that those involved in the hobby are more literate and numerate than the population as a whole.

Now, if people want to dispute the idea that above average literacy and numeracy constitutes above average intelligence, fine. All I am arguing is that, based on the D20 rules' definition of the attribute "intelligence," it is impossible to argue that gamers are not smarter than average.

 

[Trainz]

Damn. I must be absolutely evil.

Edit: To clarify, I don't feel good about myself or very proud of my successes, but I do think I'm better than a LOT of people.

If you don't feel good about yourself, you should try to change something about your life/personal outlook to adjust that. Feeling good about yourself is the basic pursuit of happiness, and I would like you to be happy. It really sucks to not feel good about yourself, I used to, many years ago.

And I think I can understand what you *mean* by "I do think I'm better than a LOT of people", but I invite you to clarify... I did imply that what you DO or what you ACHIEVE shouldn't be the scale by which you judge who's inferior to you.

Because I agree, as a general human being, I did meet people I would definitely judge inferior. In a despecable, disgusting, revolting inferior way.