Games Addiction Researcher Admits "I Made an Error"

The Phd'd researcher behind the report that claimed that 8.5% of 8-to-18 year olds in the US 'show signs of behavioural addiction' to games has admitted to an error, and a big one based on assumption, in the research.

Following a report by ABC News' Gary Langer that pointed out flaws in the sampling of the data (taken from a Harris poll) the researcher, Douglas Gentile (Ph.D) of Iowa State University, told Langer: "I guess I’d assumed they (Harris) had gathered the population initially as part of a random probability sample...

"I missed that when I was writing this up. That is an error then on my part."

Langer's criticism was that the study uses results from an opt-in online panel (people who click through to online questionnaires in order to get goodies). This is also called a 'convenience sample'. It's rather different from a 'probability sample', which is a random sampling that takes in a cross-section of society. The former is used to sell things. The latter is used for research - our words, not Langer's.

The ABC man's work has been followed up by a letter from the head of the ESA (Entertainment Software Association - the USA's industry body for video games) Michael Gallagher. Specifically, Gallagher has written to Dr. Robert V. Kail, editor of the Psychological Sciences journal set to publish the Gentile's "study". It includes the following examples of excoriating and even withering tutting:

"A press release from the National Institute on Media and the Family, with which Dr. Gentile is affiliated, contained this headline: 'New Study Finds Nearly One out of 10 Young Gamers May Be ‘Addicted.’' The dramatic assertion generated headlines in many newspapers, including the Washington Post."

(Bear in mind that SPOnG had already made the link between the 'Institute' and Dr Gentile.)

"It is safe to say that the sole reason the study generated the kind of media attention it did was due to the inclusion of specific numbers that would appear to have been based on scientific research. In fact, the numbers reflected no such thing. Because of the composition of the group studied, neither the overall figure, nor the cited sampling error is supported by the data Dr. Gentile presented", Gallagher stated.

Gallagher continued, "We accept Dr. Gentile’s admission of error at face value, although it is hard to understand how a researcher would base a scientific study upon an assumption about the nature of the group he was studying. It is not that Dr. Gentile did not have time to make sure that the group was a truly national representative sample: the data was collected in January, 2007", he wrote.

Rounding things up, Gallagher concluded, "Based on the public comments of both Dr. Gentile and Harris Interactive, we are requesting that any references to the study in your publication and on your Website, clarify the methodological flaws in Dr. Gentile’s study and inform your readers how those flaws affect the accuracy of the study."

Good work by Langer at the ABC and a validation of SPOnG's own disbelief at the 'research'.