Measure of attention over space using the useful field of view paradigm, (a) Sequence of displays. After a heavy mask, participants indicated the spoke on which the small target (filled shape within a circle) appeared. The spatial distribution of attention was tested by placing the target at different eccentricities, (b) Localization accuracy for VGPs & NVGPs. VGPs showed large enhancements in localization ability at all eccentricities. The superiority of VGPs at 30 degrees indicates that the enhancement of spatial attention observed in this population is not limited to trained locations, (c) Performance before (□, ■) and after (○. ●) training. At each eccentricity, the group trained on an action video game (open symbols, dashed lines) improved significantly more from their pre-test scores than did the control group trained on a non-action video game (closed symbols, solid lines). Error bars denote SEMs, **= P < 0.01. (From Green & Bavelier, 2003).

Measure of overall attentional capacity using multiple object tracking, (a) VGP & NVGP performance. VGPs demonstrate a substantial increase in the accuracy with which multiple items can be tracked compared to NVGPs. The effect is most pronounced for the 3–5 item range, (b) Pre- and post-training performance of the action video game group. Participants show a marked improvement with training, (c) Pre-and post-training performance of the non-action video game group. Performance was identical before and after training in the control group. Error bars denote SEMs, *= P < 0.05, **= P < 0.001. (From Green & Bavelier, 2006b).

Measure of attention over time using the attention blink paradigm, (a) Black letters were rapidly presented sequentially at fixation. At a random time in the stream, a white letter was presented. After this first target, an ‘X’ was presented at some point in the remainder of the trial, 50% of the time. After the trial, participants reported the identity of the white letter and indicated whether or not the ‘X’ was presented. Of interest is the performance of participants on detecting the ‘X’, given that they correctly identified the white letter, (b) VGP & NVGP performance. At early lags, VGPs performed better (less blink) than NVGPs; as lag increased, the effect of the attentional bottlenecks decreased, and, as expected, the performances of the two populations were comparable, (c) Performance before and after training. The group trained on an action video game recovered faster from the attentional blink than did the group trained on a non-action video game. Error bars denote SEMs, *= P < 0.05, **= P < 0.01. (From Green & Bavelier, 2003).

(a) Crowding stimuli consisted of three T shapes randomly oriented either right side up or upside down. Participants indicated the orientation of the central T. In separate blocks, three eccentricities were tested (0, 10, 25 degrees). The flanking Ts were presented first away from the central T and then brought nearer and nearer until the participant’s performance threshold was reached, (b) VGP & NVGP performance. VGPs demonstrate a significantly reduced crowding threshold compared to NVGPs, meaning they can resolve the central T orientation with closer flanking Ts. (c & d) Pre- and post-training performance of the action video game group and the control group. Participants in the action-trained group show a marked reduction in crowding with training. For the control group performance was identical before and after training. (*= P < 0.05). (From Green & Bavelier, 2007).