A survey out today from the Pew Internet & American Lift Project suggests that teens with "frequent civic gaming experiences" are more likely to go online to get information about politics and current events, give or raise money for charity, and persuade others how to vote in an election. In research that probed (refreshingly) beyond stereotypical studies focused on conjectural parallels between video gaming and social behavior (like aggression), the Pew study instead delved into the relationship between games and civic or political outcomes.
How to define a "civic outcome"? Generally speaking: "An increase in one's engagement of public and/or political life."
The Pew study found that there are, in fact, civic dimensions to video game play, that "the characteristics of game play and the contexts in which teens play games" strongly correlate with teens' interest and engagement in civic and political activities, and that civic gaming experiences are "more equally distributed than many other civic learning opportunities."
Importantly: The quantity of gameplay didn't strongly relate to teens' interest or engagement in civic and political activity (sorry World of Warcraft zombies, another potential play-excuse bites the dust). Also, playing games with others online was not related to civic and political outcomes, though playing with others in person was, suggesting that physical social cues play a role in shaping civic and political interconnectedness. On the other hand, teens who took part in social interaction related to the game, like commenting on websites or posting on message boards, were more engaged civically and politically.
I wonder if the Pew researchers stopped to consider whether posting on websites and message boards, with all the semantic shenanigans and snarky one-upping, might be construed as a kind of game in and of itself.
