Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38913664›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2024

The tangled ways to classify games: A systematic review of how games are classified in psychological research.

Jolanta Starosta, Patrycja Kiszka, Paulina Daria Szyszka, Sylwia Starzec, Paweł Strojny

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jolanta StarostaFaculty of Management and Social Communication, Institute of Applied Psychology, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Patrycja KiszkaDoctoral School in the Social Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0009-0008-4819-7769
Paulina Daria SzyszkaFaculty of Philosophy, Institute of Psychology, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Sylwia StarzecDoctoral School in the Social Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Paweł StrojnyFaculty of Management and Social Communication, Institute of Applied Psychology, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the face of the rapid evolution of the gaming market and the puzzling overlap of genres, consistency in classification seems elusive. The purpose of the present review was to explore the classification of video game genres in the context of psychological research. The aim was to address the challenges associated with creating consistent and meaningful classifications of video game genres, considering the rapid evolution of the gaming market and recent tendency to create games that could be classified into multiple genres. We performed a search in four databases according to the PRISMA guidelines and reviewed 96 full-text papers (N = 49 909). Through our findings, we reveal how researchers strive to classify genres and the numerous complications that arise from this pursuit. In the face of these challenges, we propose alternative ways of classifying genres. Our first proposal is a new classification of video game genres based on our literature review. In our second proposal, we advocate a more detailed understanding by focusing on specific gaming mechanics, and thus we introduce the innovative concept of utilizing community-based tags, such as Steam tags, as an alternative to genres in psychological research.

Indexed as

Video GamesHumans

Identifiers

PMID38913664
PMCPMC11195997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.