SynthesisPloS one2024
The tangled ways to classify games: A systematic review of how games are classified in psychological research.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Performance: Cognitive Overload and Related Cognitive, Psychophysiological, and Performance States in Competitive Esports-A Scoping Review.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The role of videogame genre and platform in gaming disorder tendencies: A large-scale world-wide study of gamers' preferences.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2026Article
- Game over? examining associations between video game play and visual and auditory spatial ability.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Exploratory study of qualitative psychological factors influencing performance in esports.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.