Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

Study: Consoles elicit varied psych responses

  • By Patrick Caldwell, GameSpot
  • Posted Aug 4, 2006 5:31 pm PT

Researchers say Xbox branding increases boys' self-confidence and motivation for power, but makes them more distrustful.

A group of market researchers yesterday released the results of a study of how branding affects children, looking at how boys responded to the PlayStation and Xbox console brands and how girls responded to Barbie and Bratz dolls.

Anderson Analytics, a Stamford, Connecticut-based market-research group, took a number of boys and girls and asked them to write short stories before and after viewing product ads or logos. Then the group's "personality psychologists" used "text-mining software" to compare the stories and measure the "subconscious effects of the brand logo or advertising."

The group found that Microsoft's branding made boys more self-confident and "power motivated" than those who viewed Sony's system. But it also "increased levels of distrust," something Sony's branding did not do, the researchers said.

It is unclear whether the study made a distinction between the Xbox and the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation, PlayStation 2, and PlayStation 3. The number of participants and their ages is also unclear. Anderson Analytics had not responded to a request for comment as of press time.

As for the dolls, Anderson said that every female participant's opinion after viewing the Bratz and Barbie brands swayed. Some girls became "more interested in prestige and status" of the brands, while others became more distrustful or more confident in them. In general, those who viewed Barbie, rather than Bratz, "exhibited a more trusting psychological state," the researchers said.

"Our findings confirm that brand advertising can increase positive attitudes and perceptions," said Anderson Analytics principal Tom Anderson. "The reverse is also true. Some ads actually decrease brand trust in the target market. That's why it's more important than ever for marketers to pay attention to psychological profiles and the power of the subconscious mind."

186 Comments

  • overachiever92

    Posted Aug 15, 2006 8:49 am GMT

    People are so paranoid! (What? I'm NOT paranoid. Not me. Nope.) I can see this being true to a slight extent, but if they dare using this study in, say, another attack against the video game market... Well, there really hasn't been enough information to make a supported point of it. I'll wait and see what happens.

  • Sephiroth99000

    Posted Aug 14, 2006 11:42 pm GMT

    "thedarkoracle
    Some people have way too much time and resources on their hands. Come on, goverment and private sectors, how about researching ways to end world hunger and poverty, and achieving world piece?"

    Then again, where's the money in that? There's always money to be made in controversy."

    These people are market resaerchers. they are not payed by the governemnt. their job is to research how ads effect people so they can more effectively advertise other products. It has nothing to do with controversy.

  • someguy503

    Posted Aug 9, 2006 6:59 pm GMT

    And wii commercials make you more co-operative and into unity and make you more trustful

  • thedarkoracle

    Posted Aug 8, 2006 8:48 am GMT

    Some people have way too much time and resources on their hands. Come on, goverment and private sectors, how about researching ways to end world hunger and poverty, and achieving world piece?

    Then again, where's the money in that? There's always money to be made in controversy.

  • rynmls

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 10:19 pm GMT

    just examining..

  • nappan

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 1:46 pm GMT

    "Dantes_Monkey
    so Xbox owners = paranoid, megalomaniacs
    Playstation owners = gullable, megalomaniacs"

    I love that summation. Now, on the surface you'd think that paranoia and gullability would be mutually exclusive, but if you think about it, it's a perfect pairing. so all those dual console owners like myself, according to the study are essentially full blown psychopaths who trust no one, seek complete dominance over their environment, but are crippled by an inability to distinguish reality from truth. That would explain why this 9 foot tall half-lizard half-walrus has been following me around and giving me bad advice regarding my plans to take over the world. **** @_o

  • willripyouanew1

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 12:17 pm GMT

    Theses people got paid for that study ?Now I know what I wanna be when i grow up.

  • EcksBocks360

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 12:10 pm GMT

    i can positively tell that some politician organized this so that he/she can use it to ban videogames...

  • PatchMaster

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 11:38 am GMT

    Wow,it sound as if they made next to no conclusions about the study. All they came away w/ was that Lemmings want to take over the world? Hmm...

  • Autolycus

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 11:29 am GMT

    To all the people defending this study, you have a right to defend, just as much as we have right to complain. The problem is, some stupid politician is going to use this as a study to condem that video games are harmful. You're right we don't know all the details(age, race, sex, how they concluded it was the logo/company, etc). However, when people give out little details to the public, it usually means it was shotty research. And then some other person or group is going to use this and state it as a fact later(which it isnt). It IS ONE of the possibilities. Or it could be the kid just had to much sugar and it just hit his mind/imagination...

  • pantweasel

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 10:24 am GMT

    I don't buy it. "text-mining"? Sounds a bit far-fetched.

  • skemaal

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 10:08 am GMT

    The scariest thing in all of this is that your tax dollars were spent to give researchers a grant on such a study....

  • Laxfish

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 6:42 am GMT

    Okay if you haven't majored in psychology or even taken a psych course shut up. You can't get all mad about this survey because you don't know all the facts. If we knew the age of kids, how many kids, the advertisments shown, and also the way in which kids were asked to wirte the stories it would be easier to deduce the credibility of the study. Also this experiment is very easy to duplicate, marketing firms do studies like these all the time. Its an interesting study on brand influence but isn't ground breaking.

  • UnbredVermin-UK

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 6:33 am GMT

  • GKBeetle

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 6:25 am GMT

    You guys are overreacting. It was sounds like it was just a study on how certain ads affect your perception of a product. It was a marketing thing. It really has nothing to do with gaming, as far as I can see. The only reason that it is on this site is the story mentions Microsoft and Sony.

    Also, I love it how all the paranoid gamers automatically come on here and post that the study is rubbish without even knowing what is really being studied or why it is being studied.

  • s0l0123

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 5:44 am GMT

    What the heck? another study?

  • Autolycus

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 5:29 am GMT

    the way this study was preformed wasnt very identifiable. The factors might have nothing to do with the console @ all....waste of tax payers dollars

  • Dantes_Monkey

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 5:15 am GMT

    so Xbox owners = paranoid, megalomaniacs
    Playstation owners = gullable, megalomaniacs
    nice

  • amirkalloe

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 3:12 am GMT

    Shouldn't people be worried about other things

  • Igiss

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 3:03 am GMT

    Oh, positive attitude, perception. This reminds me about Vice City Public Radio.

  • YEPEE00

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 2:06 am GMT

    Pbbbt!...ding! what is, the salty salt of salt. "my dad works(varible, (of lesser status), your dad makes (varible, (a common or accepted ripoff)) videogames that end up in the hands (term, (of a welcome injustice to peer favors.))"

  • daser4454

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 11:11 pm GMT

    What tha f$%!

  • ronaldmonster

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 11:08 pm GMT

    We have system wars and belive this is stuff we've loooooooong before they did this study.

  • acidicdot

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 10:45 pm GMT

    Are you taking notes, I'm looking at you Sony.

  • gamepunk86

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 10:21 pm GMT

    so we bascially found out about nothing. this affects people's...how? this is gotta be the dumbest research experiment i've ever heard of. what a complete waste of time for this stupid scientists.

  • NinjaFoot

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 6:40 pm GMT

    LMAO @ Witch Doctor "Science"

  • nappan

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 12:24 pm GMT

    "Maquis_UK
    so basically Nappan is saying that a shaven-headed individual with a gun fetish can cause more harm than a globe-straddling bullyboy corporation which furthers the have/don't have inequality even further. 5 percent of the people own 95 percent of global wealth, and lets be real here gates is one of them. but the free choice of a single individual is more scary? WTF?"

    You talked about trust, not about the degree of harm done. Corporations are predictably self centered and destructive. People present more variables. Period.

    "Iron_Dragon: Lol-Then the group's "personality psychologists" used "text-mining software" to compare the stories and measure the "subconscious effects of the brand logo or advertising." "

    Yeah really, time to break out the tinfoil beenies. This reminds me vaguely of government funded experiments to probe the viability of MDMA as a truth serum, or LSD's actions on soldiers. Of course, those studies conformed to a more scientific method, with real longitudinal data to see if these effects are more than momentary, or even real at all. If this study were being submitted to an academic review process, it would instantly die. Remember, this is a CORPORATE study... the same ones that bring us a vast failure rate for newly marketed products. The same ones that brought us "new coke". Ha.

    P.S. "B4mB00
    Maquis... about your earlier comment... "Anti-Trust" has nothing to do with the level of trust a certain consumer has..."

    Hell, I assumed he was making a joke. Maquis_UK, you knew that the kind of trust they meant is a in reference to actions taken in a market which act to form certain banned practices and monopolies. If you didn't... maybe you're qualified to work for, "A Stamford, Connecticut-based market-research group"...

  • Beaver_Ben

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 12:07 pm GMT

    Reminds me of Super Size Me. When the children are shown pictures and ask to id the person shown. Maybe this research is just another way of trying to target games towards children. Truly in about 3 weeks no1 is going to remember anyway.

  • caliland

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 11:28 am GMT

    snozberry
    Just think....while you are hard at work sweating and slaving away making those cheeseburgers and french fries, somebody is making ten times as much money(or more) by doing bullsh*t studies like this.

    Dear Snozberry, this studies are not bull, there are hundreds of thousands of stuies made each year by college professors and other academics. It is just gamespot who reported this study to us, because they found it interesting, as do I. I am sorry if you work in fast-food, this is yet another reason to get a college degree. If you are a teenager then its a bit ok but if you are a grown-a** adult then i feel sorry for you. Also these people do not make as much money as you think, but they do make a good income. Working away making burgers and fries takes no skill so they dont have to pay people much, because anyone can do it. Conducting scientific/statistical reasearch requires intense skill and a higher education, I am sorry if you disagree, maybe if you would go to college you could understand this situation and the world better.

    This is the same for all you people who bash studies, though not all are great, many are warranted.

  • necrophilissimo

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 11:09 am GMT

    Quote: Omihalcon: "i play what i want to play because i enjoy it not because some chump on the TV told me i'd be 'cool' if i did."

    I totally agree, unless the "chump on the TV" happens to be John Carmack.

  • ironman288

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 11:08 am GMT

    Its not an attack on videogames people its an attack on lousy advertisments! Don't take it personally or anything....

  • Omihalcon

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 11:02 am GMT

    Advertising is bull. The main reason most of us are here is because we're above that (we are informed gamers) and i personally know that i play what i want to play because i enjoy it not because some chump on the TV told me i'd be 'cool' if i did.

  • snozberry

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 10:08 am GMT

    Just think....while you are hard at work sweating and slaving away making those cheeseburgers and french fries, somebody is making ten times as much money(or more) by doing bullsh*t studies like this.

  • B4mB00

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 10:01 am GMT

    Maquis... about your earlier comment... "Anti-Trust" has nothing to do with the level of trust a certain consumer has...

    It means that a company is using unfair business strategies, such as monopolising a certain product.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitrust

  • DarkSaber2k

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 9:53 am GMT

    I was just thinking, what is about Gaming that attracts such bulls**t research? It's that 'Games are racist' piece of crap they reported a couple of weeks ago!

  • Maquis_UK

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 9:48 am GMT

    so basically Nappan is saying that a shaven-headed individual with a gun fetish can cause more harm than a globe-straddling bullyboy corporation which furthers the have/don't have inequality even further. 5 percent of the people own 95 percent of global wealth, and lets be real here gates is one of them. but the free choice of a single individual is more scary? WTF?

  • andresmabril

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 9:44 am GMT

    ...........And why isnt Nintendo in here??

  • metdevthegamer

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 9:40 am GMT

    Nappan is right. Damn chimps! Making monkeys out of us gamers (and less importantly little girls)!

  • comthitnuong

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 9:32 am GMT

    it seems i have motivation for power

  • DarkSaber2k

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 9:22 am GMT

    Yeah, lets be honest. Shame on Gamespot for reporting this vague piece of crap to us! We've get better stuff to be looking at, like the progress on Dead Rising or Crysis!

  • assassinX01

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 9:20 am GMT

    so basically. . . it's inconclusive and there is no need to even post this crap.

  • Dafdiego777

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 9:06 am GMT

    Ummm... Shouldn't people be worried about other things, like global warming?

  • DarkSaber2k

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 8:54 am GMT

    Your obviously an Xbox user then! LOL!

    Just kidding, but according to this 'study' you are.

    R.I.P. Scientific method.

  • nappan

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 8:30 am GMT

    "dn3datomiced"

    I drink coke, or pepsi or mountain dew based on the taste I want to experience. Period. It's the same reason why one night I might want ice water, and another night I might want a gin and tonic, or another night a glass of wine, or yet another night, a coke. A lot of people don't reference the image that a bunch of brainwashed teenieboppers have of a product before they use it.

    "McDonalds/Burger King"

    Are you kidding me? You actually chose one based on something other than the taste you want at that moment? I don't doubt some people are so vacuous and shallow that they do care, but that's not really how MOST advertising works. Most advertising buys into that kind of mentality, but the basics are still "make it look good, make it look like it tastes good or feels good or drives well, etc" and the biggest challenge is to use an image to makeit MEMORABLE. Most people don't actually drone away "I feel like tasting the excitement, I will now smoke a marlboro".

    Group of chimps, I'm telling you.

    P.S. "Beat me to it Maquis. Anyone who once believed M$ when they say the new version of Windows will be better quickly learns to distrust "

    I trust MS. I trust them to act in their best financial interest in spite of the rule of law, or the harm it will do consumers. Anything and everything they can get away with. I trust all corporations to act that way. Now, individual people tend to have MUCH less predictable motives, and therefore I trust politicians less, and the avg person MUCH less. Who knows what individual pathos you're batting around right now. You're not answerable to shareholders or the public at large, you're just some lone nut. You might be a saint, or you might be ready to shave your head, climb the closest clock tower and open fire. I don't know, and that my friend, is REAL distrust.

  • DarkSaber2k

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 8:10 am GMT

    Beat me to it Maquis. Anyone who once believed M$ when they say the new version of Windows will be better quickly learns to distrust them.

  • Maquis_UK

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 7:12 am GMT

    wow Micro$haft makes people less trusting? 1996 just called and they want their news back... individual people and governments have been filing anti-trust actions against ms for more than a decade now.

  • GFofgaming

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 7:01 am GMT

    This is really....stupid. Although I cannot disagree with the fact xbox makes people distrustful

  • DarkSaber2k

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 6:05 am GMT

    The simple fact that they are trying to decipher the subconscious should say something.

    Amtalx, they are doing nothing of the sort. They are simply investigating new ways in which they can make people subconsciously want to buy products.

    Xbox makes you powerful? It's no different a message then that given out by other brands. Look at things like Nike or Lynx. Even (or rather, especially) car advertisements give out that message in a not-so-subtle way.

  • Slifer2909

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 5:46 am GMT

    Wonder what his means for me since i associate myself with all the brands... and anyone find it funny they only mention Xbox and PS and not nintendo

  • Gailen_1

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 5:16 am GMT

    stupidest. thing. ever.

    more distrustful? higher interest in prestige? what the f***? from reading a short story? give me a break.

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!