Los videojuegos violentos no generan violencia

0
434

Un nuevo estudio publicado en la revista Nature Molecular Psychology termina de despejar las pocas dudas que hubiera en torno a la relación entre videojuegos violentos y personas violentas: no existe relación. El experimento lo ha llevado a cabo un equipo de investigadores alemanes y para ello ha reclutado a 77 personas mentalmente sanas y que no son aficionados a los videojuegos, y las ha sometido a un exhaustivo test de personalidad para medir sus niveles de agresividad y propensión a la violencia de cualquier tipo. Después ha separado a esos 77 voluntarios en tres grupos.

A los miembros del primer grupo se les puso a jugar un mínimo de media hora diaria a Grand Theft Auto V, un juego que entra dentro de los considerados violentos. A los miembros del segundo grupo les pusieron a jugar a Los Sims 3. El tercer grupo era el de control, y simplemente les dijeron que volvieran más tarde. Al cabo de dos meses, los tres grupos regresaron para someterse de nuevo a los test, y dos meses más tarde, ya todos haciendo vida normal, volvieron a examinarse.

Dependent variables GTA Sims Controls
Baseline Posttest 1 Posttest 2 Baseline Posttest 1 Posttest 2 Baseline Posttest 1 Posttest 2
Questionnaires assessing aggression and associated constructs
 BP physical aggression 1.99 (0.76) 2.03 (0.89) 1.95 (0.82) 1.55 (0.47) 1.66 (0.62) 1.50 (0.38) 1.94 (0.92) 1.87 (0.93) 2.08 (1.26)
 BP verbal aggression 3.78 (0.80) 3.61 (0.92) 3.61 (0.77) 3.62 (1.04) 3.63 (0.83) 3.56 (0.69) 3.66 (1.18) 3.82 (1.14) 3.86 (1.15)
 BP anger 2.85 (1.08) 2.63 (0.98) 2.61 (1.21) 2.42 (0.77) 2.39 (0.92) 2.22 (0.77) 2.64 (1.34) 2.49 (1.16) 2.72 (1.32)
 BP hostility 1.89 (0.66) 2.01 (0.98) 2.13 (0.83) 1.76 (0.68) 1.89 (0.74) 1.73 (0.69) 2.09 (1.20) 2.11 (1.23) 2.37 (1.32)
 SHS feeling mean 1.17 (0,22) 1.27 (0.51) 1.17 (0.20) 1.15 (0.28) 1.17 (0.26) 1.26 (0.52) 1.36 (0.59) 1.33 (0.56) 1.32 (0.48)
 SHS aggravation 1.34 (0.48) 1.41 (0.61) 1.29 (0.37) 1.32 (0.45) 1.32 (0.48) 1.37 (0.63) 1.46 (0.66) 1.48 (0.68) 1.45 (0.62)
 SHS feeling unsociable 1.37 (0.60) 1.27 (0.29) 1.24 (0.38) 1.28 (0.51) 1.17 (0.26) 1.30 (0.61) 1.49 (0.66) 1.45 (0.55) 1.36 (0.54)
 SHS lack of positive feelings 2.10 (0.68) 2.06 (0.58) 1.99 (0.61) 2.00 (0.62) 1.93 (0.48) 2.03 (0.59) 2.20 (0.82) 2.18 (0.80) 2.28 (0.93)
 IRMAS she asked for it 10.80 (3.37) 10.68 (3.81) 10.39 (4.75) 11.08 (3.43) 9.92 (2.50) 10.10 (2.97) 9.75 (4.12) 10.18 (3.77) 9.74 (4.21)
 IRMAS he did not mean to 12.16 (4.27) 13.28 (7.40) 10.39 (4.19) 11.29 (3.46) 10.46 (3.15) 9.67 (2.90) 10.68 (4.18) 9.75 (4.13) 8.91 (3.90)
 IRMAS it was not really rape 6.84 (2.66) 6.68 (2.73) 6.00 (1.33) 6.38 (2.41) 6.17 (1.79) 5.67 (1.39) 7.11 (3.33) 7.07 (3.38) 6.61 (3.14)
 IRMAS she lied 9.48 (3.61) 10.24 (3.31) 9.22 (3.32) 9.54 (3.68) 8.42 (3.31) 8.57 (3.79) 9.86 (4.93) 9.61 (4.93) 9.65 (4.99)
 Moral Disengagement Scale 1.85 (0.54) 1.88 (0.58) 1.81 (0.65) 1.67 (0.40) 1.77 (0.59) 1.62 (0.43) 1.69 (0.56) 1.64 (0.56) 1.70 (0.62)
 RPFT extra-punitive 0.46 (0.11) 0.46 (0.09) 0.45 (0.16) 0.46 (0.15) 0.46 (0.12) 0.47 (0.14) 0.53 (0.11) 0.49 (0.11) 0.49 (0.16)
 RPFT intra-punitive 0.25 (0.09) 0.27 (0.08) 0.24 (0.07) 0.26 (0.09) 0.27 (0.08) 0.23 (0.05) 0.23 (0.06) 0.26 (0.06) 0.24 (0.06)
 RPFT non-punitive 0.28 (0.08) 0.29 (0.10) 0.24 (0.12) 0.26 (0.08) 0.26 (0.08) 0.28 (0.10) 0.25 (0.09) 0.25 (0.08) 0.27 (0.12)
 RPFT obstacle dominance 0.27 (0.09) 0.27 (0.10) 0.24 (0.12) 0.32 (0.07) 0.35 (0.08) 0.30 (0.09) 0.29 (0.10) 0.30 (0.08) 0.23 (0.08)
 RPFT ego-defense 0.55 (0.09) 0.48 (0.11) 0.47 (0.16) 0.44 (0.08) 0.46 (0.06) 0.47 (0.10) 0.47 (0.09) 0.42 (0.11) 0.46 (0.12)
 RPFT need persistence 0.18 (0.11) 0.25 (0.13) 0.23 (0.13) 0.23 (0.12) 0.20 (0.11) 0.23 (0.12) 0.23 (0.11) 0.26 (0.13) 0.28 (0.11)
 WVM percent 26.43 (22.93) 19.37 (16.34) 18.90 (16.76) 18.73 (20.85) 12.35 (12.67) 11.91 (14.73) 15.16 (16.17) 16.39 (21.83) 18.61 (26.13)
 WVM safety 9.28 (3.21) 9.28 (3.46) 9.33 (3.48) 10.83 (2.55) 11.29 (2.14) 10.67 (2.24) 11.00 (2.69) 10.96 (2.50) 10.61 (2.08)
Behavioral measures assessing aggression
 Word completion test 0.11 (0.06) 0.19 (0.06) 0.19 (0.05) 0.15 (0.05) 0.17 (0.07) 0.16 (0.05) 0.12 (0.05) 0.19 (0.11) 0.18 (0.07)
 Lexical decision task 2.17 (2.30) 1.92 (1.80) 1.56 (1.30) 4.58 (8.70) 3.85 (7.81) 1.16 (1.46) 1.77 (1.97) 2.76 (7.03) 1.64 (2.13)
 Delay frustration task 2.35 (2.31) 1.79 (1.69) 1.41 (1.23) 5.21 (9.16) 3.68 (7.73) 1.28 (1.58) 1.76 (1.96) 2.72 (6.90) 1.62 (2.14)
Sensation seeking and boredom proneness
 BSSS experience seeking 4.3 (0.92) 4.28 (0.94) 4.36 (0.94) 4.33 (0.76) 4.50 (0.72) 4.38 (0.84) 4.11 (0.70) 4.21 (0.78) 4.24 (0.80)
 BSSS boredom susceptibility 3.34 (0.89) 3.24 (0.98) 3.06 (1.01) 3.42 (0.58) 3.42 (0.67) 3.26 (0.70) 2.93 (0.73) 3.16 (0.73) 3.20 (0.79)
 BSSS thrill and adventure seeking 2.36 (1.01) 2.22 (1.15) 2.53 (1.17) 2.35 (1.18) 2.46 (1.08) 2.60 (1.14) 2.02 (0.91) 2.20 (0.90) 2.22 (0.95)
 BSSS disinhibition 2.78 (1.09) 2.96 (1.08) 2.92 (1.28) 2.90 (1.15) 3.06 (1.19) 2.95 (1.17) 2.80 (0.81) 3.02 (0.93) 2.89 (0.95)
 Boredom proneness scale 81.04 (17.57) 82.28 (16.83) 81.39 (19.92) 78.83 (16.62) 81.67 (17.96) 80.29 (19.07) 82.39 (19.63) 80.71 (19.57) 86.43 (20.03)
Behavioral measures assessing risk taking and delay discounting
 Balloon analogue risk task 31.75 (13.75) 39.49 (10.86) 41.56 (12.21) 39.60 (14.08) 43.89 (13.81) 46.42 (11.42) 35.57 (13.56) 41.65 (14.08) 48.65 (13.18)
 Delay-discounting task delay 5.22 (24.85) 0.03 (0.08) 25.34 (123.25) 0.05 (0.12) 0.03 (0.08) 0.76 (2.46) 0.17 (0.80) 0.03 (0.10) 0.03 (0.07)
 Delay-discounting task probability 14.26 (35.50) 8.78 (23.47) 12.00 (33.39) 3.70 (8.86) 1.94 (2.03) 2.17 (3.22) 17.99 (42.92) 3.27 (7.51) 4.61 (9.79)
Questionnaires and tests assessing empathy and interpersonal competence
 IRI perspective taking 2.43 (0.80) 2.50 (0.66) 2.57 (0.64) 2.70 (0.49) 2.71 (0.57) 2.57 (0.54) 2.63 (0.65) 2.70 (0.53) 2.45 (0.68)
 IRI fantasy scale 2.05 (0.78) 2.04 (1.00) 1.28 (1.09) 2.48 (0.71) 1.81 (1.15) 1.41 (1.17) 2.15 (0.81) 1.96 (0.99) 1.56 (1.15)
 IRI empathic concern 2.58 (0.72) 2.52 (0.54) 2.52 (0.56) 2.64 (0.52) 2.66 (0.51) 2.61 (0.59) 2.60 (0.54) 2.50 (0.55) 2.51 (0.51)
 IRI personal distress 1.57 (0.55) 1.45 (0.75) 1.03 (0.91) 1.63 (0.57) 1.31 (0.87) 1.13 (0.95) 1.58 (0.74) 1.44 (0.82) 1.15 (0.93)
 Balanced Emotional Empathy scale 6.23 (0.83) 6.13 (0.84) 6.12 (0.86) 6.31 (0.90) 6.45 (0.96) 6.27 (0.83) 6.20 (0.95) 6.22 (0.88) 6.01 (0.90)
 Reading the mind in the eyes 25.40 (3.97) 25.00 (4.14) 27.28 (4.23) 25.54 (4.43) 26.04 (4.19) 26.79 (3.8) 24.69 (4.20) 25.31 (4.43) 24.58 (5.37)
 ICQ initiating relationships 3.47 (0.66) 3.35 (0.76) 3.85 (1.73) 3.36 (0.58) 3.28 (0.53) 3.34 (0.66) 3.31 (0.86) 3.27 (0.95) 3.30 (0.93)
 ICQ negative assertion 3.39 (0.67) 3.11 (0.67) 3.04 (0.77) 3.13 (0.66) 3.09 (0.74) 3.09 (0.81) 3.21 (0.61) 3.22 (0.66) 3.00 (0.72)
 ICQ disclosing personal information 3.33 (0.68) 3.30 (0.73) 3.29 (0.83) 3.54 (0.53) 3.54 (0.58) 3.60 (0.56) 3.09 (0.81) 3.15 (0.78) 3.10 (0.89)
 ICQ providing emotional support 4.14 (0.86) 4.01 (0.75) 4.09 (0.63) 4.10 (0.57) 4.01 (0.65) 4.09 (0.49) 3.98 (0.63) 3.97 (0.56) 3.99 (0.67)
 ICQ advice and managing social conflict 3.24 (0.73) 3.31 (0.73) 3.38 (0.74) 3.59 (0.42) 3.57 (0.46) 3.62 (0.47) 3.47 (0.50) 3.49 (0.65) 3.45 (0.63)
 RCRQ direct aggression 1.27 (0.35) 1.26 (0.30) 1.22 (0.29) 1.18 (0.24) 1.20 (0.23) 1.18 (0.19) 1.29 (0.44) 1.33 (0.52) 1.28 (0.56)
 RCRQ indirect aggression 1.30 (0.26) 1.32 (0.36) 1.39 (0.31) 1.34 (0.23) 1.35 (0.31) 1.41 (0.36) 1.55 (0.49) 1.51 (0.53) 1.48 (0.47)
Questionnaires assessing depressivity and anxiety
 Beck depression inventory 3.64 (3.49) 4.04 (6.03) 4.28 (4.87) 2.88 (2.94) 3.88 (5.13) 3.05 (5.90) 5.11 (6.26) 4.32 (7.18) 4.48 (6.54)
 STAI state 34.36 (6.36) 34.12 (8.82) 31.78 (6.84) 33.88 (8.67) 33.54 (9.78) 32.33 (10.31) 36.39 (10.65) 34.64 (6.68) 35.67 (9.85)
 STAI trait 38.84 (6.90) 38.28 (7.58) 36.39 (8.38) 37.75 (7.54) 38.63 (8.30) 37.90 (8.57) 39.93 (7.68) 40.18 (9.64) 39.08 (9.51)
Behavioral measures assessing executive control function
 Stop signal task 212.2 (51.37) 193.0 (21.20) 188.3 (24.78) 204.9 (31.42) 198.1 (39.53) 195.3 (28.88) 226.5 (40.74) 209.8 (37.30) 201.0 (39.54)
 Multi-source interference task 314.2 (55.29) 286.2 (54.39) 267.8 (46.66) 297.7 (49.42) 261.6 (53.75) 249.5 (50.36) 320.0 (88.71) 287.9 (63.85) 258.0  (64.29)
 TS switching costs 69.71 (39.29) 61.92 (43.16) 36.59 (43.94) 62.18 (36.61) 40.45 (35.11) 47.82 (46.67) 70.18 (42.79) 47.59 (53.21) 46.91 (34.18)
 TS mixing costs 133.0 (41.03) 105.0 (61.42) 64.82 (53.88) 112.10 (68.27) 82.10 (69.12) 103.45 (61.55) 126.1 (72.26) 124.5 (74.83) 86.90 (50.85)

Las conclusiones son claras. No existe la mas mínima variación entre las personas que jugaron GTA V a diario durante dos meses con los de los otros dos grupos. Los niveles de agresión, empatía, control de impulsos, ansiedad y depresión eran exactamente los mismos antes y después del experimento.

El estudio no es muy grande en términos de la cantidad de gente a la que examina, pero su metodología es tan cuidadosa que diferentes investigadores que no han participado en él lo consideran una piedra de toque a la hora de considera la relación entre violencia y videojuegos como un mito.

Pese al estudio, existen muchas voces conservadoras que siguen empeñadas en convencer a la opinión pública de que los videojuegos son los culpables de la violencia entre los jóvenes. La del presidente Trump no es ni mucho menos la única. La mismísima Asociación Americana de Psicología (APA) publicó un documento en 2015 en el que reconocía una relación entre juegos violentos y violencia. Muchos de los firmantes de este documento se basan en una teoría psicológica llamada Primado. Según esta teoría, nuestras acciones o pensamientos pueden ser influenciadas por el entorno, y por tanto someternos a videojuegos violentos puede incrementar nuestros niveles de violencia.

De poco importa que los pocos estudios al respecto solo hayan podido demostrar este efecto durante unos pocos minutos después de jugar, o de que la propia teoría del primado haya tenido problemas cuando otros psicólogos han intentado replicar sus efectos. Quizá el estudio recién publicado sirva a la APA para revisar sus políticas, pero probablemente no sirva de nada. Defender la relación entre violencia y videojuegos es como defender la relación entre vacunas y autismo. A menudo no se trata de una cuestión de ciencia, sino de ideología.

Dependent variables GTA vs. Sims GTA vs. Controls
Classical frequentist approach Bayesian approach Classical frequentist approach Bayesian approach
Questionnaires assessing aggression and associated constructs
 BP physical aggression F(1,35) = 0.486, p = 0.490, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.612 F(1,37) = 3.647, p = 0.064, ω2 = 0.063 BF01 = 0.597
 BP verbal aggression F(1,35) = 0.057, p = 0.813, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.113 F(1,37) = 0.342, p = 0.562, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.023
 BP anger F(1,35) = 0.511, p = 0.480, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.599 F(1,37) = 1.120, p = 0.297, ω2 = 0.003 BF01 = 1.754
 BP hostility F(1,35) = 1.193, p = 0.282, ω2 = 0.005 BF01 = 1.902 F(1,37) = 0.000, p = 0.998, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.252
 SHS feeling mean F(1,35) = 0.710, p = 0.405, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.390 F(1,37) = 0.245, p = 0.624, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.829
 SHS aggravation F(1,35) = 0.969, p = 0.332, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.090 F(1,37) = 0.262, p = 0.612, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.208
 SHS feeling unsociable F(1,35) = 0.619, p = 0.437, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.460 F(1,37) = 0.205, p = 0.653, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.128
 SHS lack of positive feelings F(1,35) = 0.495, p = 0.486, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.734 F(1,37) = 0.528, p = 0.472, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.183
 IRMAS she asked for it F(1,35) = 0.073, p = 0.789, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.974 F(1,37) = 0.000, p = 0.993, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.993
 IRMAS he did not mean to F(1,35) = 0.258, p = 0.615, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.964 F(1,37) = 0.011, p = 0.918, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.267
 IRMAS it was not really rape F(1,35) = 0.022, p = 0.883, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.369 F(1,37) = 0.889, p = 0.352, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.590
 IRMAS she lied F(1,35) = 0.385, p = 0.539, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.460 F(1,37) = 1.242, p = 0.272, ω2 = 0.005 BF01 = 2.363
 Moral Disengagement Scale F(1,33) = 1.001, p = 0.324, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.480 F(1,33) = 0.005, p = 0.945, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.962
 RPFT extra-punitive F(1,33) = 0.501, p = 0.484, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.436 F(1,30) = 0.358, p = 0.554, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.977
 RPFT intra-punitive F(1,32) = 0.705, p = 0.407, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.010 F(1,31) = 0.027, p = 0.870, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.666
 RPFT non-punitive F(1,32) = 0.782, p = 0.383, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 1.582 F(1,32) = 4.328, p = 0.046*, ω2 = 0.063 BF01 = 0.700
 RPFT obstacle dominance F(1,32) = 0.110, p = 0.742, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.218 F(1,31) = 0.124, p = 0.727, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.900
 RPFT ego-defense F(1,33) = 1.781, p = 0.191, ω2 = 0.017 BF01 = 0.773 F(1,31) = 6.115, p = 0.019*, ω2 = 0.102 BF01 = 0.328
 RPFT need persistence F(1,32) = 0.409, p = 0.527, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.328 F(1,31) = 0.567, p = 0.457, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.759
 WVM percent F(1,35) = 0.669, p = 0.419, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.315 F(1,37) = 1.468, p = 0.233, ω2 = 0.012 BF01 = 2.018
 WVM safety F(1,35) = 0.150, p = 0.701, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.548 F(1,37) = 0.064, p = 0.801, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.058
Behavioral measures assessing aggression
 Word completion test F(1,35) = 6.844, p = 0.013*, ω2 = 0.086 BF01 = 0.161 F(1,35) = 1.792, p = 0.189, ω2 = 0.022 BF01 = 1.717
 Lexical decision task F(1,47) = 0.002, p = 0.962, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.618 F(1,50) = 0.009, p = 0.926, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.522
 Delay frustration task F(1,37) = 1.626, p = 0.210, ω2 = 0.016 BF01 = 1.361 F(1,40) = 1.471, p = 0.232, ω2 = 0.010 BF01 = 1.695
Sensation seeking and boredom proneness
 BSSS experience seeking F(1,35) = 0.928, p = 0.342, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.327 F(1,37) = 2.988, p = 0.092, ω2 = 0.048 BF01 = 0.924
 BSSS boredom susceptibility F(1,35) = 0.297, p = 0.589, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.022 F(1,37) = 3.559, p = 0.067, ω2 = 0.058 BF01 = 0.493
 BSSS thrill and adventure seeking F(1,35) = 0.000, p = 0.996, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.280 F(1,37) = 0.386, p = 0.538, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.714
 BSSS disinhibition F(1,35) = 0.502, p = 0.483, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.673 F(1,36) = 0.073, p = 0.789, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.363
 Boredom proneness scale F(1,35) = 0.052, p = 0.820, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.205 F(1,37) = 0.400, p = 0.531, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.028
Behavioral measures assessing risk taking and delay discounting
 Balloon analogue risk task F(1,47) = 0.471, p = 0.471, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.873 F(1,47) = 0.420, p = 0.520, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.665
 Delay-discounting task delay F(1,45) = 0.646, p = 0.426, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.429 F(1,49) = 0.387, p = 0.537, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.346
 Delay-discounting task probability F(1,45) = 0.347, p = 0.559, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.838 F(1,49) = 1.131, p = 0.293, ω2 = 0.003 BF01 = 1.735
Questionnaires and tests assessing empathy and interpersonal competence
 IRI perspective taking F(1,36) = 1.637, p = 0.209, ω2 = 0.015 BF01 = 1.493 F(1,38) = 1.636, p = 0.209, ω2 = 0.015 BF01 = 2.041
 IRI fantasy scale F(1,56) = 0.447, p = 0.507, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.651 F(1,56) = 0.154, p = 0.696, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.341
 IRI empathic concern F(1,36) = 0.027, p = 0.871, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.006 F(1,38) = 0.288, p = 0.594, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.162
 IRI personal distress F(1,56) = 0.029, p = 0.867, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.915 F(1,56) = 0.099, p = 0.754, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.585
 Balanced emotional empathy scale F(1,34) = 2.293, p = 0.139, ω2 = 0.033 BF01 = 1.335 F(1,36) = 0.076, p = 0.785, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.025
 Reading the mind in the eyes F(1,33) = 1.005, p = 0.636, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.964 F(1,33) = 1.019, p = 0.626, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.746
 ICQ initiating relationships F(1,35) = 1.761, p = 0.193, ω2 = 0.017 BF01 = 2.003 F(1,37) = 1.163, p = 0.288, ω2 = 0.004 BF01 = 2.180
 ICQ negative assertion F(1,35) = 3.352, p = 0.076, ω2 = 0.037 BF01 = 0.797 F(1,37) = 0.643, p = 0.428, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.557
 ICQ disclosing personal information F(1,35) = 0.337, p = 0.565, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.413 F(1,37) = 3.335, p = 0.076, ω2 = 0.051 BF01 = 1.491
 ICQ providing emotional support F(1,35) = 1.032, p = 0.317, ω2 = 0.001 BF01 = 1.691 F(1,37) = 1.389, p = 0.246, ω2 = 0.007 BF01 = 2.076
 ICQ advice and managing social conflict F(1,35) = 0.001, p = 0.970, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.086 F(1,37) = 0.005, p = 0.943, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.197
 RCRQ direct aggression F(1,35) = 0.184, p = 0.671, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.936 F(1,37) = 0.106, p = 0.746, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.848
 RCRQ indirect aggression F(1,35) = 0.325, p = 0.572, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.948 F(1,37) = 2.227, p = 0.144, ω2 = 0.029 BF01 = 1.264
Questionnaires assessing depressivity and anxiety
 Beck depression inventory F(1,35) = 0.167, p = 0.685, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.768 F(1,37) = 0.400, p = 0.531, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.756
 STAI state F(1,35) = 0.219, p = 0.643, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.834 F(1,38) = 1.089, p = 0.303, ω2 = 0.002 BF01 = 2.140
 STAI trait F(1,35) = 0.219, p = 0.642, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.560 F(1,38) = 0.263, p = 0.611, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.305
Behavioral measures assessing executive control function
 Stop signal task F(1,47) = 0.976, p = 0.328, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 2.139 F(1,47) = 0.000, p = 0.985, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.423
 Multi-source interference task F(1,38) = 0.157, p = 0.694, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.167 F(1,37) = 0.544, p = 0.465, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 3.011
 TS switching costs F(1,38) = 0.993, p = 0.325, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 1.781 F(1,37) = 0.019, p = 0.892, ω2 < 0.001 BF01 = 1.911
 TS mixing costs F(1,38) = 10.373, p = 0.003*, ω2 = 0.184 BF01 = 0.067 F(1,37) = 1.683, p = 0.203, ω2 = 0.017 BF01 = 1.179
Summary statistics
 Harmonic mean BF01 = 1.380 BF01 = 1.808
 Arithmetic mean F = 0.945, p = 0.510, ω2 = 0.009 BF01 = 1.201 F = 0.967, p = 0.514, ω2 = 0.011 BF01 = 2.404
Foto del avatar

Comments are closed.