ImportanceAlthough most research has linked video gaming to subsequent increases in aggressive behavior in children after accounting for prior aggression, findings have been divided with respect to video gaming’s association with cognitive skills.ObjectiveTo examine the association between video gaming and cognition in children using data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this case-control study, cognitive performance and blood oxygen level–dependent (BOLD) signal were compared in video gamers (VGs) and non–video gamers (NVGs) during response inhibition and working memory using task-based functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in a large data set of 9- and 10-year-old children from the ABCD study, with good control of demographic, behavioral, and psychiatric confounding effects. A sample from the baseline assessment of the ABCD 2.0.1 release in 2019 was largely recruited across 21 sites in the US through public, private, and charter elementary schools using a population neuroscience approach to recruitment, aiming to mirror demographic variation in the US population. Children with valid neuroimaging and behavioral data were included. Some exclusions included common MRI contraindications, history of major neurologic disorders, and history of traumatic brain injury.ExposuresParticipants completed a self-reported screen time survey including an item asking children to report the time specifically spent on video gaming. All fMRI tasks were performed by all participants.Main Outcomes and MeasuresVideo gaming time, cognitive performance, and BOLD signal assessed with n-back and stop signal tasks on fMRI. Collected data were analyzed between October 2019 and October 2020.ResultsA total of 2217 children (mean [SD] age, 9.91 [0.62] years; 1399 [63.1%] female) participated in this study. The final sample used in the stop signal task analyses consisted of 1128 NVGs (0 gaming hours per week) and 679 VGs who played at least 21 hours per week. The final sample used in the n-back analyses consisted of 1278 NVGs who had never played video games (0 hours per week of gaming) and 800 VGs who played at least 21 hours per week. The VGs performed better on both fMRI tasks compared with the NVGs. Nonparametric analyses of fMRI data demonstrated a greater BOLD signal in VGs in the precuneus during inhibitory control. During working memory, a smaller BOLD signal was observed in VGs in parts of the occipital cortex and calcarine sulcus and a larger BOLD signal in the cingulate, middle, and frontal gyri and the precuneus.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, compared with NVGs, VGs were found to exhibit better cognitive performance involving response inhibition and working memory as well as altered BOLD signal in key regions of the cortex responsible for visual, attention, and memory processing. The findings are consistent with videogaming improving cognitive abilities that involve response inhibition and working memory and altering their underlying cortical pathways.

Background Concerns abound regarding childhood smartphone use, but studies to date have largely relied on self-reported screen use. Self-reporting of screen use is known to be misreported by pediatric samples and their parents, limiting the accurate determination of the impact of screen use on social, emotional, and cognitive development. Thus, a more passive, objective measurement of smartphone screen use among children is needed. Objective This study aims to passively sense smartphone screen use by time and types of apps used in a pilot sample of children and to assess the feasibility of passive sensing in a larger longitudinal sample. Methods The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study used passive, objective phone app methods for assessing smartphone screen use over 4 weeks in 2019-2020 in a subsample of 67 participants (aged 11-12 years; 31/67, 46% female; 23/67, 34% White). Children and their parents both reported average smartphone screen use before and after the study period, and they completed a questionnaire regarding the acceptability of the study protocol. Descriptive statistics for smartphone screen use, app use, and protocol feasibility and acceptability were reviewed. Analyses of variance were run to assess differences in categorical app use by demographics. Self-report and parent report were correlated with passive sensing data. Results Self-report of smartphone screen use was partly consistent with objective measurement (r=0.49), although objective data indicated that children used their phones more than they reported. Passive sensing revealed the most common types of apps used were for streaming (mean 1 hour 57 minutes per day, SD 1 hour 32 minutes), communication (mean 48 minutes per day, SD 1 hour 17 minutes), gaming (mean 41 minutes per day, SD 41 minutes), and social media (mean 36 minutes per day, SD 1 hour 7 minutes). Passive sensing of smartphone screen use was generally acceptable to children (43/62, 69%) and parents (53/62, 85%). Conclusions The results of passive, objective sensing suggest that children use their phones more than they self-report. Therefore, use of more robust methods for objective data collection is necessary and feasible in pediatric samples. These data may then more accurately reflect the impact of smartphone screen use on behavioral and emotional functioning. Accordingly, the ABCD study is implementing a passive sensing protocol in the full ABCD cohort. Taken together, passive assessment with a phone app provided objective, low-burden, novel, informative data about preteen smartphone screen use.

Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder is associated with numerous neurocognitive deficits, including poor working memory and difficulty inhibiting undesirable behaviors that cause academic and behavioral problems in children. Prior work has attempted to determine how these differences are instantiated in the structure and function of the brain, but much of that work has been done in small samples, focused on older adolescents or adults, and used statistical approaches that were not robust to model overfitting. The current study used cross-validated elastic net regression to predict a continuous measure of ADHD symptomatology using brain morphometry and activation during tasks of working memory, inhibitory control, and reward processing, with separate models for each MRI measure. The best model using activation during the working memory task to predict ADHD symptomatology had an out-of-sample R2 = 2% and was robust to residualizing the effects of age, sex, race, parental income and education, handedness, pubertal status, and internalizing symptoms from ADHD symptomatology. This model used reduced activation in task positive regions and reduced deactivation in task negative regions to predict ADHD symptomatology. The best model with morphometry alone predicted ADHD symptomatology with an R2 = 1% but this effect dissipated when including covariates. The inhibitory control and reward tasks did not yield generalizable models. In summary, these analyses show, with a large and well-characterized sample, that the brain correlates of ADHD symptomatology are modest in effect size and captured best by brain morphometry and activation during a working memory task.

Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder is associated with numerous neurocognitive deficits including poor working memory and difficulty inhibiting undesirable behaviors that cause academic and behavioral problems in children. Prior work has attempted to determine how these differences are instantiated in the structure and function of the brain, but much of that work has been done in small samples, focused on older adolescents or adults, and used statistical approaches that were not robust to model overfitting. The current study used cross-validated elastic net regression to predict a continuous measure of ADHD symptomatology using brain morphometry and activation during tasks of working memory, inhibitory control, and reward processing, with separate models for each MRI measure. The best model using activation during the working memory task to predict ADHD symptomatology had an out-of-sample R2 = 2% and was robust to residualizing the effects of age, sex, race, parental income and education, handedness, pubertal status, and internalizing symptoms from ADHD symptomatology . This model used reduced activation in task positive regions and reduced deactivation in task negative regions to predict ADHD symptomatology. The best model with morphometry alone predicted ADHD symptomatology with an R2 = 1% but this effect dissipated when including covariates. The inhibitory control and reward tasks did not yield generalizable models. In summary, these analyses show, with a large and well-characterized sample, that the brain correlates of inattention are modest in effect size and captured best by brain morphometry and activation during a working memory task.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-021-01320-y