The Economist likes WOW

[weakwarrior]

Only those who played fast-moving action video games such as "Call of Duty 2" and "Unreal Tournament" saw an improvement in their decision-making skills.

Yet the article is titled "Why World of Warcraft is good for you." Was "Why Unreal Tournament is good for you" too unsexy? Did this research actually say a single damn thing about WoW?

The Title of the original "Current Biology" article is: "Improved Probabilistic Inference as a General Learning Mechanism with Action Video Games." There is something wrong with the supplementary material link so I can't tell if WoW was involved at all.

Did they even have a control group? I don't have access to the full article until it's a year old, so I can't check, but it sounds like their two group were "exciting" and "boring" games.

They had people who didn't play games at all, people who didn't play and then were introduced to non-action games, and people who didn't play and were then introduced to action games. I presume that counts as a control group.