SynthesisPeerJ2024
Cognitive expertise in esport experts: a three-level model meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of nutritional interventions on competitive performance and dose‒response relationships among esports players of different skill levels: a systematic review and three-level meta-analysis.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Psychomotor Performance in Esports Players: A Comparative Study of Visual Reaction Time and Hand-Eye Coordination.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Beyond Performance: Cognitive Overload and Related Cognitive, Psychophysiological, and Performance States in Competitive Esports-A Scoping Review.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Driven by Dopamine: Genetic Insights into Motivation and Performance in Sports and Esports.Genes · 2026Review
- Article
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
Abstract
Objectives: The cognitive expertise of experts has been an intriguing theme; there has been rapid growth in cognitive research related to esports. Given the close association between esports activities and cognition, esports holds promise in offering new perspectives for understanding cognitive expertise. This meta-analysis aims at quantitatively delineating the cognitive disparities between esports experts and amateurs. Methods: The expert group comprised professional video game players and high-ranking players (top 1%), while amateurs were assigned to the control group. Research studies published between January 2000 and December 2023 were systematically searched in databases. A three-level model with cluster-robust variance estimation was used to calculate the overall effect size. The moderating variables included professional level, cognitive abilities, dependent variable type, game genre, gender and age. Results: A total of 15 studies containing 142 effect sizes and 1085 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The results indicated that, compared to amateurs, video game experts demonstrated superior cognitive abilities with a small effect size (Hedges' g = 0.373, 95% CI [0.055-0.691], Conclusions: This meta-analysis confirms that esports experts possess superior cognitive abilities compared to amateurs, particularly in aspects of spatial cognition and attention. These can provide an effective reference for future selection and training in esports.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.