Abstract
In video games, the participants are active agents who pursue various goals within gaming environments that increasingly resemble real life. As a result, video games are increasingly offering tools for neuroimaging studies aiming to elucidate the neural basis of human perceptual, cognitive, and emotional functions. Here, we review these studies. The first studies used computerized versions of behavioral economic games during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of brain activity, revealing brain structures relevant to mutual cooperation and structures responding when participants received unfair offers. Subsequently, first-person shooter games revealed brain activity differences during winning vs. losing. Video games have also proven useful for studying reward processing, cognitive processes during goal pursuit, and emotional responses within component models emphasizing active agency. Moreover, video games are especially well-suited for research on the neural basis of flow state. We also discuss shortcomings and ways forward in this exciting area of research.
Introduction
Video games, while offering significant entertainment and educational value (e.g., via gamification of learning; ), also provide powerful tools for human neuroimaging studies. In contrast to movies used as naturalistic stimuli during neuroimaging—where participants are passive observers (; ; )—video game participants actively engage in game play. This distinction is important because humans, like other organisms, are inherently goal-directed and active rather than passive perceivers (). Video games extend the possibilities to study the neural basis of human perceptual, cognitive, and emotional functions under complex and naturalistic stimuli and tasks approaching real-life conditions. At the same time, neuroimaging results might be relevant for game design.
The purpose of this minireview is to provide an overview of this exciting field of study from the perspective of how playing video games has been implemented in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies of perceptual, cognitive, and emotional functions. The majority of the previous review articles have focused on the long-term effects of video gaming on the brain, which we will not cover here. While some of them also covered studies in which video games were used as stimuli during fMRI (e.g., ), recent review articles on the topic are lacking. As there is a range of complexity and naturalness of video games that have been used as stimuli in fMRI studies, we start by briefly introducing results from fairly simple games before describing the results obtained with more naturalistic video games.
Economic games in the fMRI scanner
Economic games, such as the ultimatum, dictator, and prisoner’s dilemma games, have been developed and used in behavioral studies to study economic and social decision-making (; ). When adapted to the neuroimaging environment, they have helped gain an understanding of the cerebral basis of human cooperation and perception of fairness (see ).
In the ultimatum game, there are two players: one proposes how to divide a sum of money, and the other responds either by accepting or rejecting. Given this design, the ultimatum game has been relatively easy to adapt to the fMRI environment, and thus, not surprisingly, the first study was carried out more than two decades ago. In this study, responses in the anterior insula (AI) were observed when experimental participants received unfair offers in the ultimatum game (). In a subsequent study, it was observed that unfair offers both to the players themselves and toward others whom they were playing on behalf of activated the AI, suggesting that AI supports perception of unfairness in general (Corradi-Dell’Acqua et al., 2013). In contrast, the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC) only responded when the unfair treatment was directed against the self, and this effect was augmented for offers that the players rejected (Corradi-Dell’Acqua et al., 2013).
In a separate set of studies, participants played the Prisoner’s Dilemma game during fMRI. In this game, if both players choose to cooperate, they receive the same amount of money. If one player defects, the defector receives a larger sum than if both had cooperated. Additionally, the one who chose to cooperate in that round receives nothing. If both players defect, they get less than if both cooperate. During mutual cooperation, a significant increase in hemodynamic activity was observed in the striatal structures, the VMPFC, and the rostral anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) (). In contrast, when the other player defected while the participants chose to cooperate, there were robust responses in the AI (). In addition to the AI, activations were observed in the hippocampus and the amygdala, together with a deactivation of the ventral striatum (). Since defecting is considered unfair to the other player, the observed AI activity aligns with the results from the ultimatum game (; Corradi-Dell’Acqua et al., 2013). This conclusion is further supported by findings from ultimatum game play in neurological patients with insula lesions ().
Cooperation vs. competition in a pattern-building game
In addition to classical economic games, brain mechanisms supporting competition vs. cooperation have been studied in a game in which players build target patterns with tokens (). In the cooperation and competition conditions, it was possible both to help and block the other’s attempts in achieving the pattern, respectively. Brain hemodynamic activity was significantly stronger in the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) during cooperation than during competition, which the authors interpreted as indicating that the cooperation condition was more rewarding (). This is in line with the findings of VMPFC activity during cooperation in the prisoner’s dilemma game (). In the reverse contrast, brain areas showing enhanced activity during competition included the inferior parietal cortex and the superior medial prefrontal cortex, which were interpreted as signs of less self-other merging during the competition condition (). Naturally, as reviewed elsewhere, cooperation and competition in the real world are impacted by a variety of factors, including cross-cultural differences and intergroup polarization ().
Board games
Board games are among the first video games used as stimuli in fMRI studies. In one study, players viewed in different conditions a blank board, a random board, and a game board of a so-called GO game. The participants, all of whom were experienced GO players, were instructed to consider the move they would make when viewing the game board. When brain activity during the game board viewing was contrasted with that during random board viewing, enhanced activity was observed in the dorsal prefrontal, parietal, posterior cingulate, occipital, and posterior temporal regions (). Interestingly, these areas were highly similar to those observed during playing chess (). While board games are not as naturalistic as some of the more recent video games, they nonetheless allow one to study strategic thinking (for a review on the neurobiology of strategic thinking, see ). Overall, simplified game designs could also help disentangle factors governing neurocognition that take place in more complex video game settings.
First-person shooter games
First-person shooter games were the first video games used as stimuli with naturalistic graphics and flow of events in fMRI studies. They have provided a significant complementary tool for the study of aggression beyond the more conventional research methods, including the study of structural and functional resting-state connectivity changes in persons with trait aggression and experimental designs in which participants are passively viewing aggressive facial expressions (see ).
In the first study, activation of the dorsal ACC, precuneus, cerebellum, and temporoparietal junction was observed during violent scenes, in addition to the suppression of activity in the rostral ACC, amygdala, intraparietal sulcus, OFC, posterior insula, and parahippocampal areas (). The suppression of ACC and amygdala activity around the time of engaging in violence in the game was corroborated by a subsequent study (). It has been further suggested that the suppressive effects are predominantly seen in participants with a history of playing violent games, with naïve participants exhibiting an increase in activity during violent game play ().
In another study, medial prefrontal activity was observed during wins and losses during both passive observation and active game play; however, striatal responses were stronger during game play than during passive viewing of a recording of game play (). This latter finding was corroborated by a subsequent study (). It was also observed that playing a first-person shooter game against a human opponent resulted in stronger responses in the striatum and the VMPFC than playing against a computer opponent (). These findings somewhat contrast those of a previous study in which only the visual cortex responded to both wins and losses, with striatal structures only responding to losses ().
In this area of research, methodological advances play a crucially important role, including the development of suitable experience sampling and content analysis methods to guide the neuroimaging data analyses (; ). Using this type of approach, the ventral posterior cingulate cortex and theory of mind network of the brain were identified as central for the prediction of attack intents of others ().
In an interesting recent study, experimental participants were immersed in a first-person shooter game while their supplementary motor area (SMA) activity levels were continuously monitored using fMRI (). The participants were told that self-inducing higher levels of SMA activity during game play would result in the avatar moving faster, thus yielding benefits in game play. This was successful, as the participants were taught to upregulate their SMA activity levels to aid their game play (). It is easy to envision how this type of setup might be translated to complement existing gamified rehabilitation paradigms in neurological patients ().
Video games and studies of reward structures
assigned participants to two groups: one group observed a recording, while the other played the interactive video game Re-Mission, designed for cancer patients to increase cancer awareness and promote adherence to chemotherapy. Compared with the observation condition, engagement in interactive game play increased activity in mesolimbic areas, including the caudate nucleus and the nucleus accumbens involved in reward processing (see ), as well as in the parahippocampal gyrus, thalamic, and insular areas. Perhaps a bit surprisingly, medial parietal and prefrontal activity decreased when the participants were engaged in game play vs. passive viewing.
These results show that active engagement robustly enhances activity in the mesolimbic reward areas compared with passive viewing of the same materials, which was interpreted as supporting previous behavioral findings of agency being a central factor that explains the efficacy of Re-Mission game play in the context of cancer treatment (). These findings are also in line with observations of higher involvement of striatal structures in video game play vs. observation conditions (; ). Overall, these findings demonstrate how additional insights can be obtained via brain imaging on the mechanisms contributing to the efficacy of educational games such as Re-Mission.
Video games in studies of the flow state
Another phenomenon that closely relates to reward processing is called the flow state (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975). Flow state can be defined as intense and pleasurable engagement in a task. While other tasks (e.g., arithmetic tasks) have also been used in neuroimaging studies of the flow state (see ), captivating video games are ideal for inducing the flow state. This is because they enable the manipulation of psychological, cognitive, and behavioral variables implicated in the flow experience. Given its importance for motivated performance and the difficulties in capturing it with questionnaires, finding neural markers for flow state would also be of high application value (see ).
Flow state results when the task difficulty and individual ability are in balance: too difficult tasks tend to be anxiety-inducing, and too easy tasks are boring. When brain activity elicited during a balanced-difficulty task was contrasted with too difficult and too easy tasks, activity was observed in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), the superior parietal lobule, AI, and putamen, attributed to cognitive control, attention, and reward processing. Additionally, the DLPFC and putamen exhibited heightened functional connectivity during balanced task difficulty, suggesting that intrinsic reward and cognitive control are coupled during a flow state (). Interestingly, the DLPFC is also a hub in a brain network that supports the feeling of presence in virtual reality (; ). In contrast to balanced task difficulty, overly easy tasks resulted in activation of the default-mode network (DMN) (), consistent with findings suggesting that boredom during video gaming drives DMN activation ().
In one study, the time courses of factors known to contribute to flow experience, i.e., balance between ability and challenges, concentration, direct feedback, clear goals, and control over the activity, were used as predictors of fMRI responses (). In this analysis, the balance between ability and challenge resulted in activity in the striatal structures, cerebellum, thalamus, superior parietal cortex, and motor–premotor areas. Concentration, in turn, was associated with increased activity in the cerebellum, visual areas, precuneus, and premotor cortex. During the presence of clear goals, activity was enhanced in the fusiform face area and the intraparietal sulcus. Finally, control was associated with the activity in the visual, cerebellar, thalamic, and motor regions (). Overall, these results revealed specific neural mechanisms supporting different constituents of the flow experience.
Video games in studies of thoughts
Video games have been successfully used in neuroimaging of thoughts that took place while London cab drivers were navigating through virtual streets of London (; for a review of the cerebral basis of human navigation, see ). After game play, they were asked to self-report thoughts that they had in various phases of the game. This allowed the authors to investigate patterns of brain activity associated with customer-driven route planning, spontaneous route planning (e.g., to adapt to changing traffic), expectations, as well as their confirmation and violation, visual inspection, and traffic monitoring. When contrasted with coasting conditions, each elicited distinct brain activity patterns. During customer-initiated route planning, the hippocampus was recruited along with posterior parietal and dorso- and ventrolateral prefrontal cortices (). These results illustrate the potential of video games combined with post-neuroimaging questionnaires in elucidating the neural basis of thought processes.
Video games in studies of emotions
In the component process model of emotions (CPM), appraisal, motivation, physiology, and expression components dynamically interact to produce emotional states (). During video game play, the appraisal component, coping potential, and goal conduciveness recruited brain regions associated with action planning, uncertainty, valuation, reward processing, attention, and salience/relevance detection (Leitao et al., 2020). Motivation processes recruited the orbitofrontal, anterior cingulate, and posterior parietal cortices associated with approach and avoidance. The expression component, modeled with participants’ facial electromyography, and the physiology component, measured using heart rate and electrical skin conductance, co-varied with activity in areas associated with control of facial muscles as well as subcortical, prefrontal, and insular areas associated with affective interactions with peripheral physiology (Leitao et al., 2020).
The authors further identified somatomotor areas as being involved in synchronized changes across component processes during the emergence of emotional reactions (Leitao et al., 2020). This supports the notion that emotions are embodied action preparation mechanisms that help the organism to adapt to its environment. These results unveil the potential of video games to facilitate our understanding of human emotions in ways previously unexplored in neuroimaging studies, as previous studies have mostly been mapping reactions during the viewing of emotional stimuli (see ). Notably, given that emotions are, in CPM, understood as arising in situations of active pursuit of goals among challenges, video games offer more suitable tasks/stimuli for neuroimaging studies of emotions in the context of CPM than traditional emotion elicitation paradigms in which the experimental participant passively perceives emotional stimuli.
Video games in studies of social cognition
In an interesting study, players were engaged in either context-appropriate behaviors or context-inappropriate behaviors (). Context-appropriate behaviors involved shooting an assailant and healing a wounded person. Context-inappropriate behaviors included shooting a wounded person and healing an assailant. During context-appropriate vs. context-inappropriate behaviors, enhanced activity was observed in the VMPFC and the amygdala, as well as in the AI (). These findings were interpreted to support, in healthy subjects, the somatic marker hypothesis formulated based on neurological patients with VMPFC and amygdala lesions failing to behave in a contextually appropriate manner (see ). These results in the healthy video game players suggest that areas supporting contextually appropriate behaviors additionally include the AI (), though the AI activity could also indicate empathy to the pain of others ().
Limitations and future directions
Shortcomings in the literature include relatively small sample sizes in many studies that may have resulted in real effects not reaching statistical significance and prevented investigation of, for example, gender differences reported by some studies (). Overall, in many areas of cognitive neuroscience, there have been relatively few studies that have used video games as stimuli, limiting the impact of the approach. Continued development of fMRI analysis methods, such as state space modeling approaches, is vital when using video games as stimuli in fMRI studies (). Furthermore, it has been shown that functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) and fMRI provide similar results (). The use of fNIRS would be beneficial since movement of participants is less restricted in fNIRS than in fMRI. This is important because spatial navigation relies on locomotion and proprioception that are lacking in the fMRI environment (Taube et al., 2013). As a shortcoming of fNIRS, imaging of deeper brain structures such as the hippocampus remains challenging, and one would have to rely on measuring activity of cortical areas that closely correlate with hippocampal activity (). Finally, video games are well suited for studying moral decisions that vary across contexts and cultures (, ), therefore hold significant potential for neuroimaging investigations of moral decision-making.
Conclusion
Video games have significantly extended the possibilities offered by other naturalistic stimulus paradigms, such as movies, by adding the dimension of the participants being active agents pursuing their goals. Video games used in neuroimaging studies have varied greatly, from simplified scenarios such as computerized versions of economic games to highly complex and naturalistic ones. Tailored video games can be used to study the neural basis of perceptual, cognitive, and emotional functions in novel and ecologically valid ways that would be otherwise difficult to achieve. Studies of the neural basis of the flow state and studies based on component models of emotions in which active agency is the key element offer good examples of research questions in which video games offer unique possibilities over more traditional experimental designs, given that the pursuit of these research questions requires active engagement from the participant.
Statements
Author contributions
IB: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Conceptualization. VK: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. AS: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This article is an output of a research project implemented as part of the Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE University).
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
AlamedaC.SanabriaD.CiriaL. F. (2022). The brain in flow: a systematic review on the neural basis of the flow state. Cortex154, 348–364. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2022.06.005,
2
AwadE.DsouzaS.KimR.SchulzJ.HenrichJ.ShariffA.et al. (2018). The moral machine experiment. Nature563, 59–64. doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0637-6,
3
AwadE.DsouzaS.ShariffA.RahwanI.BonnefonJ. F. (2020). Universals and variations in moral decisions among 42 countries by 70,000 participants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA117, 2332–2337. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1911517117,
4
BaqapuriH. I.RoesL. D.ZvyagintsevM.RamadanS.KellerM.RoecherE.et al. (2020). A novel brain–computer interface virtual environment for neurofeedback during functional MRI. Front. Neurosci.14:593854. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2020.593854
5
BasuJ.NagelK. (2024). Neural circuits for goal-directed navigation across species. Trends Neurosci.47, 904–917. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2024.09.005,
6
BaumgartnerT.SpeckD.WettsteinD.MasnariO.BeeliG.JänckeL. (2008). Feeling present in arousing virtual reality worlds: prefrontal brain regions differentially orchestrate presence experience in adults and children. Front. Hum. Neurosci.2:8. doi: 10.3389/neuro.09.008.2008
7
ChenX.ZhangD.ZhangX.LiZ.MengX.HeS.et al. (2003). A functional MRI study of high-level cognition II. The game of GO. Cogn. Brain Res.16, 32–37. doi: 10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00206-9,
8
ColeS. W.YooD. J.KnutsonB. (2012). Interactivity and reward-related neural activation during a serious videogame. PLoS One7:e33909. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0033909,
9
Corradi-Dell’AcquaC.CivaiC.RumiatiR. I.FinkG. R. (2013). Disentangling self- and fairness-related neural mechanisms involved in the ultimatum game: an fMRI study. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci8, 424–431. doi: 10.1093/scan/nss014,
10
CsikszentmihalyiM. (1975). Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
11
DamasioA. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: emotion, rationality and the human brain. New York, NY: Putnam (Grosset Books).
12
DecetyJ.JacksonP. L.SommervilleJ. A.ChaminadeT.MeltzoffA. N. (2004). The neural bases of cooperation and competition: an fMRI investigation. NeuroImage23, 744–751. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.05.025,
13
EpsteinR. A.PataiE. Z.JulianJ. B.SpiersH. J. (2017). The cognitive map in humans: spatial navigation and beyond. Nat. Neurosci.20, 1504–1513. doi: 10.1038/nn.4656,
14
GentileD. A.SwingE. L.AndersonC. A.RinkerD.ThomasK. M. (2016). Differential neural recruitment during violent video game play in violent- and nonviolent-game players. Psychol. Pop. Media Cult.5, 39–51. doi: 10.1037/ppm0000009
15
HoeftF.WatsonC. L.KeslerS. R.BettingerK. E.ReissA. L. (2008). Gender differences in the mesocorticolimbic system during computer game-play. J. Psychiatr. Res.42, 253–258. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2007.11.010,
16
HongY.SaabN.AdmiraalW. (2024). Approaches and game elements used to tailor digital gamification for learning: a systematic literature review. Comput. Educ.212:105000. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105000
17
HuskeyR.CraigheadB.MillerM. B.WeberR. (2018). Does intrinsic reward motivate cognitive control? A naturalistic-fMRI study based on the synchronization theory of flow. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci.18, 902–924. doi: 10.3758/s13415-018-0612-6,
18
JaaskelainenI. P.HalmeH. L.AgamY.GlereanE.LahnakoskiJ. M.SamsM.et al. (2016). Neural mechanisms supporting evaluation of others’ errors in real-life like conditions. Sci. Rep.6:18714. doi: 10.1038/srep18714,
19
JaaskelainenI. P.SamsM.GlereanE.AhveninenJ. (2021). Movies and narratives as naturalistic stimuli in neuroimaging. NeuroImage224:117445. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117445,
20
JahaniS.FantanaA. L.HarperD.EllisonJ. M.BoasD. A.ForesterB. P.et al. (2017). fNRIS can robustly measure brain activity during memory encoding and retrieval in healthy subjects. Sci. Rep.7:9533. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-09868-w
21
JänckeL.CheethamM.BaumgartnerT. (2009). Virtual reality and the role of the prefrontal cortex in adults and children. Front. Neurosci.3, 52–59. doi: 10.3389/neuro.01.006.2009,
22
KatoP. M.ColeS. W.BradlynA. S.PollockB. H. (2008). A video game improves behavioral outcomes in adolescents and young adults with cancer: a randomized trial. Pediatrics122, e305–e317. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-3134,
23
KatsyriJ.HariR.RavajaN.NummenmaaL. (2013). Just watching the game Ain't enough: striatal fMRI reward responses to successes and failures in a video game during active and vicarious playing. Front. Hum. Neurosci.7:278. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00278,
24
KhoshnoudS.AlvarezI. F.WittmannM. (2020). Peripheral-physiological and neural correlates of the flow experience while playing video games: a comprehensive review. PeerJ8:e10520. doi: 10.7717/peerj.10520
25
KingJ. E.BlairR. J. R.MitchellD. G. V.DolanR. J.BurgessN. (2006). Doing the right thing: a common neural circuit for appropriate violent or compassionate behavior. NeuroImage30, 1069–1076. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.10.011,
26
KlasenM.WeberR.KicherT. T. J.MathiakK. A.MathiakK. (2012). Neural contributions to flow experience during video game playing. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci.7, 485–495. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsr021,
27
KlasenM.ZvyagintsevM.WeberR.MathiakK. A.MathiakK. (2008). “Think aloud during fMRI: neuronal correlates of subjective experience in video games” in Fun and games. Fun and games 2008. Lecture notes in computer science. eds. MarkopoulosP.RuyterB.IJsselsteijnW.RowlandD., vol. 5294 (Berlin: Springer).
28
LeeD.SeoH. (2016). Neural basis of strategic decision making. Trends Neurosci.39, 40–48. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2015.11.002,
29
LeitaoJ.MeulemanB.Van De VilleD.VuilleumierP. (2020). Computational imaging during video game playing shows dynamic synchronization of cortical and subcortical networks of emotions. PLoS Biol.18:e3000900. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000900,
30
LevittS. D.ListJ. A. (2007). What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world?J. Econ. Perspect.21, 153–174. doi: 10.1257/jep.21.2.153
31
MathiakK. A.KlasenM.WeberR.AckermannH.ShergillS. S.MathiakK. (2011). Reward system and temporal pole contributions to affective evaluation during a first person shooter video game. BMC Neurosci.12:66. doi: 10.1186/1471-2202-12-66,
32
MathiakK. A.KlasenM.ZvyagintsevM.WeberR.MathiakK. (2013). Neural networks underlying affective states in a multimodal virtual environment: contributions to boredom. Front. Hum. Neurosci.7:820. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00820,
33
MathiakK.WeberR. (2006). Toward brain correlates of natural behavior: fMRI during violent video games. Hum. Brain Mapp.27, 948–956. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20234,
34
NitschF. J.StrengerH.KnechtS.StuderB. (2022). Lesion evidence for a causal role of the insula in aversion to social inequity. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci.17, 266–272. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsab098
35
NoahJ. A.OnoY.NomotoY.ShimadaS.TachibanaA.ZhangX.et al. (2015). fMRI validation of fNIRS measurements during a naturalistic task. J. Vis. Exp.100:e52116. doi: 10.3791/52116-v
36
OngD. S. M.WeibinM. Z.VallabhajosyulaR. (2021). Serious games as rehabilitation tools in neurological conditions: a comprehensive review. Technol. Health Care29, 15–31. doi: 10.3233/THC-202333,
37
PalausM.MarronE. M.Viejo-SoberaR.Redolar-RipollD. (2017). Neural basis of video gaming: a systematic review. Front. Hum. Neurosci.11:248. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00248,
38
RillingJ. K.GoldsmithD. R.GlennA. L.JairamM. R.ElfenbeinH. A.DagenaisJ. E.et al. (2008). The neural correlates of the affective response to unreciprocated cooperation. Neuropsychologia46, 1256–1266. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.11.033,
39
RillingJ. K.GutmanD. A.ZehT. R.PagnoniG.BernsG. S.KiltsC. D. (2002). A neural basis for social cooperation. Neuron35, 395–405. doi: 10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00755-9,
40
RosellD. R.SieverL. J. (2015). The neurobiology of aggression and violence. CNS Spectr.20, 254–279. doi: 10.1017/S109285291500019X,
41
SaarimakiH. (2021). Naturalistic stimuli in affective neuroimaging: a review. Front. Hum. Neurosci.15:675068. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.675068,
42
SanfeyA. G.RillingJ. K.AronsonJ. A.NystromL. E.CohenJ. D. (2003). The neural basis of economic decision-making in the ultimatum game. Science300, 1755–1758. doi: 10.1126/science.1082976
43
SchererK. R. (2009). The dynamic architecture of emotion: evidence for the component process model. Cogn. Emot.23, 1307–1351. doi: 10.1080/02699930902928969
44
SingerT.SeymourB.O’DohertyJ.KaubeH.DolanR. J.FrithC. D. (2004). Empathy for pain involves the affective but not sensory components of pain. Science303, 1157–1162. doi: 10.1126/science.1093535,
45
SonkusareS.BreakspearM.GuoC. (2019). Naturalistic stimuli in neuroscience: critically acclaimed. Trends Cogn. Sci.23, 699–714. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2019.05.004
46
SpiersH. J.MaguireE. A. (2006). Is navigation in virtual reality with FMRI really navigation?J Cogn Neurosci.25, 1008–19. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00386
47
TaubeJ. S.ValerioS.YoderR. M. (2013). Disentangling self- and fairness-related neural mechanisms involved in the ultimatum game: an fMRI study. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci8, 424–431. doi: 10.1093/scan/nss014,
48
van DijkE.De DreuC. K. W. (2021). Experimental games and social decision making. Annu. Rev. Psychol.72, 415–438. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-081420-110718,
49
VanderwalT.EilbottJ.CastellanosF. X. (2019). Movies in the magnet: naturalistic paradigms in developmental functional neuroimaging. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci.36:100600. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2018.10.004,
50
WangK. S.SmithD. V.DelgadoM. R. (2016). Using fMRI to study reward processing in humans: past, present, and future. J. Neurophysiol.115, 1664–1678. doi: 10.1152/jn.00333.2015,
51
WeberR.BehrK. M.TamboriniR.RitterfeldU.MathiakK. (2009a). What do we really know about first-person-shooter games? An event- related, high-resolution content analysis. J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun.14, 1016–1037. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01479.x
52
WeberR.RitterfeldU.MathiakK. (2009b). Does playing violent video games induce aggression? Empirical evidence of a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Media Psychol.8, 39–60. doi: 10.1207/S1532785XMEP0801_4
53
WuY. E.HongW. (2022). Neural basis of prosocial behavior. Trends Neurosci.45, 749–762. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2022.06.008
54
YeZ.LvC.ZhouH.BaoY.HongT.HeQ.et al. (2025). Neural substrates of attack event prediction in video games: the role of ventral posterior cingulate cortex and theory of mind network. NeuroImage312:121228. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2025.121228
55
ZhangT.GaoJ. S.CukurT.GallantJ. L. (2021). Voxel-based state space modeling recovers task-related cognitive states in naturalistic fMRI experiments. Front. Neurosci.14:565976. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2020.565976
Summary
Keywords
cognition, emotions, functional magnetic resonance imaging, neuroimaging, perception, video games
Citation
Blank IB, Klucharev V and Shestakova A (2026) Video games as stimuli in neuroimaging studies: a minireview. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 20:1687121. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2026.1687121
Received
16 August 2025
Revised
04 February 2026
Accepted
06 February 2026
Published
06 March 2026
Volume
20 - 2026
Edited by
Lutz Jäncke, University of Zurich, Switzerland
Reviewed by
Maira Monteiro Froes, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Updates
Copyright
© 2026 Blank, Klucharev and Shestakova.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Anna Shestakova, a.shestakova@hse.ru
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.