New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Inside the Mind of a Video Game Champ

Cognitive scientists are observing StarCraft 2 players to learn how humans multitask

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

If there is one general rule about the limitations of the human mind, it is that we are terrible at multitasking. When devoted to a single task, the brain excels; when several goals splinter its focus, errors become unavoidable.

Still, clear exceptions challenge that general rule. For decades chess has held the exalted position of the Drosophila of cognitive science—the model organism that scientists could poke and prod to learn what makes experts better than the rest of us. StarCraft 2, one of the world’s hottest computer games, might be overtaking chess: its added complexity may confound researchers initially, but the answers could ultimately be more telling. In this real-time strategy game, players exert a godlike role over a cluster of creatures, leading them to develop their economy and prepare for skirmishes with a neighboring society. The winner is often the person who can make the most moves, as many as six actions a second.

For researchers the appeal lies in the data each game generates. When two players face off, their computers each produce a record of the actions taken during the game. These logs reflect what a gamer was thinking at every stage of play. “I can’t think of a cognitive process that’s not involved in StarCraft,” says Mark Blair, a cognitive scientist at Simon Fraser University. “It’s working memory. It’s decision making. It involves precise motor skills. Everything is important, and everything needs to work together.”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Thousands of these gamers are now contributing to a project under Blair’s watch, called SkillCraft, to learn what separates experts from novices when it comes to attention, multitasking and learning. By comparing the techniques and attributes of low-level players with those of other gamers up the chain of ability, the researchers can start to discern how skills develop—and perhaps, over the long run, identify the most efficient training regimen. Blair sees parallels between the game and emergency management systems. In a high-stress crisis situation, the people in charge of coordinating a response may find themselves facing competing demands: fire alarms, a riot, contamination of drinking water. The mental task of keeping cool and distributing attention among equally urgent activities might closely resemble the core challenge of StarCraft 2.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe