Revisiting the Twentieth Century Through the Lens of Generation X and Digital Games: A Scoping Review

There has been much debate concerning when the ‘Generation X’ (also referred to as ‘Gen X’) cohort starts and finishes. In this piece, we use the time frame of 1965–1980 as illustrated by (Vogels 2019)

Generation X are a cohort within society who proceed the Baby Boomers (1946 and 1964). Table 1 displays two of several perspectives of societal generations, whereby Nielsen (2014) reports how Generation X ranges between 1965 and 1976, Vogels (2019) suggests Generation X ranges between 1965 and 1980, while, Strauss and Howe have defined Generation X between 1965 and 1981 (Howe 1993; Howe and Strauss 1992; Strauss and Howe 1997).

From the stand point of the UK, the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) describes Generation X as “Thatcher’s children: the lives of Generation X” (Economic and Social Research Council 2016). This description is apt for Generation X as they are the cohort who grew up during the premier of Margaret Thatcher after winning a general election in 1979 and was the first British female prime minister until she left office in 1990.

From a cultural standpoint, Generation X are the first generation to experience the advent of music videos, experienced via MTV (MetLife Mature Market Institute 2013). Consequently, music/videos are now a fundamental component of a diverse range of music genres such as alternative rock, grunge, indie, hip-hop and rap.

Generation X experienced the rapid development of videogames and latterly, the movement from analogue to digital devices. The 1970s and 1980s facilitated gaming opportunities from arcade games to home consoles, using a multitude of controllers for interaction (i.e. joysticks, and buttons). Home console gaming also provided an alternative option to engage with this medium with the arrival of a second generation of consoles between the mid-1970s and the early 1990s. Moreover, the third generation integrated 8-bit units spanned between 1983 and 1995, increasing to 16-bit between 1987 and 1999 (Forster 2005; Herman 2001; Kent 2000). Throughout the 1990′s developments in hardware led to greater opportunities to engage through a wider range of formats. Arcade gaming declined as 3D games became increasingly popular through desktop and online gaming environments.

From an academe standpoint, Game Studies has grown over the last 30–50 years encompassing a myriad of scholarly research ranging from gender, cognition to games for health, user engagement and design. Research in this area is compounded by understanding game player experiences: immersion (Ermi and Mäyrä 2005; Marston et al. 2016; Marston 2013a; Nacke and Lindley 2008a, b, 2010), motivation, player preferences, usability (Diaz-Orueta et al. 2012; Gajadhar et al. 2010; Nap et al. 2009a, b; Fitzpatrick 2009; Harley et al. 2010; Ijsselsteijn et al. 2007); while gender in relation to videogames garnered attention to understand the game preferences, character development, the relationship between game playing as an activity and gender, online game playing engagement, gender differences between game confidence and competency (Brown et al. 1997; Hayes 2007; Jansz and Martis 2007; Jenson et al. 2007; King and Douai 2014; Temple and Lips 1989; Bryce and Rutter 2002, 2003; Jenson and De Castell 2004; Marston and Graner-Ray 2016; Cassell and Jenkins 2000; Hartmann and Klimmt 2006). Furthermore, this discipline has received interest from scholars across various disciplines who are interested in understanding videogames from a theoretical perspective and who are interested in learning the various relationships between genres and sub-genres can impact upon this discipline (Abt 1987; Adams 2009; Bogost 2007; Fencott et al. 2012; Lindley 2003; Marston and McClenaghan 2013; Mueller et al. 2008, 2011; Neale 1980; Oh and Yang 2010; Orland and Remo 2008).

Up-to-date statistics surrounding older adults playing videogames (Kakulla 2020) illustrate 32% of older adults in 2019 reported to play with their spouse/partner, 29% played with their children followed by 21% playing videogames with their grandchildren, while 19% of respondents play videogames with other additional family members and friends.

Intergenerational gaming can influence the game playing habits of older gamers, while this notion may, in some instances reduce the influence of their parent or grandparent as they themselves build their confidence. Learning about new technology and games, 10% of older adults reported to be influenced by their (grand) children in 2019, whereas in 2016 this was 17%. Learning how to play videogames, purchasing of videogames and associated technology was also lower in 2019 than in 2016, displaying 10% and 14% respectively. Additional insights and results can be found for the purchasing habits, preferences of learning and game genre preference by older adults in the scholarly work by Marston (2012); Marston et al. (2017) and Marston and Graner-Ray (2016).

Generational research in the realm of Game Studies has focused on ageing populations such as Baby Boomers. Whereas, intergenerational research has received less attention than other sub-groups of interest (Voida and Greenberg 2009, 2010, 2012). Results from (2011) highlight how intergenerational gaming was conducted by at least two generations and in some instances four. Both older and younger generations were positive in sharing their experiences during game play, whilst younger generations took leadership roles whereas, older gamers had the opportunity to practice “being more gracious experts, more patient teachers, and more thoughtful hosts and hostesses” (p. 24).

Voida and Greenberg (2012), suggest intergenerational gaming can offer researchers greater insight into designing new technologies to offer support within intergenerational gaming, noting greater motivation is offered through exploring how intergenerational gaming can offer greater affordances as well as limitations to existing game console design. Conversely, a more recent study by Wang et al. (2018) investigated the effect of videogame co-playing among family members, in a bid to understand the closeness of familial relations and satisfaction. A total of 361 parents completed an online survey, with results detailing the greater the frequency of familial gaming playing the greater the satisfaction and closeness was experienced.

In 2017, a systematic review conducted by De la Hera et al. (2017) identified 16 papers fitting the in/exclusion criteria and via data analysis identified four categories associated to the benefits of intergenerational gaming; (1) reinforcing family bond, (2) enhancing reciprocal learning, (3) increasing understanding of the other generation and finally reducing social anxiety. De la Hera et al. (2017) noted factors that informed and should be considered when considering the influences of designing videogames for intergenerational game play; (1) player-centric, motivations, resulting in wanting to play different games and the variance of abilities. Although, the second factor was game-centric, and included additional facets such as goal-oriented play and space-related forms of interactions. Which in turn play a pivotal role in understanding and identifying the key factors of designing intergenerational videogames. Several recommendations of future work to expand this area of game studies and interdisciplinary research included investigating intergenerational relationships beyond the grandparent, quantitative studies should recruit larger sample sizes, and include greater variety of videogames to offer readers further in-depth understanding of the factors and motivations to designing games for intergenerational gaming. Through a participatory design process de Schutter and colleagues (De Schutter et al. 2017) were able to learn, understand and create six prototypes based on the experiences of five older adults and four undergraduate students. The project identified how through a four-step creative process, coupled with open, selective and theoretical coding analyses, the notion of co-creation aimed at videogame designs can be meaningful for both younger and older adults.

Given existing scholarly activity in the early part of the twenty-first century, the academe has primarily focused on older adults which has offered substantial insights into videogame playing preferences and design, as well as the benefits to engaging with video games (Brown and De Schutter 2016; De Schutter and Brown 2016; Marston and Graner-Ray 2016; Marston et al. 2012, 2013a, b, 2016, 2017; Pearce 2008). However, Generation X are a cohort of population within society that have grown up with videogames, witnessing the turbulent history of the Games Industry and the developments of many successful franchises.

The purpose of this scoping review is to identify existing literature which recruited participants categorised as Generation X between the years of 1970 and 2000. This body of work is distinctive and lends itself to a scoping review to identifying and ascertaining existing literature in a set period of time. This scoping review will identify the existing literature surrounding Generation X and aims to answer two questions, (1) What type of research/themes were conducted that included Generation X as participants? (2) What impact(s) will videogames have on Generation X—the future ageing populations?

This scoping review was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines (Tricco et al. 2018). This review has not been registered but following the PRISMA-ScR checklist can be accessed via [http://​www.​prisma-statement.​org/​Extensions/​ScopingReviews]. A systematic search of five electronic databases ACM, CINHAL, Google Scholar, Pubmed, Web of Science (WOS) was conducted between October and December 2018. Search strategies were adapted for each database (Table 2). Limiters were ‘English, Portuguese, Spanish’ and ‘humans’. Articles, their references (bibtex format) and where possible their CSV files, were exported into Dropbox and Mendeley.

The initial screening involved vetting the papers’ titles and abstracts using the inclusion and exclusion criteria described in Table 3. Where necessary the full paper was screened by the authors to determine the papers suitability. Initially, both authors separately reviewed all titles and abstracts followed by a collective decision on which papers were suitable for full review. Any discrepancies were discussed by both authors before an ‘inclusion or exclusion’ decision for was made.

The database search identified 3186 records. However, three records were not available from the ACM search. Similarly, three records were unavailable from the Scopus search. Following the removal of 138 duplicates, the first and second reviewers independently assessed 3048 records for inclusion. Twenty-two records met the criteria for inclusion in this scoping review (Fig. 1). Data items/variables were sought on selected papers following the criteria in Table 4. Where papers were not easily accessible, MD contacted the respective author(s) requesting a copy of the published paper via the Research Gate platform (n = 4).

Both authors reviewed the databases/papers individually and came together to jointly make the final decisions. During the review phase, the reviewers (HM and MD) discussed any concerns relating to any of the papers before making a final decision, Any discrepancies the reviewers discussed and came to an agreement, following the in/exclusion criteria.

The initial search identified 3186 abstracts published between 1970 and 2000, of which 2351 were excluded; 19 papers had full text assessment (Fig. 1). The majority of the articles were published in 1997 (n = 4) and 1999 (n = 4) with one study published in 1971. Likewise, only one study was published in the years 1980, 1983, 1985, 1986, 1988, and 1989 respectively. Two studies were published in 1994.

The sample size varied across all articles from three participants (Baer 1980) to 1600+ participants (Wilder et al. 1985). The total sample includes 4816 participants with a mean age of 24.347 ± 8.16, with a total of 1404 female participants, and 1575 male participants. Two studies did not report age or gender (Wilder et al. 1985; Philippatos and Moscato 1971), they only reported the overall number of participants recruited to their respective studies.

The majority of studies (n = 14) were conducted in the USA (Baer 1980; Ballard and Wiest 1996; Ballard and Lineberger 1999; Barnett et al. 1997; Brown et al. 1997; Calvert and Tan 1994; Funk et al. 1999, 2000; Lawton and Morrin 1999; O’Connor et al. 2000; Philippatos and Moscato 1971; Tkacz and Laforce 1998; Turner et al. 1997; Wilder et al. 1985), one study was conducted in Australia (Dalziel et al. 1989), three studies were conducted in Canada (Braun and Giroux 1989; Pepin and Dorval 1986; Miller and Ditto 1988) and two studies were performed in Europe (Kasteleijn-Nolst Trenite et al. 1999; Millett et al. 1999).

Overall study design consisted of 16 studies reporting an experimental design (Turner et al. 1997; Tkacz and Laforce 1998; Philippatos and Moscato 1971; Pepin and Dorval 1986; O’Connor et al. 2000; Millett et al. 1999; Miller and Ditto 1988; Lawton and Morrin 1999; Dalziel et al. 1989; Calvert and Tan 1994; Brown et al. 1997; Braun and Giroux 1989; Barnett et al. 1997; Ballard and Lineberger 1999; Ballard and Wiest 1996; Baer 1980), four studies reported a descriptive design (Wilder et al. 1985; Kasteleijn-Nolst Trenite et al. 1999; Funk et al. 1999, 2000).

In the following section, an extensive breakdown of the scholarly work highlighted across the primary and secondary themes. Table 5 presents an overview of the selected papers.