Step 1: Make thread with outlandish claims backed by little or faulty evidence.
It didn't seem outlandish to me -gotta say that it seemed almost obvious to me- ... you have no idea of how many subtleties are involved in our psychology, dude. Also, there's this little thing called "peer-reviewed" journals
that check studies before they get published. If the evidence is faulty or little, it's their claim, not ours.
We have not seen the original article, just a summary made by a journalist. So the quality of the evidence is out of discussion. Also, I've not seen anyone providing better evidence beyond the usual gut-reactions these kind of stuff bring out of you guys....
Step 2: People rebuttal with common logic and question the data.
Common logic? Truthiness
, I say. In a world full of science-haters, what else can be done? I just found that study interesting. I value discussion, but I just can't appreciate teenagers ranting because a study contradicts their beloved intuitions... You know what's funny? Non-scientist gamers bashing Non-gamer scientists
, making the study invalid because they don't know much about games while ignoring the fact most of you don't do science... The authors just made the math in one game, and the study can be replicated further. Also, another study was cited about the red color being more prominent in winners on RL sports... if you don't believe it, big deal. But saying it's shit because you don't believe it?
Step 3: You make snide remarks and flamebait about how everyone is butthurt because they disagree with you.
Read again the thread. If this isn't butthurt, then we need a better definition...
Really. I know you think you are such a clever troll, but your childish musing prove very little. No one really cares if one color wins more than the other, let alone are 'butthurt' over it. It doesn't affect anyone here on a personal level.
So, why the angry replies? I didn't even posted my opinion until now... I just posted a study from a journal FFS...
Anyway, actually, thanks for caring. And also, here's the abstract of the original article summarized in the quote in the OP, for good measure (I don't have access to this journal so I'll have to wait to get my hands on it):
In the 2004 Olympic Games, opponents wearing red athletic uniforms were more likely to win against opponents wearing blue uniforms. To investigate whether this color bias extends to the world of virtual competition, we compared the performance of red and blue teams in a popular multiplayer first-person-shooter (FPS) computer game. For 3 consecutive months, we collected data from a publicly available global statistics server. Outcomes from 1,347 matches played by the top 10 players on the same virtual arena were included. Red teams won 54.9% of matches, and this effect was highly significant. Our data suggest that joining the red team may offer a slight advantage over the blue team in virtual competition, and this should be accounted for when designing FPS games. It is likely that “seeing red” may trigger a powerful psychological distractor signal in human aggressive competition that can affect the outcome of sports and virtual contests alike.
Andrei Ilie, Silvia Ioan, Leon Zagrean, Mihai Moldovan. Better to Be Red than Blue in Virtual Competition. CyberPsychology & Behavior. June 1, 2008, 11(3): 375-377. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0122.