High compliance and reduced online gaming time among Chinese adolescents after the 2021 gaming policy: Effects across all gamers, not just heavy users

Abstract

Government policies have been proposed to mitigate excessive online gaming among adolescents, yet empirical evaluations of their effectiveness remain limited. Following China's 2021 online gaming policy, the strictest such regulation to date, we examined the compliance rate and alternative behaviors among heavy adolescent gamers. Several methodological concerns have been raised, including the omission of the 2019 policy, the narrow focus on heavy gamers, and ambiguities in key definitions. In this response, we address these concerns by clarifying the policy's independence, expanding the analysis to all adolescent participants, and incorporating pre- and post-policy gaming time as an additional measure of policy impact. Results from a broader sample (N = 2,715, mean age = 10.84) revealed a high compliance rate (93.6%) and a significant decrease in daily gaming time following the policy (60.12 vs. 43.52 min per day, p < 0.001). This reported gaming time may include offline or single-player gameplay. These findings support the conclusion that the 2021 policy significantly reduced adolescents' gaming time and achieved high compliance rates, though self-reported data may include offline gameplay and that historical policy context should be acknowledged in interpretation. Moreover, its longer-term effects on psychological well-being and physical health warrant further investigation.

Introduction

Policy interventions have been regarded as potential measures for mitigating excessive gaming behavior among adolescents. However, empirical studies assessing their effectiveness remain relatively scarce (King et al., 2018; Zendle et al., 2023). In August 2021, the National Press and Publication Administration (NPPA) of China issued a notice limiting online gaming time for minors to only one hour per day (8–9 PM) on Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays and statutory holidays (The National Press and Publication Administration, 2021b). Although this was not the first policy targeting underage online gaming, it was the most stringent to date (Colder Carras, Stavropoulos, Motti-Stefanidi, Labrique, & Griffiths, 2021), as it substantially strengthened government oversight by mandating all gaming companies operating in China to integrate the NPPA Real-Name Verification System (Pilarowski, Yu, & Zhu, 2021). In light of this, we conducted a study to examine compliance with this policy among heavy adolescent gamers and to explore their alternative behaviors during gaming restrictions (Zhou, Liao, Gorowska, Chen, & Li, 2024).

Xiao (2024) identified several limitations in our study, including (i) the omission of the 2019 gaming policy, which may have led to misinterpretation; (ii) the potential influence of the 2019 restrictions on adolescents' perceptions of being restricted; (iii) ambiguity in the definition of “playing unlimited games”, which could have affected the compliance measurement; and (iv) the focus on heavy gamers, neglecting the behavioral responses of the broader adolescent population. In addition, Xiao (2024) provided constructive suggestions, such as using post-policy gaming time as a compliance indicator. These critiques offer valuable opportunities to refine our understanding of policy effectiveness. In response, this commentary aims to (i) clarify potential ambiguities, (ii) broaden the analysis to include all adolescent participants rather than exclusively heavy gamers, and (iii) incorporate pre- and post-policy gaming time data to further assess the impact of the 2021 policy.

Clarity regarding potential confounding effects of the 2019 policy

Xiao (2024) expressed concern that omitting the 2019 policy may lead to misinterpretation of the current results (Zhou et al., 2024). We acknowledge the potential influence of this prior policy and aim to further clarify the contribution of the present study. The 2019 restriction limited the online gaming time of minors under 18 to a cumulative total of 3 h per day on public holidays, and 1.5 h on other days (The National Press and Publication Administration, 2019). That is, online gaming behavior among Chinese adolescents had already been regulated prior to the implementation of the 2021 policy (The National Press and Publication Administration, 2021b). Nonetheless, the 2021 regulation was notably distinct from previous ones in terms of enforcement intensity (The National Press and Publication Administration, 2007, 2019). Specifically, the 2021 policy mandated the integration of a government-supervised Real-Name Verification System and imposed strict penalties on non-compliant companies (Pilarowski et al., 2021; The National Press and Publication Administration, 2021a). It effectively closed loopholes previously exploited by adolescents, such as playing in guest mode or using fake IDs (Borak, 2020; Colder Carras et al., 2021; Jiang, Zhao, & Zhu, 2005). Furthermore, irregular facial verification checks, which led to immediate disconnection upon failure, further strengthened enforcement (Internet Law Research Center of University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, 2024). In summary, while the 2021 regulation, which includes unique enforcement mechanisms, provides a distinct and valuable context for examining adolescent gaming behavior, the historical context should still be acknowledged.

Clarity of the simplistic question on “feeling of restriction”

Xiao (2024) criticized the use of a simplistic question to assess the “feeling of restriction”, suggesting it may not adequately capture nuanced perceptions, particularly in light of the 2019 policy. We appreciate this observation and recognize its relevance to the interpretation of our findings. All questions in our study were designed to directly assess adolescent responses to the 2021 policy, using clear and specific phrasing to ensure relevance and precision. For instance, the question “After August 30, do you feel restricted in playing online games? (yes/no)” was explicitly designed to measure perceptions of restriction attributable to the 2021 regulation. However, the existence of the 2019 regulation may have also confounded adolescents' sense of restriction, which constitutes a limitation of our study. Considering that adolescents may have compared their feelings to the 2019 policy, those who felt more restricted would report “Yes”, so the actual feeling of restriction may be underestimated.

Even though the measurement was not perfect, this simplistic question revealed distinctive feelings of restriction among heavy gamers and all adolescents. As illustrated in Fig. 1, 75.6% (n = 325) of heavy gamers reported feeling restricted, while a notably lower percentage (58.2%, n = 1,581) was reported among all adolescent participants. These results demonstrate the question's ability to capture meaningful variation in perceptions across different groups, validating the impact of the 2021 regulation.

Fig. 1.

Statistical indicators of adolescent behavioral responses to the 2021 gaming policy. (a) Proportion of all participants (n = 2,715) and heavy gamers (n = 430) who reported feeling restricted on online gaming following the policy implementation. (b) Compliance rate, calculated as 1 minus the proportion of policy-violating behaviors. (c) Proportion of policy-violating behaviors. (d) Self-reported online gaming time. Error bars indicate mean values with 95% confidence interval (CI). Following the policy implementation, the average gaming time significantly decreased across all participants (60.12 vs. 43.52 min, p < 0.001), with heavy gamers exhibiting a more pronounced reduction (210.91 vs. 132.25 min, p < 0.001)

Clarity of the concept “play unlimited game”

The potential ambiguity of the term “play unlimited game” raised concerns about the validity of compliance measurements, particularly regarding the possibility of accessing games via foreign servers (Xiao, 2024). We agree that more detailed measurements could benefit our understanding of gaming behaviors under this regulation, while we would also like to clarify that the use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) was less likely to be a major concern for Chinese adolescents, at least in the absence of sufficient empirical evidence. First, registering new accounts on foreign game servers imposes restrictions on interactions with existing friends, as account systems for international and Chinese servers typically operate independently. This directly undercuts the social interaction motive, a primary driver of adolescent gaming behavior (Olson, 2010). Second, gaming via VPNs often results in latency and connectivity issues, leading to a suboptimal user experience (Taneja & Tyagi, 2019). Third, the unauthorised establishment or rental of VPNs is legally prohibited in mainland China, which practically poses significant access barriers for adolescents (Cyberspace Administration of China, 2017).

Most participants who reported “playing unlimited games” were likely referring to offline games or single-player games embedded within social platforms such as WeChat (Internet Law Research Center of University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, 2024), which were generally considered compliant with the policy. While Xiao (2024) suggests that some players may have accessed foreign servers, this possibility lies beyond the scope of our study, which focuses on the impact of domestic regulatory measures. In summary, although the possibility of accessing foreign servers cannot be entirely ruled out, it is less likely to significantly impact our findings due to the practical barriers faced by adolescents. Nonetheless, future research could investigate the prevalence and implications of foreign server access among adolescent gamers.

Analysis of the full adolescent sample

Xiao (2024) raised concerns that restricting the sample to heavy gamers might limit the generalizability of our findings to the broader adolescent population. To address this issue, we extended our analysis to include the full sample of 2,715 participants (mean age = 10.84), thereby encompassing a broader range of adolescent gaming behaviors. As shown in Fig. 1, the overall compliance rate in the full sample was 93.6%. Noncompliant participants either reported playing via rented accounts (n = 43; 1.6% of participants) or reported using a family member's identity (n = 156; 5.7%). These findings suggest that most adolescents adhered to the policy, with only a small proportion employing alternative methods to bypass restrictions. To account for potential age-related differences in comprehension, a robustness check was conducted on a subset of 1,844 participants aged 10 and above (mean age = 12.26), yielding a compliance rate of 92.5%, with 1.6% (n = 30) using rented accounts and 6.9% (n = 127) using a family member's identity. This consistency across age groups further supports the reliability of our findings. Compared to the previously reported compliance rate of 84.7% among heavy gamers, the full sample exhibited a notably higher compliance rate, aligning with Xiao's (2024) speculation. This finding may be explained by the growing popularity of short video platforms, which have become a widespread alternative to gaming among adolescents in recent years (China Internet Network Information Center, 2023; Zhou et al., 2024). The availability of such alternatives likely contributed to the higher compliance rate observed in the full sample, highlighting the broader impact of the 2021 policy on adolescent behavior.

Pre- and post-policy online gaming time

The original study (Zhou et al., 2024) employed the indicator (1 - proportion of policy-violating behaviors) to assess compliance, as it provides a clear and interpretable measure of adherence to the policy. Alternative indicators, such as gaming time, as suggested by Xiao (2024), could provide additional insights. However, self-reported online gaming time poses some methodological challenges. First, recalling exact playtime imposes cognitive demands on adolescents, and estimating daily gaming duration down to the minute is inherently imprecise (e.g., an average of 26 min per day after the 2021 policy). Second, the question we used, “How many minutes do you spend on online games every day?”, lacks the validity to capture differences across weekdays, weekends, and statutory holidays. ​​Third, considering the young age of the participants, there may be misclassification of offline or single-player gameplay as online gaming time.

Despite these obvious limitations, self-reported online gaming time still provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of the policy. As shown in Fig. 1, the average daily online gaming time among all 2,715 participants significantly decreased from 60.12 to 43.52 min following the implementation of the policy (t = 13.472, p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.26). This reduction suggests that the policy had a meaningful effect on reducing online gaming time among adolescents. Among the subset of 430 heavy gamers, the reduction was even more pronounced, with average gaming time decreasing from 210.91 to 132.25 min per day (t = 13.678, p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.66). This substantial decrease highlights the policy's particularly strong impact on those who previously engaged in excessive online gaming. However, a clear discrepancy remains, as the average gaming time indicates that participants did not adhere to the 2021 regulation. Considering the limitations of self-reported gaming time, the original study prioritized a more precise and unambiguous indicator over potentially misleading quantitative data to measure compliance.

Conclusions

We thank Xiao (2024) for his insightful comments, which promoted us to improve the clarity of our work and expand our analysis to include the full sample of 2,715 participants. By incorporating data on changes in online gaming time, this analysis provides a more comprehensive evaluation of the 2021 policy's impact. While gaming regulations continue to be debated, our findings demonstrate that the 2021 policy has achieved a high compliance rate and has effectively reduced gaming time among adolescents, particularly among heavy gamers. However, the long-term impact of these restrictions warrants further investigation. Future research should explore potential behavioral adaptations, such as shifts toward alternative forms of digital entertainment (e.g., short video platforms), and examine the psychological and social consequences of reduced gaming time. By addressing key concerns and refining our analytical approach, we hope this discussion can provide valuable insights for future research and policymaking related to digital media and adolescent well-being.

Funding Statement

Funding sources: This study was funded by a grant from International Cooperation and Exchange of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (32161133004).

Data availability statement

The data supporting this study are available at: https://doi.org/10.57760/sciencedb.psych.00687.