From Pokemon to Plato

That's him going past me to go upstairs," says Janis Fraser, wryly. Her youngest son, Mazek, nine, is on his way up to his bedroom. And his mother has no doubt why. He is off to play a computer game.

It is now a decade since Janis, 51, and her partner Sam gave in to demands from Mazek's older brother – Suki, now 20 – for his first computer game. Since then, computer games have grown into a multi billion-pound industry in Britain and, despite many rearguard parental manoeuvres, the games – still the shared recreational obsession of Suki, Mazek and middle brother, Azu, 15 – have come to dominate the life of the Fraser family.

"We lost control years ago," says Janis, admitting that when the children were younger, and she was whacked by the demands of motherhood, the computer game obsession offered her some valuable breathing space. Two years ago, with the boys regularly "hyper" from hours of game playing – sometimes they played on and off all day – and a small family fortune already expended, Janis introduced a ban on playing during the week. That rule is now in place, but enforcement took a huge effort.

Janis, like many parents of the computer generation, worries about the effect computer games may have had on her sons. Only Suki had a traditional childhood of board games and performing his own little plays in the living room. "I feel the younger two missed out," says Janis. It is Mazek, "the biggest addict", whom she frets about most. Mazek is dyslexic. And she wonders if computers have had any part to play in that. Does she think computer games have any educational value? Janis laughs. "As far as I can tell, they have just become very skilled with their thumbs."

According to new research by Teachers Evaluating Educational Multimedia (Teem) – a respected independent software evaluation service for teachers – many parents feel that computer games do nothing educationally for their kids. But Teem's research, funded by the DfES, has concluded, not only that games do not have a bad effect on kids, but they in fact encourage strategic and logical thinking.

Teem worked with 56 families and 28 teachers. Anne Sparrowhawk, the director of Teem, says parents – many of whom were playing a computer game for the first time – were surprised to discover how sophisticated and demanding computer games were now that a new wave of games is challenging children to create, and run, their own virtual worlds and business empires and to create and shape families through virtual life games like The Sims. "Parents came out a lot more positive than they went in," she says. "Many were surprised by the level of complex thinking involved."

Teem's findings will delight the computer games industry, which is keen to have parents and teachers accept that there is educational value in computer games. Elspa (European Leisure Software Publishers Association) represents more than 100 UK games software distributors. Its director general, Roger Bennett says that despite media sensationalism about health risks and violence – "Only 0.5 per cent of all video games get 18-plus certification," he says scathingly – computer games are not harmful to children. Bennett insists that the industry is winning the long-running debate about the effects of computer games. The proof, he argues, is that the Daily Mail now stands alone, implacably opposed to computer games.

The industry is currently reaching younger and younger game players. Disney now has educational computer games targeted at children as young as nine months. Two-year-olds can also learn with Winnie the Pooh and four-year-olds can get ready for school with Mickey Mouse. While the game for nine-month-olds has not really taken off yet – Matt Carroll, UK director of Disney Interactive, says this is largely because retailers are not sure it will be a seller – Disney sees no reason why nine-month-old babies should not sit in front of a computer screen for short bursts of interactive play. Carroll uses the games as a treat with his own two and-four-year-old. "No one is advocating that young children be left alone for long periods with a game. These products are for children and parents to use together."

Such developments dismay computer games critics, who, whatever Bennett says, have not all gone away. Recently we have had studies warning that computer-age children are spending so little time physically exercising that they have an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes. Earlier this year doctors warned that children playing vibrating computer games for excessive periods could be developing "white finger", an industrial injury previously seen in miners who worked heavy machinery. And last year a team of experts at Tohoku University in Japan monitored children's brain activity during game playing and concluded that computer games would, in time, create a dumber and more violent generation. On the other hand, studies like Teem's add to research that suggests computer games can enhance a child's intelligence.

Psychologist, Aric Sigman recently completed a review of existing studies on computer games for Powergen. The utility company funded the Sigman study to explain the increase in domestic electricity and telephone bills over the past few school summer holidays. Sigman says that a quarter of 1,000 children aged seven to 12 listed "playing computer games alone" as their principle holiday occupation. A fifth listed watching television alone and only 13 per cent said they mostly played with friends. Sigman reported that teachers found children disruptive and their social skills rusty when they return to school after the summer holidays.

"One of the problems with discussions about computer and video games is that so much of the research is funded by the industry," says Sigman. "Too much research looks at very narrow skills – like hand-eye co-ordination or mouse use – and measures tiny improvements. More important is what children are missing out on by spending so much time on games." Sigman has concerns that lasting neurological damage may be done to the game and TV generation – given how long many spend in front of screens – and that social, communication and critical reasoning skills will suffer.

For Sparrowhawk, the parental dilemma now is not whether or not to allow computer games but how to decide which ones are of most benefit to children. Though the Parents Information Network (PIN) does endorse games with a strong educational content, there is little other independent advice for parents.

While game sales would suggest that Sparrowhawk is right and that most parents have become relaxed about the alleged risks of computer games, parents like Janis Fraser do retain basic health concerns. Those will not be calmed by Sigman's warning that we may not understand the true extent of the damage done to children for a generation.

Bennett says the computer games industry cannot be blamed if children spend too much time playing computer games because that is a parental responsibility. "Cobblers," says Fraser. She insists that once the games genie is out of the bottle, it is hard for even the most determined parents to force it back in.

education@independent.co.uk