the social and psychological impact of online gaming

Human Computer Interaction InstituteCarnegie Mellon University

A. Fleming Seay

The Social and Psychological Impact of Online Gaming

2 2

Agenda1:00-1:45 – Presentation

1:45-2:15 – Discussion

2:15 – Adjournment, Faculty remain in room

3 3

About Gaming430 million people worldwide play video games (~7%)

50% of Americans age six or older play video games

$31.37 billion industry in 2003

Average age of a player is 29

39% of gamers are female

(Zona,2004; Kagan,2004; ESA, 2004)

5 5

UsageWeekly average usage

~28 hours of television

~17 hours of Internet (other than email)

3-10 hours of video games

15 hours if Multiplayer Online Game30 hours not uncommon

(AC Nielsen 2001; Harris Interactive, 2003; Seay, 2004; Yee, 2004)

6 6

Why we should careGaming puts users in front of computers for long hours

Provides us opportunities for research and design inAttention Management Behavior ManagementExperience Enhancement

7 7

What is an MMOG? A robust example of online community

Thousands of players connecting to and living together in a persistent world

Governed by “real-world” theoretical precepts CSCW (Seay, 2004)Psychology (Yee, 2004)Sociology (Williams, 2004)Economics (Castranova, 2001)

8 8

World of WarCraft (WoW) Demo

9 9

How Do MMOGs Differ from Other Online Games?

Persistent World Game world is their whether or not the player is

More Players Servers support thousands of players at a time

Much Emphasis on Community and Coordinated ActionPeople must communicate and/or work together to be successful

10 10

The ProblemIt is claimed that MMOG play causes…

Social Withdrawal & DetachmentDepressionAddiction

At least 10% of all MMOG players are allegedly addicted40 million in China alone (Bao, 2004)

MMOG players don’t have normal real-life social relationships (Scheeres, 2001)

Players engage in activity to compensate for feelings of anger, depression, low self-esteem (French, 2002; O’Dwyer, 2002)

Online Games pose a threat to academic development at the college level, particularly in Computer Science (Messerly, 2004)

Play can lead to dry-eyes, carpal tunnel syndrome, and “problems with school or work” (French 2002; Orzack, 2002)

11 11

But seriously…Korean Government allocated 3 million dollars to project aimed at combating online gaming addiction

EverQuest Widows

Deaths associated with online gaming

12 12

Term Shift : “Addiction” vs. Problematic UseWe are NOT talking about chemical/physical dependence

Problematic Use:Use of an entertainment or communication medium in such a way that it causes identifiable difficulties in one’s life.

What kind of difficulties?Social and emotional conflictDisplacement of other activitiesDereliction of responsibilities

Timing as important as frequency/amount

13 13

What’s Happening

The Media Effects Model What effect a medium has on a homogeneous pop

You play – You get addicted – You get depressed

Simple substance abuse modelExposure -> Dependence -> Negative Outcomes

Negative Social &

Psychological Consequences

Problematic Use

Play

14 14

But…

Only happens to a small percentage of players (<4%)

Ignores effect of user’s ability to manage own behavior

Ignores environmental factors

We Need…a more sophisticated model to get at who & whyunpack social from psychological consequences

Negative Social &


Problematic Use

Play

15 15

What Happens Considerably More Often…

Engaged Use

Play

Engaged Use – The adaptive and desirable state of interest in and enjoyment of an entertainment or communication medium.

Engaged Use of a social medium might logically have positive social consequences.

16 16

A Framework to Develop


Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects

17 17



Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects

Play Motivations

Depression

18 18



Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects

Problematic Use Engaged Use

Self-Regulation

19 19



Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects

DisplacementAugmentation

Social IntegrationGuild Commitment

20 20



Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects

Depression

21 21


Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects

Some Context as We Proceed

1) What factors might predict Problematic Use vs. Engaged Use?2) How might online gaming reduce or even enhance social integration?

Play Motivations


Self-Regulation



Depression

22 22

Phase One : Types of Play


Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects

Play Motivations

Depression

23 23

Why do players play?For Fun?To Pass Time?

More specifically…Why?What aspect of the experience is rewarding to you?

24 24

The Adapted Player Motivation TypologyEscapismPlaying the game lets me forget some of the real-life problems I have.

AchievementI try to optimize my experience (XP) gain as much as possible.

ManipulationI like to annoy other characters/players.

RelationshipI talk to my friends in the game about personal issues.

Roleplaying I like to try out new roles and personalities with my characters.

25 25

Why we care about why we playWho you are and why you use something are important

determinants of the outcomes of use

Bessiere et al (in press) Different characteristics may moderate the influence of particular types of internet use on psychological well being.

Different player motivations may lead to different outcomes

Uses and Gratifications Tradition (Communications and Media Studies)Focus on why people use media – meeting needs

A richer and more robust alternative to the Media Effects model

Who Why WhatLow

social support

Meet new people &

Participate in online groups

Become less

depressed over time

26 26



Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects


Self-Regulation

27 27

Problematic Use & Engaged UseInternet Addiction (Young, Greenfield)

Adapted from Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) definitions of substance abuse

Dichotomous items & arbitrary cutpoints

Brown’s Diagnostic CriteriaToleranceEuphoriaCognitive SalienceBehavioral SalienceConflictWithdrawalRelapse

28 28

The Criteria in DetailTolerance – requiring more to get the desired effect

Euphoria – the feeling of enjoyment from use/performance

Cognitive Salience – thinking about something very often

Behavioral Salience – doing something very often

Conflict – arguments and tension with self or others

Withdrawal – anxiety and discomfort when removed

Relapse – inability to quit/reduce despite repeated attempts

29 29

EAS Item Examples by CriterionTolerance“I tend to want to spend increasing amounts of time playing Lineage II

Euphoria“I often experience a buzz of excitement while playing Asheron's Call”

Cognitive Salience “I rarely think about playing Battlefield2 when I am not using a computer”

Behavioral Salience“I sometimes neglect important things because of an interest in Savage”

Conflict“My social life has sometimes suffered because of me playing Unreal 2004”

Withdrawal“I would hate to go without playing Guild Wars for more than a few days”

Relapse“I have made unsuccessful attempts to reduce the time I spend playing Eve”

30 30

Problematic Use vs. Engaged UseThe Bifurcation of Brown’s Criteria

Behavioral SalienceConflictWithdrawal Relapse

ToleranceEuphoriaCognitive Salience

Vs.

Problematic Use is undesirable

Engaged Use is desirable

A conceptual distinctionNeed to assess discriminative validity.

31 31

Self-RegulationSupports our ability to observe, identify, and adjust behavioral deficits and

excesses

Three Classes of Self-regulatory behavior

1) Self MonitoringObserving and Keeping track of one’s own behavior

ex. “When I’m trying to change something, I pay a lot of attention to how I’m doing.”

2) Self EvaluationThe comparison of one’s behavior to internally or externally generated standardsex. “I have personal standards, and try to live up to them.”

3) Self ConsequationThe creation and enforcement of contingencies aimed at managing one’s behaviorex. “I get myself through hard things mostly by planning to enjoy myself afterwards.”

32 32

How is Self-regulation Relevant?

Self Regulation

Problematic UseInternet Use

_+

Problematic use as deficient self-regulation (LaRose, 2002)

Self Regulation

Problematic UseInternet Use

_+

Depression

Moderating effect of depression on self-regulation (Bandura)

33 33



Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects



34 34

Social Augmentation HypothesisSocial communication on the Internet augments people’s total social resources by providing an added avenue for everyday social interaction.

The literature indicates that users of the internet…

have more total contact with family members than non-users (Katz & Aspden, 1997)

made more new friends (Katz & Aspden, 1997)

are more involved in their community (Wellman, 2001)

have larger social networks (Robinson et al 2000)

35 35

Social Displacement HypothesisSocial communication on the Internet displaces valuable everyday social interaction with family and friends.

The literature indicates that users of the internet…spend less time and had lesser relationships with family and friends

(Gershuny, 2000; Kraut et al., 1998; Sanders et al., 2000)

have less real world social contact (Kraut et al., 1998)

felt increased loneliness and depressive affect (Kraut et al., 1998)

spent less time on social activities (Nie & Hillygus, 2001).

36 36

Social Integration

Perceived Social

Support

Social Network

SizeLoneliness

Social Integration

Formal Group

Activity

Informal Group

Activity

The fullness of one’s social life and the resources made available as a result of it Many possible metrics:

An augmentation paradigm would indicate that online gaming would increase social integrationA displacement paradigm would indicate that online gaming would decrease social integration

Implication : Reduced social integration could lead to psychological problems

37 37

Guild CommitmentAn individual’s dedication to and involvement in a group

Organizational Commitment QuestionnaireDeveloped by Mowaday to quantify“job involvement” in work groups (1979)

Adapted to fit online gaming

Respondent rates level of agreement with 15 statements

“I find that my values and this organization's values are very similar” or“It wouldn't take much to cause me to leave this organization.”

38 38

Why measure Guild Commitment?Involvement and dedication to online groups could interfere with or displace that for real-life social and professional groups

Simple participation may have a different impact than committed involvement

On the other hand, the impact of commitment to an online group could be positive

39 39



Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects

Depression

40 40

DepressionA mental state of depressed mood characterized by feelings of sadness, despair, and discouragement.

Social Integration Hypotheses

• Resources provided by the real or perceived presence and involvement of other people tend to buffer individuals from depression

• Important sense of well-being and “peace of mind” derived from the ability to get advice assistance and emotional support from one’s social network

41 41

What does the literature suggest?

Social Integration Hypotheses Social Resources buffer individuals from depression. Regardless of the causative stressor(s)Real and/or felt availability of support & advice

Depression

Perceived Social

Support

Social Network

SizeLoneliness

Social Integration

Emotional Stability

Self-RegulationExtraversion

Personal Traits

42 42


Personal Factors Dimensions of personality and behavior associated with depression

Depression

Perceived Social

Support

Social Network

SizeLoneliness

Social Integration

Emotional Stability


Personal Traits

43 43


Types of Use

Types of Play

Social Integration

Effects

Summary of Concepts

Play Motivations


Self-Regulation


Social IntegrationOrg. Commitment

Depression

44 44

Two Research Questions1) What factors might predict Problematic Use vs.

Engaged Use?

2) What is the social impact of online gaming?

45 45

What factors might predict Problematic Use?Time Spent Playing

Self-Regulatory Behavior – how active a user is in monitoring and managing their usage

Player Motivation - why does one play?

Depression - as predictor rather than result

46 46

Predicting Problematic UseHypothesis IProblematic use is predicted by not only by hours of play, but also by self-regulation, player motivation, and depression.

47 47

Some Testable Models

Moderation Model

Problematic Use

Play Hours +

+Self

Regulation

_

Depression

+

++_+

Play Hours

Self Regulation

Depression

Problematic Use

Main Effects Model

Play Motivation

Play Motivation

48 48

Predicting Engaged Use

++++

Play Hours

Game Affinity

Guild Commitment

Engaged Use

Play Motivation

Hypothesis IIWhile also associated with play hours, engaged use is predicted by game affinity, play motivation, and guild commitment.

49 49

What is the social impact of online gaming?Does use interfere with “real world” social activity?

Might it enhance feelings of social integration for some?

What about negative psychological outcomes?

50 50

Reminder – Social Integration & Depression

Depression

Perceived Social

Support

Social Network

SizeLoneliness

Social Integration

Emotional Stability


Personal Traits

Where does problematic use fit in?

51 51

Problematic Use, Social Integration & Depression

Problematic use could lead to depression by displacing real-life social activityreducing / ablating social rolls and involvement

Depression

Perceived Social SupportProblematic

Use

Social Network Size

Loneliness+

_

_

Social Integration

+

_

_

52 52

Gaming’s effect on Social Integration – 2 models

Displacement Model

Social Integration

Play Hours _

Guild Commitment

Problematic Use

Augmentation Model

Play Motivation

Social Integration

Play w/ RL Friends

Online Friends Met

in RL

+

+

Guild Commitment

+

_

_

_

53 53

The Displacement ModelHypothesis III - Over time as play hours and guild commitment rise, social integration will decrease. Players with relationship play motivation may be particularly vulnerable to displacement of this type. Similarly, players with high levels of problematic use may encounter displacement of real world social involvement.

Social Integration

Play Hours _

Guild Commitment

Problematic Use

Play Motivation

_

_

_

54 54

The Augmentation ModelHypothesis IV – Play with real-life friends/relatives, conversion of friends from online to real-life, and commitment to online groups may lead to enhanced social integration.

Social Integration

Play w/ RL Friends

Online Friends Met

in RL

+

+

Guild Commitment

+

55 55

Method

56 56

Online Surveywww.projectmassive.com

95 Items

Out-of-game Recruitment • Posts to web forums (e.g. Vault Network & Slashdot)• Re-recruitment of past participants

In-game Recruitment • World of Warcraft• Guild Wars• Counter-Strike• Xbox Live

57 57

4 Waves of Project MassiveWave One (pilot) – Collected Spring and Summer 2002

Wave Two – Collected September – January 2004

Wave Three – Launched in April of 2004

Wave Four – Planned for September

58 58

What do we ask?Basic Demographics

Gameplay – Games, frequency / length of play

ScalesPlayer Motivation – Adapted Yee ScaleSelf Regulation – SSRQDepression - CES-DLoneliness - UCLA-LPerceived Social Support - ISEL-12 Social Network Index – SNIProblematic & Engaged Use - EAS-IIOrganizational (Guild) Commitment – OCQPersonality – Saucier 7 Factor InventorySocial Activity – Formal/Informal Group Activity

59 59

Results So Far

60 60

DemographicsWave 1 (pilot)

Wave 2 Wave 3(so far)

N 1836 1503 1089

Age 27 28 28

Gender 10% Female 11% Female 11% Female

Play Hours 21 hrs/week 22 hrs/week 21 hrs/week

Game Type Not Collected 85% MMO15% Other

80% MMO20% Other

61 61

Evidence of Discriminative Differences

N~1400Play

HoursDepression Loneliness Perceived

Social Support

Self-Regulation

Guild Commitment

Game Affinity

Problematic Use

.301 .387 .298 -.262 -.377 .067 .084

Engaged Use .229 .064 .021 .025 -.056 .213 .414



Vs.

62 62

Support for the Main Effects Model

Problematic Use

Play Hours+

Play Motivation +

Self Regulation_

Depression

+

63 63

Zero-Order Correlations

N~1400 Problematic Use

Play Hours

Escapism Achievement Manipulation Self-Regulation

Depression

Problematic Use

. .301 .373 .288 .198 -.377 .387

Play Hours . .120 .154 .047 -.071 .163Escapism . .224 .059 -.184 .298Achievement . .321 -.095 .119Manipulation . -.111 .106Self-Regulation

. -.559

Depression .

64 64

Regression Model for Problematic Use

Adj R2 = .331, N=1153Significant Interaction

Play Hours * Escapism

Model Attribute Beta Std. Error t p

Self-Regulation -.469 .055 -8.56 <.0001

Escapism .208 .025 8.34 <.0001

Depression .188 .055 3.41 .0007

Achievement .158 .028 5.62 <.0001

Manipulation .085 .030 2.79 <.0001

Relationship .044 .020 2.17 <.0001

Play Hours .010 .001 7.80 <.0001

Play Hours * Escapism .002 .001 2.25 .0247

65 65

Decomposing the Hours*Escapism Interaction

Interaction pPlay Hours * Escapism .021

Play Hours * Relationship .109

Play Hours * Manipulation .197

Play Hours * Immersion .678

Play Hours * Achievement .753

Players who are high on the Escapism motivation dimension and play a high number of hours report high levels of problematic use

1

7

Problematic Use

Play Hours

1560

7 Hi Escapism Lo Escapism

66 66

Reconsidering Engaged & Problematic UseSAT Verbal Analogies

What if

Engaged Use : Problematic UseAs

Deep Appreciation for Food : Over Eating

Then it would make sense to put Engaged Use into the model

67 67

Regression Model for Problematic Use

Adj R2 = .404, N=1121


Engaged Play .518 .043 12.04 <.0001

Self-Regulation -.421 .052 -8.09 <.0001

Depression .270 .053 5.10 <.0001

Escapism .132 .025 5.38 <.0001

Manipulation .126 .029 4.32 <.0001

Achievement .082 .027 3.02 .0026

Roleplaying -.065 .023 -2.79 <.0001

Play Hours .008 .001 6.30 <.0001

68 68

A Main Effects Model for Engaged Use

Engaged Use

Play Hours+

Play Motivation +

Game Affinity+

Guild Commitment

+

69 69

Regression Model for Engaged Use

Adj R2 = .355, N=893


Game Affinity .255 .019 13.60 <.0001

Escapism .115 .016 7.38 <.0001

Achievement .115 .018 6.27 <.0001

Manipulation -.072 .020 -3.50 .0005

Guild Commitment .066 .017 3.97 <.0001

Roleplaying .031 .015 2.06 .0396

Play Hours .007 .001 6.95 <.0001

70 70

Going Forward

71 71

Taking Advantage of Longitudinal DataExamining change over time with hierarchical linear modeling

Predicting change in:Problematic useSocial integration

HLM w/ longitudinal data - a license to make causal claims

Two Stages1. Identify the shape of change within the individual over time2. Look at interindividual differences in change

what factors predict these differences

72 72

Longitudinal Analysis using HLMBy measuring repeatedly causality can be addressed

T1 predictors Change in outcome b/w T1 and T2

Problematic Use

Play Hours+

Play Motivation +

Self Regulation_

Depression

+

Time One Time Two

73 73


T1 predictors Change in outcome b/w T1 and T2

Social Integration

Play Hours_

Play Motivation _

Guild Commitment

_

Problematic Use

_

Time One Time Two

74 74


T1 predictors Change in outcome b/w T1 and T2Time One Time Two

Play w/ RL Friends

Online Friends Met

in RL

+

+

Guild Commitment

+Social

Integration

75 75

Fitting the Omnibus Model

DepressionPerceived

Social Support

Social Network

Size

Loneliness+_

_

Social Integration

++_

+

Play Hours

Self Regulation

Depression

Problematic Use

Play Motivation

+_

_

76 76

Research Informing DesignUI Plug-in for World Of Warcraft allowing user to:

view personal usage statisticssee comparison to personal & community standardsshare usage data with friends to support coordination

Reflects the study’s findings by:Supporting self-regulatory activity to reduce likelihood of problematic use

Supporting collaboration and coordinated action to enhance online social experience

79 79

ContributionsEmpirical examination of the role of self-regulation, player motivation, and depression in the development of problematic use of interactive entertainment

Identification and examination of socio-environmental and motivational “risk factors” that could make an individual susceptible to problematic use

Empirical examination of the effect that participation in online communities has on the real-life activities of the individual

Application of longitudinal hierarchical linear modeling to the study of gaming communities

Testing and further development of a player motivation inventory for online gaming

Adaptation of Organizational Commitment Questionnaire to the study of online social groups

80 80

Time Frame

81 81

Thank [email protected]://www.cs.cmu.edu/~afseaywww.projectmassive.com

82 82

Two Frameworks to Develop

Negative Psychological Consequences

Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play

83 83



Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play

Types of Play

84 84



Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play

Types of Use

85 85



Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play

Social Consequence

s

86 86



Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play

Psychological Consequence

s

87 87

Some Context as We Proceed


Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play

1) What factors might predict Problematic Use vs. Engaged Use?2) How might online gaming reduce or even enhance social integration?

88 88

Phase One : Types of Play


Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play

Types of Play

89 89

Phase Two : Types of Use


Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play

Types of Use

Problematic UseEngaged UseSelf-Regulation

90 90

Phase Three : Social Consequences


Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play

Social Consequence

s

DisplacementAugmentation Social IntegrationOrganizational Commitment

91 91

Phase Four : Psychological Consequences


Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play


s

92 92

Summary of Concepts


Problematic UsePlay

Engaged Use

Enhanced Social

Integration

Reduced Social

Integration

Play

Types of Play

Play Motivations

Types of Use


Self-Regulation


Social IntegrationOrg. Commitment


s

Social Consequence

s

Depression

93 93

Modeling the Social Impact of Online Gaming

Displacement Model

Social Integration

Play Hours _

+Org.

Commitment

+Problemati

c Use

Augmentation Model

+Play

Motivation

Social Integration

Play w/ RL Friends

Online Friends Met

in RL

+

+

Org. Commitment

+

94 94

Player Motivation LiteratureBartle – Players Who Suit MUDs, 1996

AchieversSocializersExplorersKillers

Yee – Facets, 2002RelationshipImmersionGriefAchievementLeadership

95 95

Problematic Use vs. Engaged Use

N~1400Play

HoursDepression Loneliness Perceived

Social Support

Problematic Use

.301 .387 .298 -.262

Engaged Use .229 .064 .021 .025



Vs.

96 96

How Is Problematic Use Measured?EAS-II

Engagement Addiction Scale II29 Items – 14 “Addiction”, 15 EngagementDeveloped by Charlton & Danforth

97 97

How Is Self-Regulation Measured?SSRQ

Short Self Regulation Questionnaire31 items rating agreement with statements about

personal qualities and practicesDeveloped by Carey & Neal (2004)

ExamplesSelf Monitoring“When I’m trying to change something, I pay a lot of attention to how I’m doing.”

Self Evaluation“I have personal standards, and try to live up to them.”

Self Consequation“I get myself through hard things mostly by planning to enjoy myself afterwards.”

98 98

Decomposing the Hours*Escapism Interaction

Interaction pPlay Hours * Escapism .021

Play Hours * Relationship .109

Play Hours * Manipulation .197

Play Hours * Immersion .678

Play Hours * Achievement .753

Players who are high on the Escapism motivation dimension and play a high number of hours report high levels of problematic use

0

Hours per Week

PT_ESC

ADDSCORE

0

Hours per Week

PT_ESC

ADDSCORE

99 99

How Is Depression Measured?CES-D

Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale11 Items rating frequency of certain feelings/states

Examples

“I could not get going.”

“I felt that everything I did was an effort.”

“I had trouble keeping my mind on what I was doing.”

100 100


Self Regulation

Problematic UsePlay Hours

_+

Problematic use as deficient self-regulation (LaRose, 2002)

Self Regulation

Problematic UsePlay Hours

_+

Depression

Moderating effect of depression on self-regulation (Bandura)

101 101

Regression Model for Engaged Use

Adj R2 = .453, N=814


Game Affinity .244 .018 13.39 <.0001

Problematic Use .209 .018 11.77 <.0001

Depression -.139 .032 -4.43 <.0001

Manipulation -.119 .022 -5.46 <.0001

Achievement .087 .018 4.94 <.0001

Escapism .077 .016 4.84 <.0001

Guild Commitment .051 .015 3.48 .0005

Roleplaying .041 .015 2.74 .006

Achieve. * Manip. .038 .017 2.14 <.0001

Play Hours .004 .001 5.03 .032

the social and psychological impact of online gaming

Documents