situational autonomy support in video game playan exploratory studySebastian Deterding (@dingstweets)Hans Bredow Institute for Media ResearchICA 2013 Preconference »The Power of Play: Motivational Uses and Applications«London, June 16, 2013

cb

1

Outset

3

Method

2

Theory

4

Results

5

Outlook

3

Method

2

Theory

4

Results

5

Outlook1

Outset

serious games in school contexts

gamification in work contexts

Johan Huizinga

»First and foremost, all play is a voluntary activity.«

homo ludens (1938/1950: 7)

Cf. Caillois 2001, Suits 2005, Pellegrini 2009, Burghardt 2005

Lopez 2011

Heeter et al. 2011, Mollick & Rothbard 2013

1 3

Method

4

Results

5

Outlook

Theory

2

Outset

Edward Deci, Richard Ryan

»To be autonomous means to behave with a sense of volition, willingness, and congruence; it means to fully endorse and concur with the behavior one is engaged in.«

motivation, personality, and development (2012: 85)

autonomy in SDT

• Action is energised and directed by three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, relatedness

• All motivations range from controlled to autonomous, external to internal locus of causality

• Individuals potentially energised by multiple motivations at the same time; sum determines overall experienced level of autonomy

• Motivational »significance« of social-contextual input results from subjective construal process

Ryan & Deci 2002, Deci & Ryan 2012

spectrum of motivations

Perc

eive

d ex

tern

al

locu

s of

cau

salit

y Perceived internal locus of causality

External extrinsic

introjected extrinsic

internalised extrinsic

integrated extrinsic

intrinsic

{{

overall controlled

overall autonomous

Deci & Ryan 2012

autonomy in SDT

• Action is energised and directed by three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, relatedness

• All motivations range from controlled to autonomous, external to internal locus of causality

• Individuals potentially energised by multiple motivations at the same time; sum determines overall experienced level of autonomy

• Motivational »significance« of social-contextual input results from subjective construal process

Ryan & Deci 2002, Deci & Ryan 2012

existing research

• Video gaming can satisfy intrinsic needs, which can explain part of video game play enjoyment (1)

• Some studies on in-game autonomy support specifically through »meaningful choice« (2)

• Studies on video gaming context mainly explored relatedness support (3)

• Many studies on social contexts supporting or thwarting autonomy in other activities (4) – but none on video gaming yet

(1) Ryan, Rigby & Przybylski 2006; Tamborini et al. 2010, 2011; Przybylski, Rigby & Ryan 2010; Peng et al. 2012; Przybylski et al., 2012, Reinecke et al. 2012; (2) Rigby & Ryan 2011; (3) Kaye & Bryce, 2012; (4) Deci, Koestner & Ryan 1999, Deci & Ryan 2012

How do social contexts affect autonomy experience in video game play?

research question

1

2

Theory

4

Results

5

Outlook3

MethodOutset

Method

• 19 interviewees gaming in leisurely and presumed-low autonomy contexts: game journalism, design, research, e-sport, gamified application

• Semi-structured interviews, 90-120 min. length

• Interviewees invited to openly compare contexts, then narrate high/low autonomy experiences

• Transcription of all interviews

• Coding and analysis w/ MAXQDA following directed qualitative content analysis (1)

Hsieh & Shannon 2005, Gläser & Laudel 2011

1 3

Method

2

Theory

5

Outlook

4

Results

Outset

in-game autonomy support

• Salient autonomy with meaningful choice (impacts game world, no faux choice) & open spaces (1)

• Salient controlled motivation related to expectations and values

• expected action is thwarted (invisible walls, ‘logical’ move impossible)

• expected choice not provided (‘railroad’ levels)

• cut scenes, QTE take away expected agency

• progress requires action against player’s values

(1) Cf. Ryan, Rigby & Przybylski 2006; Rigby & Ryan 2011

Situational autonomy support

• Autonomy in play is taken for granted: Interviewees recalled mainly moments of controlled motivations as noteworthy, labelling them »work«, »not play«

• Playing in low-autonomy contexts is less enjoyable & emotional, more effortful, pressured, detached

• Both leisurely and low-autonomy contexts hold experiences of controlled motivation

• They become salient when spontaneous interests and provided choices mismatch and controlled motivations keep players to given choices

P3: And as a reviewer you have to look: How does an, an adventure like Heavy Rain, which plays a lot with the freedom to act, and suggests it, there you have to- as a normal, contemplative player you just play it through, and afterwards you think: ‘Maybe I’ll do it again.’ And here you indeed have to play the same scenes immediately again and look, how, what is different, so. [That is]

Interviewer: [That is,] you have to actually exhaust the possibility space?

P3: Exactly, yes. Yes, yes. You are forced to do it, it’s no longer an optional possibility. Whenever you’re forced to do something, then in becomes more work. (P3-2/669-672)

game features and context interact

In::: 95 percent of the cases no. It's still a hobby. You- it's still a passion. You enjoy playing it, also because something like:: a professional level comes in, money and you get around and you get to know new people. That's nice, no question. And those remaining five percent, those are the percentages where you say: <<Hm, not training again from seven to ten pm? Now I could have gone to the movies with my girlfriend.>> For example. Where you would say: <<I so would have wanted to go with her to the movies. Damn, damn, damn. Why do I have to train now?>> (P16/97-99)

… with current goals & interests

controlling lack of choice

• Whether and when to start playing

• What game to play

• How to play (goal-focused vs. explorative)

• Whether and when to achieve game states

• When to stop gaming

• Whether and how to self-regulate emotion display

P9: When I in principle have no time limit, that is, when I can say, I can play until I say: <<I don't want to anymore.>> No appointments and no obligations, both inside the game and outside of the game, then I find, that's an experience of freedom. (P9/308)

freedom of choice

Then also simply games you actually, somehow, don’t want to play. So that’s something that you have to bring yourself to do, to play games you would not voluntarily play. Yes perhaps also to ruin the game with walkthroughs, save games or cheat codes. So that’s something one does intentionally. And well, I would never do that otherwise. Yes, in the end, everything to, to, what, what’s helpful to reach the goal you set before. (P10/380-382)

game choice

• Low-autonomy contexts• Professional reputation• Material consequence (prize money, workload)• Verbal sanctions from superiors and peers

• Leisurely contexts• Social norms of reciprocity, harmony, politeness• Reputation (if gaming is tied to identity)• Loss or attainment of in-game resources

controlling motivations

So with other games it was never like that, that I would go even if I didn't feel like it. With WoW you had, especially with WoW there somehow was a social, yes, somehow, a social coercion behind it. Because of, as I said, this reputation and then also the social contexts that you maintained through it. Or found there. That they moved you to go there. Because I think, that's the thing with sport. That you don't feel like training in the evening, or something, and you still go there. Because you feel socially obliged somehow. (P19-2/68-78)

social norms

Because then ((when money is involved)) there's the pressure that you have to win. Of course, everybody who plays wants to win somehow. Or have some successes, at least. Otherwise you wouldn't play, presumably. Bu::t when it's about money, that's a real thing, and that you have to work hard for. That wouldn't have a playful character for me then. (P8/297-303)

material consequence

situational autonomy support

Not need-aligned, controlled gameplay

Intrinsic need satisfying gameplay

Ability to reconfigure & dis/engage

Lack of social/material consequence

Salientautonomous motivations

Salient controlled motivations

+

+

+–

–

Construal of action as autonomous

–

+

+

1 3

Method

2

Theory

4

Results

5

OutlookOutset

Conclusion & Ramifications

• Autonomy support in video gaming involves a situational meta-process of configuration & dis/engagement

‣ Calls for more ecological studies on situational processes of gaming enjoyment

• Gamification and serious games in low-autonomy contexts face potentially serious challenge

‣ Calls for more studies on effects of situational autonomy support

future research

• Operationalisation and experimental testing of model

• Testing of relation between autonomy experience and play experience in video gaming

• Testing of effect of autonomy experience on productivity in gamification of work

• Testing of effect of autonomy experience on learning outcomes in educational games

ReferencesBurghardt, G. M. (2005). The Genesis of Animal Play: Testing the Limits. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Caillois, R. (2001). Man, Play, and Games. Urbana, Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Motivation, Personality, and Development Within Embedded Social Contexts: An Overview of Self-Determination Theory. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation (pp. 85–107). New York: Oxford University Press.Gläser, J., & Laudel, G. (2010). Experteninterviews und qualitative Inhaltsanalyse als Instrumente rekonstruierender Untersuchungen (4th Ed.). Wiesbaden: VS.Heeter, C., Lee, Y.-H., Magerko, B., & Medler, B. (2011). Impacts of Forced Serious Game Play on Vulnerable Subgroups. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations, 3(3), 34–53.Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative health research, 15(9), 1277–88.Huizinga, J. (1955). Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Boston: Beacon Press.Kaye, L. K., & Bryce, J. (2012). Putting The “Fun Factor” Into Gaming: The Influence of Social Contexts on Experiences of Playing Videogames. International Journal of Internet Science, 7(1), 23–37.Lopez, S. (2011, October 19). Disneyland workers answer to “electronic whip”. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/19/local/la-me-1019-lopez-disney-20111018Mollick, E. & Rothbard, N. (2013). Mandatory Fun: Gamifiction and the Impact of Games at Work. Working Paper.Pellegrini, A. D. (2009). The Role of Play in Human Development. New York: Oxford University Press.Peng, W., Lin, J.-H., Pfeiffer, K. a., & Winn, B. (2012). Need Satisfaction Supportive Game Features as Motivational Determinants: An Experimental Study of a Self-Determination Theory Guided Exergame. Media Psychology, 15(2), 175–196.Przybylski, A. K., Rigby, C. S., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). A motivational model of video game engagement. Review of General Psychology, 14(2), 154–166.Reinecke, L., Tamborini, R., Grizzard, M., Lewis, R., Eden, A., & David Bowman, N. (2012). Characterizing Mood Management as Need Satisfaction: The Effects of Intrinsic Needs on Selective Exposure and Mood Repair. Journal of Communication, 62(3), 437–453.Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S., & Przybylski, A. (2006). The Motivational Pull of Video Games: A Self-Determination Theory Approach. Motivation and Emotion, 30(4), 344–360. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). An Overview of Self-Determintation Theory: An Organismic-Dialectical Perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Determination Research (pp. 3–36). Rochester: University of Rochester Press.Tamborini, R., Bowman, N. D., Eden, A., Grizzard, M., & Organ, A. (2010). Defining Media Enjoyment as the Satisfaction of Intrinsic Needs. Journal of Communication, 60(4), 758–777.Tamborini, R., Grizzard, M., David Bowman, N., Reinecke, L., Lewis, R. J. & Eden, A. (2011). Media Enjoyment as Need Satisfaction: The Contribution of Hedonic and Nonhedonic Needs. Journal of Communication, 61(6), 1025–1042.

sebastian@codingconduct.cc

@dingstweets

codingconduct.cc

Thank you.