close intimate playthings? understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment,...

25
playthings? Understanding player- avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy Jaime Banks @amperjay Nicholas D. Bowman @bowmanspartan

Upload: west-virginia-university-department-of-communication-studies

Post on 02-Dec-2014

2.191 views

Category:

Education


3 download

DESCRIPTION

Central to research on video games and virtual worlds is the player-avatar relationship (PAR): the interaction between a corporeal person and a digital body. Research perspectives on the nature of this relationship vary, suggesting it to be: a feature of social presence (de Kort, IJsselsteijn, & Poels, 2007), a function of emotional intimacy and perceived agency (Banks, in progress), identification with avatar personae (Yee, Bailenson, & Ducheneaut, 2009), and a merging of player and avatar psyches (Lewis, Weber, & Bowman, 2008). Yet, each recognizes that there are real physical humans and real digital avatars interacting in digital spaces. The following study uses in-depth player interviews to integrate Banks (in progress) and Lewis et al.’s (2008) perspectives to provide a more comprehensive understanding of PARs and suggests how a more integrative approach might aid our understanding of the gaming experience from an entertainment perspective. Citation: Banks, J. D., & Bowman, N. D. (2013, October). Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy. Paper to be presented at the annual meeting of Association of Internet Researchers, Denver.

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Close intimate playthings?

Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment,

agency, and intimacy

Jaime Banks@amperjay

Nicholas D. Bowman@bowmanspartan

Page 2: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy
Page 3: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy
Page 4: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy
Page 5: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Avatar:“An interactive, social representation

of a user.”

Meadows, 2008

Page 6: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Avatars are …Possibilities (Markus & Nurius, 1986; Nakamura, 2002) Bricolage (Turkle, 1997)Rhetorical acts (Kolko, 1999)Vehicles (Carr, 2002)Bundles of resources (Castronova, 2005)Tools, roles, and props (Linderoth, 2005)Surrogates (Gee, 2006)Masks (Galanxhi & Nah, 2007, in Schultz & Leahy) Totems (Apter, 2008)Symbolic objects (Giddings & Kennedy, 2008)Costumes (Merola & Pena, 2010)

Page 7: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Player-avatar (para)relationships

• Attachment• Identification• Proteus Effect (reverse)

“one-sided, non-dialectical, and controlled by the performer” ~Horton & Wohl, 1956

Page 8: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Character Attachment

• “Psychological Merging”• Dimensions

o Identification/friendshipo Suspension of disbeliefo Sense of controlo Sense of care/responsibility Past work demonstrates:

Highest in RPGs (Weber et al., 2008)

Associated with pro- and anti-social gaming (Bowman et al.,

2012)Drives enjoyment and

appreciation experiences (Bowman et al., 2013)

Page 9: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Player Avatar Relationships

Relationship = valenced connection between two people

where each party influences the other

Burscheid & Peplau, 1983Harvey & Pauwels, 2009

AGENTS

Page 10: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Player-Avatar Relationships

• Two-sided, dialectical, mutual agency• Dimensions

o Emotional intimacyo Perceived agencyoGameplay practices

Page 11: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

PAR Types

Object Me Symbiote

Other

Page 12: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Research Question

How do dimensions of CA (parasocial)

map to PAR types (social)?

Page 13: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Method• Transcripts from in-depth

interviewsoVoice interview + play interviewo 25 World of Warcraft playerso~70 hours audio 1,500 pp transcripts

• Thematic narrative analysisoCA dimensionso Known PAR types (previous analysis)

Page 14: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

ResultsAvatar as

ObjectAvatar as

MeAvatar as Symbiote

Avatar as Social Other

Identification

Low High Mid Low

Suspension of disbelief

Low Mid Mid High

Sense of Control

High Mid Mid Low

Sense of care/responsibility

Low Mid Mid High

Page 15: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

CA: Identification

Low“I know who I am and so an avatar on a screen is not going to be me.”

Medium “She’s just kind of that part of me that I don’t allow to come out in… real life.”

High“He's just kind of more my style than others … Dwarves are kind of rough and tumble, and I'm a little that way.”

Page 16: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

CA: Suspension of Disbelief

Low

“I’m a woman in real life. … Well, I’m not a guy in real life. But then I’m not a Paladin in real life, either, so. I don’t really see whether that should matter.”

Medium

“I’d just go into the park and find a tree and just kind of chill. Same thing I do in Org. I’m around people … but in my own world enjoying it.”

High

“I always kind of envisioned his retirement, sort of golden years, as patrolling in the Barrens. He was tasked by the Warchief to lend aid to the young’uns.”

Page 17: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

CA: Sense of Control

Low“I know his voice, I know his stance and I will frequently make choices in-game based on how I know he would act.”

Medium“I think as long as the game is a place that people can interface with each other with pixels … I think that I'll continue to play it.”

High

“I feel like I have a lot more control over the success of a group [as a healer] than I did as just a damage dealer and it’s much more engaging.”

Page 18: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

CA: Sense of Care/Responsibility

Low

“[When I’m raiding] I feel kind of a responsibility. You have 24 other people counting on you or 9 other people counting on you.”

Medium“Someone had hacked my account … I felt really violated … like somebody had taken something from me.”

High“His entire family died. He barely escaped and had to learn how to take care of himself.”

Page 19: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

ResultsAvatar as

ObjectAvatar as

MeAvatar as Symbiote

Avatar as Social Other

Identification

Low High Mid Low

Suspension of disbelief

Low Mid Mid High

Sense of Control

High Mid Mid Low

Sense of care/responsibility

Low Mid Mid High

Page 20: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Self-differentiation

LowHig

h

Page 21: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

ResultsAvatar as

ObjectAvatar as

MeAvatar as Symbiote

Avatar as Social Other

Identification

Low High Mid Low

Suspension of disbelief

Low Mid Mid High

Sense of Control

High Mid Mid Low

Sense of care/responsibility

Low Mid Mid High

Page 22: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Human-Tech RelationshipsFrom user-used to “we”

Tools

Bundles o

f res

ourc

es

V

ehicl

es

C

ostu

mes

/mas

ks

Rhet

orica

l act

s

Surro

gates

To

tem

s

Bric

olage

Role

s

Symboli

c objec

ts

P

ossib

ilities

………….Social self-differentiation

Page 23: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Entertainment gratifications

• Entertainment is (Oliver & Raney, 2010)o Enjoyment: Pleasure of Control o Meaningfulness: Pleasure of Cognition

• Self-differentiation seems key to stimulating “authentic” meaningfulness

Authentic emotional intimacy requires self-differentiation (Bowen,1978)

Page 24: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Future Research• Language patterns (signatures)• PARs through levels of ‘realism’• Moderating effects?o Impact of educational gameso Influences on identity performanceoExperiences of violent contentoPower of mood management

Page 25: Close intimate playthings? Understanding player-avatar relationships as a function of attachment, agency, and intimacy

Jaime Banks@amperjay

Nick Bowman@bowmanspartan