In It to Win It: A Mediation Model of Personal Characteristics and Motivations of Adolescents First-Person Shooter Players
Kinyi Tsui
University of Amsterdam
Masters’ Thesis
Graduate School of Communication
Masters’ Programme Communication Science Student number: 10000815
Supervisor: J. S. Lemmens Date: 27-6-2014
Abstract
Although many studies have examined the effects of playing first-person shooters (FPS), the characteristics and motivations of these gamers have been largely neglected. In order to examine if the relation between personal characteristics (self-esteem, loneliness, social competence and trait aggression) and playing FPS is mediated by specific motivations (enjoyment, escapism, social interaction and competence), a survey was held among 1060 Dutch adolescents, of whom 232 played FPS (91.3% male). Logistic regression analyses showed that trait aggression and social competence positively predicted playing FPS. Several mediation models were tested that demonstrated a significant mediation of trait aggression by social interaction and competence, though influenced by gender. Among boys, the impact of trait aggression was partially mediated by players’ motivation for both social interaction and competence, indicating that aggressive adolescent males play FPS to satisfy their need for interpersonal competition. Among girls, the impact of trait aggression was partially mediated by social interaction only, indicating that aggressive female adolescents are more likely to play FPS motivated by their need to connect with others.
In It to Win It: A Mediation Model of Personal Characteristics and Motivations of Adolescents First-Person Shooter Players
First-person shooters (FPS) have often been the subject of public concern due to their violent content and popularity among adolescents (Jansz & Tanis, 2007). Many studies have focused on the effects of playing FPS and its negative impact on adolescent gamers (e.g. Scharrer & Leone, 2008), yet few studies have examined who plays FPS and why these games are played by this age group. Studies that examined the characteristics of gamers in general, have often focused on psychosocial traits of gamers, such as social competence (e.g. Lo, Wang & Fang, 2005), loneliness (Kowert, Domahidi, Festl & Quandt, 2014), aggression (e.g. Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Anderson & Dill, 2000; Griffiths, 1999) and self-esteem (e.g. Colwell et al., 1995; Roe & Muijs, 1998). Studies that examined why players are interested in games, have often focused on specific motivations for playing, such as enjoyment (Sherry, Lucas, Greenberg & Lachlan, 2006), social interaction (e.g. Cole & Griffiths, 2007; Jansz & Tanis, 2007), escapism (e.g. Jansz & Tanis, 2007), or competence (e.g. Sherry et al., 2006; Tychsen, Hitchens & Brolund, 2008; Przybylski, Ryan & Rigby, 2010). Because certain characteristics seem related to specific motivations, it is plausible that motivations mediate the relationship between player-characteristics and playing FPS. However, the mediating role of motivations in the relationship between player-characteristics and playing FPS has not yet been examined. It is important to find out who plays these games and for what reason, because these factors may enhance the potentially negative effects these violent games can have on adolescent players (Fikkers et al., 2013). Thus the research question is: Which characteristics among adolescents can predict whether they play first-person shooters and what motivates them to play?
Studies on the traits of gamers have indicated that the following four
(e.g. Lo, Wang & Fang, 2005), loneliness (Kowert, Domahidi, Festl & Quandt, 2014), aggression (e.g. Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Anderson & Dill, 2000; Griffiths, 1999) and self-esteem (e.g. Colwell et al., 1995; Roe & Muijs, 1998). Characteristics are not the only predictors of preference for specific video games, there are also underlying motivations that influence these choices (Sherry et al., 2006). Studies that examined the link between
motivations and gaming have generally focused on needs that are gratified by playing games (Jansz & Martens, 2005; Jansz & Tanis, 2007; Sherry et al., 2006). Specific motivations for playing FPS include the need for enjoyment (Sherry et al., 2006), the need for social
interaction (e.g. Cole & Griffiths, 2007; Jansz & Tanis, 2007; Sherry et al., 2006), the need for escapism (e.g. Jansz & Tanis, 2007) and the need for competence (e.g. Sherry et al., 2006; Tychsen et al., 2008; Przybylski, Ryan & Rigby, 2010). Based on the existing literature around FPS, these characteristics and motivations are included in our study.
There are two main reasons why the focus is on adolescents. Firstly, FPS are popular among this age group: 47% of adolescents regularly play games from this genre (Lenhart et al., 2012). Secondly, the effects of games are stronger among younger players, as adolescents who play FPS are more likely to be problematic gamers than adults (Festl, Scharkow & Quandt, 2012) and negative effects of violent games are stronger for adolescents than adults (as shown by the meta-analysis by Bushman & Anderson 2001). Because adolescents are prominent users of FPS and heavy playing could lead to problematic behaviour, it is important to determine which adolescents are more likely to play and why. Specifically, the main aim of the present study is to examine which characteristics relate to which motivations to predict who plays FPS and why they play them.
In FPS, players assume the first person point-of-view in a three-dimensional space. Past popular titles include Doom (id Software, 1993), Counter Strike (Valve, 2000) and the Halo series (Bungie, 2003-2014). Currently, the genre is dominated by military shooters such
as the Call of Duty series (Activision, 2003-2014). In 2012, Call of Duty: Black Ops II was the best-selling video game of the year (ESA, 2013). Due to differences in gameplay, a
distinction is made between offline and online FPS. Offline FPS are generally played in single player mode, whereas online FPS are played in multiplayer mode (Montag et al., 2011). A major difference is that online FPS players can experience interpersonal cooperation and competition by playing in teams (Jansz & Tanis, 2007; Montag et al., 2011). Because online FPS allow players various forms of communication through the Internet, they have more opportunities for social interaction than offline FPS can offer (Montag et al., 2011). These differences in gameplay could indicate that the motivations to play online FPS may be different from the motivations to play offline. Thus, the relations between characteristics (who), motivations (why) and playing FPS will be examined to predict who plays FPS and why they play them. The mediating role of motivations on the link between characteristics and online or offline FPS is of particular interest in the present study.
Characteristics of First Person Shooter Players
Out of the four characteristics included in the present study, aggression has been researched most often in relation to FPS. Aggression refers to any behaviour directed to another individual that is carried out with the proximate intent to cause harm (Anderson & Bushman, 2002). Many studies have shown that exposure to violent video games is related to heightened aggression among adults and adolescents (Anderson & Bushman, 2001). Although most studies focussed on aggression as an outcome of playing violent games, such as FPS, some studies have also shown that aggressive adolescents are also more likely to select violent games (e.g., Lemmens, Bushman & Konijn, 2006). However, causality is not the aim of the study and will not be examined. The present study focusses on trait aggression as an expected characteristic of FPS players. More specifically, it is widely claimed that males are
more physically aggressive than females (Björkqvist, 1994). Therefore, aggression is expected to be a characteristic that is more prevalent among male adolescent FPS players.
Another characteristic that is often related to gaming in a negative way is social competence (Lo et al., 2005). Social competence refers to the ability to effectively form and manage offline interpersonal relationships (Valkenburg & Peter, 2008). Although gamers are stereotypically seen as unsociable people (Jansz & Martens, 2005), several studies have shown that social interactions are a key element in the multiplayer experience when playing FPS online (e.g. Cole & Griffiths, 2007; Jansz & Tanis, 2007). The link between a player’s social competence and online FPS is of particular interest, because of its multiplayer options. Therefore, social competence is expected to be higher among those who play FPS online than those who play offline.
Loneliness is another characteristic of gamers (Kowert et al., 2014). It refers to the unpleasant experience that is derived from important deficiencies in an individual’s social network (Peplau, 1982). Lonely people sometimes lack the social skills to develop
relationships or have meaningful interactions with others. Lonely individuals are also more likely to use online games for emotional support and social interaction (Morahan-Martin & Schumacher, 2003). As online FPS often have several multiplayer options and feature communities, they offer a variety of interactions with others. Thus, it is expected that loneliness is a characteristic of online FPS players.
A final characteristic that is often found among adolescent gamers is self-esteem. Self-esteem can be defined as an evaluation of one’s self-concept, heavily dependent on reflected appraisal, social comparisons and self-attributions (Rosenberg, Schooler & Schoenbach, 1989). Some studies argue that gamers who experience competence or success also experience an increase in self-esteem (Long, 1983; Ryan, Rigby & Przybylski, 2006).
Because of its possibilities to enhance self-esteem, it is expected that especially adolescents with low self-esteem are more likely to play FPS.
Motivations of First Person Shooter Players
According to previous studies, social interaction is the most important motivation to invest time in multiplayer FPS (Jansz &Tanis, 2007). Social interaction refers to interpersonal interactions and relationships (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Social interaction is facilitated by the opportunity to play and interact with others online (Przybylski et al., 2010). Players who are motivated by social interaction may use FPS as a means for the formation and
maintenance of social relationships (Xu et al., 2011). Since the characteristic social competence refers to the ability to effectively engage in social situations (Rose-Krasnor, 1997), social interaction is expected to mediate the link between the characteristic social competence and playing FPS. Furthermore, lonely individuals often seek to develop
relationships online as a replacement for offline relationships (Kowert et al., 2014). Therefore, social interaction is also expected to mediate the relation between loneliness and playing online FPS. Regarding gender, girls are generally more likely to engage in social interaction than boys (Bosacki & Astington, 1999). Thus, it is expected that social interaction is more prevalent as a motivation for female FPS players.
Another motivation that is frequently mentioned in prior research is enjoyment (Sherry et al., 2006). Enjoyment describes the positive reaction towards media and its content
(Vorderer, Klimmt & Ritterfeld, 2004). According to Vorderer et al. (2004), enjoyment is the core of media entertainment, which would lead to the assumption that enjoyment is the most important motivation for all gamers, not just those who play FPS. Indeed, enjoyment is one of the predictors of time spent playing FPS, though not the most important (Jansz &Tanis, 2007). A study has also indicated that aggression may be related to enjoyment in games
(Anderson & Dill, 2000). Thus, enjoyment is expected to mediate the relation between aggression and playing FPS.
A motivation that is often linked to games, especially those with fantasy or role-playing elements, is escapism. Escapism in the present context refers to use of a gaming environment to avoid thinking about real-life problems (Yee, 2006). In general, escapism as a motivation to play FPS is higher among adolescents than adults (Jansz & Tanis, 2007). Since the present study focuses on adolescents, escapism is expected to be one of the main
motivations to play FPS. Escapism is also possibly related to low self-esteem (Stetina et al., 2011). It is therefore expected that those with lower self-esteem are motivated by escapism to play FPS.
The final motivation is competence, a motivation that is part of the self-determination theory of gaming (Przybylski et al., 2010). Competence refers to the belief in one’s
capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations (Bandura, 1997). Skill-graded performance and positive feedback from the game are key gaming experiences that keep gamers motivated (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Przybylski et al., 2010). Competence is a particularly important motivator for players of games with distinct competitive elements like FPS (Vorderer et al., 2003). A more specific concept within
competence is interpersonal competition (Vorderer et al., 2003), which takes place when a competitive action is performed to maintain one’s own interest to the disadvantage of others. One study indicated that those who played player-versus-player FPS experienced more state hostility than those who played player-versus-environment FPS (Shafer, 2012). In the present study, aggression is treated as trait aggression. Thus, competence is expected to mediate the link between aggression and playing FPS, especially among those who play online.
Furthermore, games provide players many options to determine their own fate in the game and give them the autonomy over multiple game elements (Przybylski et al., 2010). This
empowers the gamer to shape the game’s narrative, satisfying their need for competence and autonomy. It is plausible that adolescents with low self-esteem are more likely to seek games that satisfy their need for competence (Vorderer et al., 2003). Thus, it is expected that those with lower self-esteem will play FPS motivated by competence. Furthermore, differences in gender are also expected, as it has been shown that men are more competitive than women (Niederle & Vesterlund, 2005). Therefore, it is expected that male FPS players will be more motivated by competence than female FPS players.
The overall aim of the present study is to examine the mediating role of motivations in the link between player-characteristics and playing FPS. The four characteristics included in this study are social competence, loneliness, aggression and self-esteem. The impact of these characteristics may be mediated by four motivations: Enjoyment, escapism, social interaction and competence. In order to examine the interplay between players’ characteristics and motivations for playing online or offline FPS, a survey among 1060 adolescents was conducted.
Figure 1. Conceptual mediation model
Enjoyment Escapism Social interaction Competence Self-esteem Online Loneliness Offline Social Competence Aggression Characteristics Motivations Playing FPS
Method Sample and Procedure
A survey was conducted among Dutch adolescents from six secondary schools throughout the Netherlands. The ages of respondents varied between 11 and 18 years, (M = 13.79, SD = 1.20). In total, 1060 respondents completed the survey, of whom 458 (43.8%) were male. Of these respondents, 591 respondents (56.2%) reported having played a video game in the past month. 19 respondents were eventually omitted from the analysis, because they did not fill in the key variables for analysis. Of the remaining 572 gamers, 400 were male (70.5%) and 164 (28.7%) were female (8 respondents did not disclose their gender). The average age of the gamers varied between 12 and 18, M = 13.73 and SD = 1.20. Among all gamers, 232 (40.6%) reported at least one FPS among their three most-played games, of which 187 (80.6%) played online. Of all 232 FPS players, 209 were male (91,3%). Among all 187 online FPS players, 173 were male (93,5%).
The schools were initially contacted by email. After acquiring passive consent from parents, and active consent from the schools and teachers, the questionnaire was distributed in May 2014. The respondents filled in a paper-and-pencil survey at school. The questionnaire took approximately 25 minutes to complete. The respondents were assured that their answers would remain anonymous to teachers, parents and classmates. Each respondent was given a small gift to express our gratitude for participation.
Measures
Gameplay. Respondents were asked whether or not they had played a video game in the past month. Those who did not play video games were exempted from filling in the game-related questions. Those who had played at least one game were asked to fill in the number of days a week they usually played games and the amount of hours and/or minutes they played
per day. These respondents are referred to as ‘gamers’ in the present study. The gamers also listed their three most played games and indicated for each of them if they were played online or offline.
FPS Players. Respondents who mentioned at least one FPS in their top three were considered FPS players, regardless of the order. Those who did not name any FPS in their top three were not considered FPS players, and will be referred to as the other gamers. Thus, playing FPS is a dichotomous variable. Some games, such as Call of Duty (Activision, 2003-2014), contained both FPS and third-person-shooter elements. Call of Duty is however, widely referred to as a FPS (Colzato, Van Leeuwen, Van den Wildenberg, & Hommel, 2010), thus the players of this game were taken into the analysis as FPS players. Furthermore, the respondents had filled in for each game if they were mostly played online or offline. The FPS players that played online were considered online FPS players (n = 187). There were some FPS players who played multiple FPS either online or offline. In that case, only the response from the first game was taken into account, and the respondent was coded as an online or offline FPS player accordingly.
Characteristics. All items on personal characteristics were formatted as statements and measured on a 5-point Likert scale with response categories ranging from ‘Completely disagree’ to ‘Completely agree’, with the exception of aggression and social competence, which were measured on a 5-point scale ranging from ‘Never’ to ‘Almost every day’ and ‘Very difficult’ to ‘Very easy’ respectively. Each characteristic contained four to six items. A principal component factor analysis (PCA) was conducted to examine the validity of these scales, and Cronbach’s Alpha (α) was calculated to determine their reliability.
Social competence. To measure social competence, four items were selected from the social competence scale by Valkenburg and Peter (2008). The four items with the highest factor loading were selected from the Initiation and Self-disclosure subscales. Each of the
items started with ’How difficult or easy is it for you to…’, followed by the statements. Examples are: ‘…start a conversation with someone you don’t know very well’, ‘…introduce yourself to someone for the first time’ and ‘…express your feelings to someone else’.
Response categories ranged from ‘Very difficult’ tot ‘Very easy’. The variables formed a single dimensional scale., with one component reaching an Eigenvalue higher than 1 (Eigenvalue = 2.41). All items had positive factor loadings ranging from .73 lowest to .82 highest. The items also formed a reliable scale (α = .78), M = 3.16, SD = 0.79.
Loneliness. To measure loneliness, five items were adapted from the UCLA loneliness scale (Russell, 1996). These items include: ‘In the past six months, I felt alone’, ‘In the past six months, there was no one who really understood me’ and ‘In the past six months, I felt left out’. The PCA showed that the variables formed a single dimensional scale, with only one component reaching an Eigenvalue higher than 1 (Eigenvalue = 3.70). All items had positive factor loadings ranging from .85 lowest to .88 highest. The items also formed a reliable scale (α = .91), M = 1.79, SD = 0.84.
Aggression. The measurement for aggressionwas based on the Physical Aggression Subscale by Buss and Perry (1992). In line with previous studies on gaming and aggression (Huesmann & Taylor, 2006), the current study only focussed on physical aggression that could cause harm to others. Five items were adapted from the original scale, including: ‘In the past six months I was given enough provocation to hit another person’ and ‘In the past six months I had to resort to violence to protect my rights’’. The response categories ranged from ‘Never’ to ‘Almost every day’. The PCA showed there was one component with an
Eigenvalue higher than 1 (Eigenvalue = 3.12). All items had positive factor loadings and ranged from .74 lowest to .83 highest. The items also formed a reliable scale (α = .84), M = 1.27, SD = 0.46.
Self-esteem. Finally, the items to measure self-esteem were adapted from the six-item self-esteem scale by Rosenberg et al. (1989). Examples of items are ’I am able to do things at least as well as other people’, ’I feel I don’t have much to be proud of’ (which was later reverse coded) and ’I feel that I have a number of good qualities’. Two items that were negatively formulated in the survey were re-coded for the analyses. The PCA showed there was one component with an Eigenvalue higher than 1 (Eigenvalue = 3.20). All items had positive factor loadings and ranged from .65 lowest to .78 highest. The items also formed a reliable scale (α = .94), M = 3.79, SD = 0.66.
Motivations. All motivations items were formatted as statements beginning with: ‘I play games…’ and were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from ‘Completely disagree’ to ‘Completely agree’. Each motivation was comprised of three items. An explorative PCA was used to examine the dimensions of the twelve motivation items. It initially showed that there were only three components with an Eigenvalue higher than 1, in which the six items measuring enjoyment and escapism formed one component together. A second PCA was then conducted with the abovementioned six items only, which showed that enjoyment and escapism were actually two components with each an Eigenvalue higher than 1. Thus, the items formed a single dimensional scale for each of the motivations.
Enjoyment. The items to measure enjoyment were based on Fang, Chan, Brzezinski and Nair’s (2010) measurement of computer game play enjoyment. The original scale by Fang et al. (2010) measured enjoyment through positive affect, cognition and behaviour. However, since enjoyment in the present study was interpreted as the positive reaction towards games, only the items for positive affect were selected. Another reason for this selection was to limit the amount of items in the present study. The items include: ‘I play games to feel happy’, ‘I play games to feel satisfied’’ and ‘I play games to feel excited’. The PCA showed that the items formed one component with an Eigenvalue of 3.62. All items had
positive factor loadings ranging from .80 lowest to .88 highest. The items also formed a reliable scale, with α = .86, M = 2.54, SD = 1.09.
Escapism. Escapism was measured using items from Christy’s measurement of media escapism (2011). Two of the items were directly taken from Christy (2011). The items
include: ‘I play games to get away from feelings of stress’ and ‘I play games to get relief from feelings of worry’. The third item combined several of Christy’s (2011) items and was
phrased as: ‘I play games to distract myself from negative thoughts’. The PCA showed that the items formed one component with an Eigenvalue of 1.01. All items had positive factor loadings ranging from .80 lowest to .86 highest. The items also formed a reliable scale, with α = .83, M = 2.44, SD = 1.12.
Social interaction. The measurement of social interaction was based on several items from Yee’s (2006) study on the motivations to play online games. The items covered online chatting, friendships and teamwork and included the following: ‘I play games to chat with other games’, ‘I play games to befriend other gamers’ and ‘I play games to play in a team’. The PCA showed that the items formed one component with an Eigenvalue of 1.18. All items had positive factor loadings ranging from .76 lowest to .88 highest. The items also formed a reliable scale, with α = .87, M = 2.22, SD = 1.14.
Competence. Finally, the measurement for competence was based on items from the General Self-efficacy Scale (GSS) by Chen, Gully and Eden (2001), since self-efficacy is a concept similar to competence. The three items include: ‘I play games to challenge myself’, ‘I play games, because obtaining the highest scores is important to me’ and ‘I play games to see if I’m better than other gamers’. The PCA showed that the items formed one component with an Eigenvalue of 1.75. All items had positive factor loadings ranging from .74 lowest to .81 highest. The items also formed a reliable scale, with α = .83, M = 2.82, SD = 1.18.
Results Comparison of gamers
Several significant differences were found in the characteristics of gamers and gamers. Gamers scored significantly higher on self-esteem (M = 3.84, SD = 0.65) than non-gamers (M = 3.74, SD = 0.66), t (1048) = 2.42, p < .05, 95% CI [0.02, 0.18]. Aggression was also significantly higher among gamers (M = 1.35, SD = 0.53) than non-gamers (M = 1.18, SD = 0.33), t (993.58) = 6.58, p < .01, 95% CI [0.12, 0.23]. There were no significant differences regarding loneliness between gamers (M = 1.76, SD = 0.82) and non-gamers (M = 1.84, SD = 0.86). There were also no significant differences found regarding social competence between gamers (M = 3.18, SD = 0.79) and non-gamers (M = 3.13, SD = 0.78).
Among gamers (N = 572), competence (M = 2.81, SD = 1.18) was the most important motivation. Enjoyment came second (M = 2.54, SD = 1.10), followed by escapism (M = 2.44, SD = 1.12) and social interaction (M = 2.22, SD = 1.14). A paired sample t-test showed that the scores on each of the motivations significantly differed from each other. The average gamer spent M = 8.30 (SD = 9.91) hours per week on games. Boys (M = 10.32, SD = 10.79) spent significantly more time playing games than girls (M = 3.33, SD = 4.47), t (10.87) = 8.01, p < .01, 95% CI [5.27, 8.69].
Approximately 250 different games were reported by the respondents. The most frequently named titles were from the Call of Duty series (Activision, 2003-2014), n = 239, followed by games from the FIFA series (Electronic Arts, 1993-2014), n = 179, and GTA series (Rockstar Games, 1997), n = 163. Interestingly, the majority of the gamers (n = 402, 70.3%) reported playing games that were rated PEGI 16 or 18, considering that the average gamer was 13.73 (SD = 1.20) years old.
Characteristics and Motivations of FPS Players
An independent samples t-test indicated that respondents who reported having played FPS in the past month (n = 232) spent significantly more time gaming per week (M = 10.10, SD = 10.24) than players who did not play this genre (M = 7.11, SD = 9.50), t (564) = 3.51, p < .05, 95% CI [1.30, 4.60]. As Table 1 shows, players of FPS were significantly different on certain characteristics and motivations than other gamers. FPS players scored significantly higher on social competence (M = 3.27, SD = 0.76) than other gamers (M = 3.12, SD = 0.82), t (567) = 2.26, p < .05, 95% CI [0.02, 0.29]. Aggression was the other characteristic that was significantly different between FPS players and other gamers. FPS players (M = 1.48, SD = 0.64) scored significantly higher on aggression than other gamers (M = 1.26, SD = 0.42), t (364.51) = 4.43, p < .01, 95% CI [0.12, 0.31]. There were no significant differences between FPS players and other gamers regarding the other characteristics.
FPS players scored significantly higher on each of the motivations than other gamers (Table 1). Among FPS players (n = 232), the motivation competence (M = 3.16, SD = 1.13) was significantly higher than among other gamers (M = 2.61, SD = 1.17), t (569) = 5.60, p < .05, 95% CI [0.36, 0.75]. Enjoyment as a motivation was also found to be higher among FPS players (M = 2.70, SD = 1.02) in comparison to other gamers (M = 2.45, SD = 1.13), t
(523.05) = 2.78, p < .05, 95% CI [0.07, 0.43]. Escapism as a motivation was also higher among FPS players (M = 2.58, SD = 1.25) than other gamers (M = 2.35, SD = 1.12), t (568) = 2.47, p < .05, 95% CI [0.05, 0.43]. Finally, social interaction as a motivation was higher among FPS players (M = 2.55, SD = 1,13) than other gamers (M = 2.01, SD = 1.10), t (569) = 5.66, p < .05, 95% CI [0.35, 0.72]. A paired sample t-test showed that there were no
Table 1.
Mean scores on Characteristics and Motivations All Gamers (N = 572) FPS players (n = 232) Non-FPS players (n = 322) M SD M SD M SD Time on games 8.25 9.90 10.10 a 10.24 7.11 a 9.50 Characteristics Self-esteem Loneliness Social competence Aggression 3.84 1.76 3.18 1.35 0.65 0.82 0.80 0.53 3.85 1.75 3.27 b 1.48 c 0.66 0.84 0.76 0.64 3.84 1.77 3.12 b 1.26 c 0.65 0.81 0.82 1.47 Motivations Enjoyment Escapism Social Interaction Competence 2.54 2.44 2.22 2.81 1.10 1.12 1.14 1.18 2.70 d 2.58 e 2.55 f 3.16g 1.02 1.25 1,13 1.13 2.45 d 2.35 e 2.01 f 2.61 g 1.13 1.12 1.10 1.17
Note: Variable means of FPS players and non-FPS players with identical superscripts (a-g) differ significantly, with at least p <.05.
T-tests were also conducted between online (n = 187) and offline FPS (n = 45) players within the group of FPS players. No significant differences were found regarding
characteristics. However, three significant differences were found regarding motivations. Online FPS players (M = 2.78, SD = 1.03) were significantly more motivated by enjoyment than offline FPS players (M = 2.39, SD = 0.95), t (228) = 2.03, p < .05, 95% CI [0.06, 0.72]. As expected, significant differences were also found in social interaction as a motivation. FPS players (M = 2.63, SD = 1.14) were significantly more motivated by social interaction than offline FPS players (M = 2.22, SD = 1.01), t (73,55) = 2.38, p < .05, 95% CI[0.07, 0.75]. Another significant difference was found in competence as a motivation, which also met
expectations. Online FPS players (M = 3.25, SD = 1.12) were significantly more motivated by competence than offline FPS players (M = 2.81, SD = 1.11), t (229) = 2.33, p < .05, 95% CI [0.07, 0.80].
Mediation models FPS
To examine whether motivations mediated the influence of characteristics on playing FPS, a mediation model was tested using the SPSS script ‘’INDIRECT’’ developed by Preacher and Hayes (2008). This script estimates direct and indirect effects in multiple mediator models through logistic regression analyses. Path coefficients of the predicting effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable are estimated through multiple mediators. The estimates are conditional to the inclusion of the other mediators and covariates in the model. Moreover, the script uses bootstrapping methods to create bias-corrected
confidence intervals to determine the significance of the mediation. Only if the value of zero is not included in the confidence interval, the mediation can be considered significant
(Preacher & Hayes, 2008). Through bootstrapping analyses, the violation of the assumption of normal distribution is less problematic. Though the present study reports the standardized coefficients, the confidence intervals cannot be generated for standardized coefficients and are for the unstandardized coefficients instead.
The general condition that must be met before a mediation model is tested, is that that X must have an effect on Y in order to test the X M Y model (Baron & Kenny, 1986). The path between X and M is referred to as path a, whereas the path between M and Y is referred to as path b. The direct path between X and Y is referred to as path c. To determine which characteristics (X) and motivations (M) should be taken into the mediation model, logistic regressions were conducted to test the significant paths (b, c) to playing FPS (Y). Only characteristics that have a direct relation to playing FPS (significant path c) were taken
into the mediation model. Likewise, only the motivations that had a direct relation to playing FPS (significant path b) were taken into the mediation model.
First of all, logistic regression analyses were conducted to test path c for each characteristic. Results showed that social competence had a significant predicting effect on playing FPS (χ2 = 5.11, p < 0.05, with df = 1). The EXP(B) value indicated that with an increase of one unit in social competence, the odds ratio is 1.28 as large. Aggression was the second characteristic that had a significant predicting effect on playing FPS (χ2 = 22.33, p < 0.01, with df = 1). The EXP(B) value indicated that with an increase of one unit in aggression, the odds ratio is 2.20 as large. The other characteristics did not have a significant predicting effect on playing FPS. Thus, social competence and aggression were the only characteristics that were tested in a mediation model.
Secondly, logistic regressions were conducted to test path b for each motivation. All b paths for each of the motivations were significant. Results showed that enjoyment had a significant predicting effect on playing FPS (χ2 = 7.38, p < 0.01, with df = 1). The EXP(B) value for enjoyment indicated that with an increase of one unit in enjoyment, the odds ratio is 1.24 as large. Escapism was the second motivation that had a significant predicting effect (χ2 = 7.38, p < 0.05, with df = 1). The EXP(B) value for escapism indicated that with an increase of one unit in escapism, the odds ratio is 1.21 as large. A significant b path was also found for social interaction (χ2 = 30.53, p < 0.01, with df = 1). The value of EXP(B) regarding social interaction was 1.52. Finally, competence also had a significant predicting effect on playing FPS (χ2 = 30.56, p < 0.01, with df = 1), with an EXP(B) value of 1.51. Thus, all motivations were accepted into the mediation models, where they were expected to mediate the link between social competence and playing FPS, as well as the link between aggression and playing FPS.
A mediation model with social competence as the independent variable was tested using the script by Preacher and Hayes (2008). All four motivations – enjoyment, escapism, social interaction and competence – were added into the model at once. The results showed that social competence was not significantly mediated by any of the motivations. Thus, a mediation model with social competence as the independent variable was rejected.
The same method was used for the mediation model with aggression as independent variable, with all four motivations added as mediators. The results showed that aggression was partially mediated by two motivations within one model: Social interaction and
competence. Aggression was a positive predictor for social interaction (β = .13, p < .01) and competence (β = .17, p < .01) and in turn social interaction (β = .31, p < .01) and competence (β = .29, p < .05) were positive predictors for playing FPS (Figure 4). Aggression was also a direct positive predictor of playing FPS (β = .30, p < .01), indicating that it is only partially mediated by social interaction and competence. Additional bootstrapping showed that the mediating effects remained significant for both social interaction (95% CI [0.02, 0.20]) and competence (95% CI [0.03, 0.23]).
β = .17* β = .29*
β = .30*
β = .13* β = .31*
Figure 2. Path model of partial mediation of aggression by competence and social interaction on playing FPS. *p < .01. Playing FPS Competence Social interaction Aggression Competence Social interaction
Controlling for Gender
As there were both female (n = 23) and male (n = 209) FPS players, gender was added as a control variable into the mediation model with aggression as independent variable. When gender was added as a control variable, competence was no longer a significant motivation to play. Only social interaction (β = 0.25, p < .05) remained as a significant mediator between aggression and playing FPS, with additional bootstrapping of 95% CI [0.00, 0.14]. This indicates that gender influences the mediating effects of competence. An additional mediation model was then tested that only included the male FPS players. The results showed that competence (β = 0.26, p < .05) was still a significant mediator for the male FPS players (with bootstrapping of 95% CI [0.02, 0.24]), thus indicating that competence is not a significant mediator among female FPS players only. Therefore, when controlling for gender, it can be concluded that competence is not a motivation to play FPS for female FPS players. For both female and male FPS players, aggression remained a significant characteristic and social interaction remained a significant motivation. Gender was also added as a control variable for the mediation model with social competence as independent variable. However, no significant mediations were found even when controlling for gender.
To predict playing online and offline FPS within the group of FPS players, logistic regressions were conducted to determine which variables met the condition to be taken into a mediation model with online FPS as dependent variable (Y). Logistic regression on each of the motivations showed that three motivations significantly predicted playing online FPS. Enjoyment significantly predicted playing online FPS, (χ2 = 5.24, p < 0.05, df = 1, EXP(B) = 1.46), as did social interaction (χ2 = 5.00, p < 0.05, df = 1, EXP(B) = 1.41) and competence (χ2 = 5.20, p < 0.05, df = 1, EXP(B) = 1.39). However, the logistic regressions on characteristics showed that none of the characteristics had any direct relation to playing online FPS. Thus,
the condition that path c is significant was not met and all mediation models with playing online FPS as dependent variable were rejected.
Discussion
The present study is the first to combine player-characteristics and motivations in a mediation model to examine who plays FPS and why they are played. The analyses yielded several findings. As expected, social competence was a characteristic that significantly predicted playing FPS. More socially competent adolescents are more likely to play FPS, in line with the findings of Jansz and Tanis (2007) and Cole and Griffiths (2007) who already stressed that social relations are key to FPS players.In accordance with previous findings regarding violent games in general, the present study also indicated that FPS players are characteristically more aggressive (Lemmens et al., 2006). Both male and female adolescents who are more aggressive are more likely to play FPS. However, given the size of the group of female FPS players in the present study, this is likely to concern only a small portion of adolescent girls. Thus, the notion that boys are more physically aggressive is not undermined (Björkqvist, 1994).
All four motivations that were included in the survey – enjoyment, escapism, social interaction and competence – were more important to FPS players than to other gamers. This may have been caused by the fact that FPS players spent significantly more time playing games, therefore this group would have stronger motivations that keep them interested in playing. Competence was found to be the most important motivation to play games in general and FPS in particular. This indicates that most adolescents who play games are motivated by the need for challenge, to achieve the highest scores possible and to beat other gamers. These results provide partial support for the self-determination theory of gaming, in which it was expected that feedback on the player’s skills would be intrinsically satisfying for adolescents
(Przybylski et al., 2010). Social interaction was the second most important motivation that significantly predicted playing FPS. Likewise, those who are less motivated by competence and social interaction are also less likely to play FPS. This is also in line with the findings by Jansz and Tanis (2007), who found that social interaction was the most important motivation among players of FPS.
Aggression was the only characteristic that qualified to be tested in a mediation model. When testing the model, two motivations were eventually found to partially mediate the influence of aggression, though there were differences when controlling for gender. Among male FPS players, competence and social interaction were found as significant mediators. This indicates that the more aggressive a male adolescent is, the more likely it is that he is motivated by competence and social interaction to play FPS. Moreover, competence and social interaction were found as significant mediators within one model. Therefore, being motivated by both competence and social interaction also indicates that male FPS players are seeking interpersonal competition. In this regard, male FPS players want to prove themselves better players to the disadvantage of others. They want to win the game and reach the highest scores possible. Thus, the findings of the present study further complement the findings of Vorderer et al. (2003), who came to a similar conclusion.
Among a small group of female FPS players, social interaction was the only
significant mediator. This indicates that the more aggressive a female adolescent is, the more likely it is that she is motivated by social interaction to play FPS. Contrary to male FPS players, female FPS players are not motivated by competence. This is in line with
expectations and provides further support to the findings of Niederle and Vesterlund (2005), who also concluded that men are more competitive than women. This also complements the findings by Bosacki and Astington (1999), in the sense that social interaction is something that girls are specifically looking for in FPS. Thus, male aggressive adolescents have a
stronger urge to feel competent at the expense of others, whereas female aggressive adolescents feel a stronger urge to chat with other gamers, befriend them or play in a team with them. It is important to note that there was also a direct relation between aggression and playing FPS, which indicates that adolescents who are characteristically aggressive are also more likely to play FPS regardless of their motivation for interpersonal competition.
It can be concluded that escapism is not an important motivation for FPS players. Escapism did not act as a mediator between characteristics and playing FPS, nor did it predict playing online FPS. Escapism is perhaps only a motivation to play games with more distinct fantasy or role-playing elements (Stetina et al., 2011). It can also be concluded that loneliness and self-esteem are not characteristics for FPS players, even though it was expected that lonely individuals would be especially attracted to online FPS (Kowert et al., 2014) and that individuals with low self-esteem would be motivated by competence to play FPS (Long, 1983; Ryan, et al., 2006). Loneliness and self-esteem are perhaps characteristics that are only common among excessive gamers (Lemmens, Valkenburg & Peter, 2011).
Finally, there are several limitations in the present study. First of all, the study did not cover all characteristics and motivations related to playing video games. It is plausible that there are many characteristics and motivations that are yet to be uncovered in relation to gaming. A broader scope of motivations and characteristics should be taken into account in future studies on this topic. Secondly, no causal relationships can be determined from the present study. It cannot be concluded that aggression or social competence are the antecedents of playing FPS, nor can it be concluded that they are the outcome. As proposed by Anderson and Dill (2000), aggression can be both the cause and the effect of playing FPS. Since there were no tests for causality, the possibility of aggression and social competence being the effects rather than the cause of playing FPS remains open. Thirdly, this study did not directly investigate the public concern around FPS. The goal was to examine if the link between
certain personal characteristics and playing FPS is mediated by specific motivations. The findings of the present study cannot further elaborate on the discussion of whether or not FPS are harmful for adolescents.
Conclusion
The aim of present study was to examine who plays first-person shooters (FPS) and what motivates them. It can be concluded that characteristically aggressive adolescents are most likely to play FPS. Boys, who form the vast majority of players, play mostly to experience competence and social interaction. The combination of competence and social interaction as motivations for playing FPS indicates that aggressive boys may be seeking to satisfy their need for interpersonal competition. Interpersonal competition is generally less beneficial to achievements and peer-relationships than interpersonal cooperation (Roseth, Johnson & Johnson, 2008), though the findings of the present study cannot indicate if this is harmful in the context of FPS. For the few girls who play FPS, competence is not a
motivation, as girls are also generally less competitive than boys. Only social interaction motivates characteristically aggressive girls to play FPS. In other words, aggressive girls are motivated to play FPS by the need to connect with others, whereas aggressive boys are also motivated to compete with their peers. The results of the current study may be interesting for game developers, who can tap into adolescents’ need for competence and social interaction by adding more player-versus-player elements and creating an increasingly challenging
multiplayer environment. They can also create a slightly challenging learning curve and build a steady community around the game.
In conclusion, the present study has reached its goal by demonstrating that adolescents with certain characteristics are more likely to play FPS, mediated by specific motivations. The study has also demonstrated that mediation models regarding video games are plausible and
can be used in future studies. Future studies can look into causality with regards to
characteristics, motivations and playing FPS. As studies on motivations and characteristics of gamers are scarce, future studies can examine player characteristics and motivations in regards to other game genres and continue to uncover who plays which games and for what reasons. After all, it is not all about competing.
References
Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological
science,12(5), 353-359.
Anderson, C. A., & Dill, K. E. (2000). Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 78(4), 772.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin, 117(3), 497-529. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
Björkqvist, K. (1994). Sex differences in physical, verbal, and indirect aggression: A review of recent research. Sex roles, 30(3-4), 177-188.
Bosacki, S., & Wilde Astington, J. (1999). Theory of mind in preadolescence: Relations between social understanding and social competence. Social Development, 8(2), 237-255.
Bushman, B. J., & Anderson, C. A. (2002). Violent video games and hostile expectations: A test of the general aggression model. Personality and social psychology
bulletin, 28(12), 1679-1686. doi: 10.1177/014616702237649
Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The aggression questionnaire. Journal of personality and social psychology, 63(3), 452-459. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.63.3.452
Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new general self-efficacy
scale. Organizational research methods, 4(1), 62-83. doi: 10.1177/109442810141004 Christy, K. R. (2011). Developing a validated measure of media escape (Doctoral
dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT)database. (1501183)
Cole, H., & Griffiths, M. D. (2007). Social interactions in massively multiplayer online role-playing gamers. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(4), 575-583. doi:
10.1089/cpb.2007.9988
Colwell, J., Grady, C., & Rhaiti, S. (1995). Computer games, self‐esteem and gratification of needs in adolescents. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 5(3), 195-206.
Colzato, L. S., Van Leeuwen, P. J., Van Den Wildenberg, W., & Hommel, B. (2010). DOOM'd to switch: superior cognitive flexibility in players of first person shooter games. Cognition, 1, 8. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00008
Fang, X., Chan, S., Brzezinski, J., & Nair, C. (2010). Development of an instrument to measure enjoyment of computer game play. Intl. Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 26(9), 868-886. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2010.496337
Festl, R., Scharkow, M., & Quandt, T. (2013). Problematic computer game use among adolescents, younger and older adults. Addiction, 108(3), 592-599. doi:
10.1111/add.12016
Fikkers, K. M., Piotrowski, J. T., Weeda, W. D., Vossen, H. G., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2013). Double Dose: High Family Conflict Enhances the Effect of Media Violence Exposure on Adolescents’ Aggression. Societies, 3(3), 280-292. doi: 10.3390/soc3030280
Griffiths, M. (1999). Violent video games and aggression: A review of the
literature. Aggression and violent behavior, 4(2), 203-212. doi: 10.1016/S1359-1789(97)00055-4
Huesmann, L. R., & Taylor, L. D. (2006). The role of media violence in violent behavior. Annual Review of Public Health, 27, 393-415. doi:
10.1146/annurev.publhealth.26.021304.144640
Jansz, J., & Martens, L. (2005). Gaming at a LAN event: the social context of playing video games. New media & society, 7(3), 333-355. doi: 10.1177/1461444805052280 Jansz, J., & Tanis, M. (2007). Appeal of playing online first person shooter
games. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(1), 133-136. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9981 Kowert, R., Domahidi, E., & Quandt, T. (2014). The relationship between online video game
involvement and gaming-related friendships among emotionally sensitive individuals. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 1-7. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2013.0656.
Lemmens, J. S., Bushman, B. J., & Konijn, E. A. (2006). The appeal of violent video games to lower educated aggressive adolescent boys from two countries. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(5), 638-641. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9.638.
Lemmens, J. S., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2011). Psychosocial causes and consequences of pathological gaming. Computers in Human Behavior,27(1), 144-152. doi:
10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.015
Lenhart, A., Kahne, J., Middaugh, E., Macgill, A. R., Evans, C., & Vitak, J. (2008). Teens, Video Games, and Civics: Teens' Gaming Experiences Are Diverse and Include Significant Social Interaction and Civic Engagement. Retrieved from
Lo, S. K., Wang, C. C., & Fang, W. (2005). Physical interpersonal relationships and social anxiety among online game players. CyberPsychology & Behavior, (1), 15-20. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2005.8.15.
Long, M. (1983). True confessions of a pac man junkie. Family Weekly, 2, 6-10.
Montag, C., Flierl, M., Markett, S., Walter, N., Jurkiewicz, M., & Reuter, M. (2011). Internet addiction and personality in first-person-shooter video gamers. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 23(4), 163-173. doi: 10.1027/1864-1105/a000049
Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (2003). Loneliness and social uses of the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 659-671. doi: 10.1016/S0747-5632(03)00040-2
Niederle, M. & Vesterlund, L. (2005). Do women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(3), 1067-1101. doi: 10.1162/qjec.122.3.1067
Peplau, L. A. (1982). Loneliness: A sourcebook of current theory, research and therapy. Vol. 36. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
Perlman, D., & Peplau, L. A. (1984). Loneliness research: A survey of empirical
findings. Preventing the harmful consequences of severe and persistent loneliness, 13-46.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior research methods, 40(3), 879-891. doi. 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
Przybylski, A. K., Rigby, C. S., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). A motivational model of video game engagement. Review of General Psychology, 14(2), 154. doi: 10.1037/a0019440
Roe, K., & Muijs, D. (1998). Children and Computer Games A Profile of the Heavy User. European Journal of communication, 13(2), 181-200. doi:
10.1177/0267323198013002002
Rose‐Krasnor, L. (1997). The nature of social competence: A theoretical review. Social development, 6(1), 111-135. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9507.1997.tb00097.x
Rosenberg, M., Schooler, C., Schoenbach, C., & Rosenberg, F. (1995). Global self-esteem and specific self-esteem: Different concepts, different outcomes. .American
sociological review, 141-156.
Roseth, C. J., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2008). Promoting early adolescents' achievement and peer relationships: the effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures. Psychological bulletin, 134(2), 223-246. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.223
Russell, D. W. (1996). UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of personality assessment, 66(1), 20-40.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. doi: 10.1037110003-066X.55.1.68.
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. doi: 10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8
Scharrer, E., & Leone, R. (2008). First‐Person Shooters and the Third‐Person Effect. Human Communication Research, 34(2), 210-233. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00319.x Shafer, D. M. (2012). Causes of state hostility and enjoyment in player versus player and
player versus environment video games. Journal of Communication,62(4), 719-737. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01654.x
Sherry, J. L., Lucas, K., Greenberg, B. S., & Lachlan, K. (2006). Video game uses and
gratifications as predictors of use and game preference. Playing video games: Motives, responses, and consequences, 213-224.
Stetina, B. U., Kothgassner, O. D., Lehenbauer, M., & Kryspin-Exner, I. (2011). Beyond the fascination of online-games: Probing addictive behavior and depression in the world of online-gaming. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 473-479. doi:
10.1016/j.chb.2010.09.015
Tychsen, A., Hitchens, M., & Brolund, T. (2008). Motivations for play in computer role-playing games. Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Future Play: Research, Play, Share, 57-64.
Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2008). Adolescents' Identity Experiments on the Internet Consequences for Social Competence and Self-Concept Unity. Communication Research, 35(2), 208-231. doi: 10.1177/0093650207313164
Vorderer, P., Hartmann, T., & Klimmt, C. (2003). Explaining the enjoyment of playing video games: the role of competition. Proceedings of the second international conference on Entertainment computing, 1-9.
Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., & Ritterfeld, U. (2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media entertainment. Communication theory, 14(4), 388-408. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00321.x
Xu, Y., Cao, X., Sellen, A., Herbrich, R., & Graepel, T. (2011). Sociable killers: understanding social relationships in an online first-person shooter game. Proceedings of the ACM 2011 conference on Computer supported cooperative work , 197-206.
Yee, N. (2006). Motivations for play in online games. CyberPsychology & behavior, 9(6), 772-775. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9.772.
