Caught Them All: Endgame Motivations of Pokémon Go Players
Ilse A.M. Weergang 10634010
Master’s Thesis
Graduate School of Communication Entertainment Communication Supervisor: J.S. Lemmens January 30, 2020
2
Abstract
Pokémon Go not only enjoys tremendous popular appeal, the game has also captivated the scientific community. The aim of this study was to examine the characteristics and
motivations of hardcore Pokémon Go players by analyzing self-reported survey data from 1630 trainers of level 25 and higher. Age ranged from 16 to 75 years old (M = 36.8, SD = 11.62). The Self-Determination Theory was used to understand the motivations of these hardcore Pokémon Go players. Results show that male players played more and showed more progress in the game than female players. The most prominent motivation among hardcore players to play Pokémon Go is the need for relatedness. Male players felt a higher need for competence and relatedness than female players did. Whereas, female players felt a higher need for autonomy than male players did.
3
Introduction
What started out as an April fools’ joke quickly became one of the most popular video games in history: Pokémon Go. April fools’ is the perfect day for gaming companies to pull a joke and Tsunekazu Ishihara, president of the Pokémon Company, thought it would be fun if all around the world Pokémon would appear on Google Maps. This created such a buzz that it would only make sense to turn this into an actual game by combining Pokémon, Google Maps and Ingress. This resulted in the appearance of Pokémon Go in the summer of 2016
(Meggiato, Goïnga, & Regenboog, 2016). Millions of players worldwide were walking around streets and parks, frantically flicking Pokéballs at pocket monsters on their
smartphone trying to catch them all. Thousands of players swarmed the sidewalks of Taipei, hoping to catch an elusive Snorlax (Jenkins, 2016) or an ultra-rare Vaporeon in Central Park (Jula, 2016). With more than 500 million downloads in the first few months, Pokémon Go quickly became a global phenomenon (Howe et al., 2016). Although it seemed that the glory days of Pokémon Go were over by the time winter came along, the game’s developers Niantic have been steadily introducing new elements, such as raids (June 2017), the ability to form friendships, battle, and trade Pokémon with other trainers (June 2018). In addition to increasing the available Pokémon from 150 to 500 over the years, these social components seem to have increased the longevity of the game considerably, with reportedly more than 140 million steady players and a total revenue of 894 million US dollars worldwide in 2019
(Chapple, 2020).
Pokémon Go has also captivated the scientific community. With more than 100 published studies on Pokémon Go, it has quickly become one of the most-researched video games. Most of these studies have focused on the short-term physical benefits of playing (e.g., Althoff, White, & Horvitz, 2016; Marquet, Alberico, & Hipp, 2018; Xian et al., 2017). Others have focused on the enjoyment of the game and its positive effects on emotional well-being
4 (e.g., Bonus, Peebles, Mares, & Sarmiento, 2018). Fewer studies have focused on the
motivations of players (e.g., Broom & Flint, 2018) and only a few studies have examined excessive use of Pokémon Go or signs of game addiction among its users (Cheng, 2019). However, almost none of these studies have taken recent changes in the app into account when examining its appeal or effects. More importantly, long-term hardcore users have never been examined specifically. Understanding hardcore players’ long-term uses and motivations is not only interesting from an academic perspective, but especially for game designers, as it allows them to create more effective experiences, tailored to the needs of target audiences. Examining mobile free-to-play games such as Pokémon Go, seems of particular importance because these are the most profitable sector within the game industry (Newzoo, 2019). Therefore, the aim of this study is to answer the following question:
What are the characteristics and motivations of hardcore Pokémon Go players?
Theoretical Framework
It is commonly understood that people actively select and use technology to satisfy their needs and motives (Rubin, 2009). Within research on video games, the Self Determination Theory is one of the most widely used approaches to understanding player motivations to use entertainment (Broom, Lee, Lam, & Flint, 2019; Tamborini et al., 2011; Wulf, Rieger, & Schmitt, 2018; Ryan, Rigby, & Przybylski, 2006). According to the Self Determination Theory (SDT), three essential innate universal psychological needs motivate individuals to initiate behavior: the need for competence, autonomy and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000). In the following paragraphs each of these three intrinsic human needs of the SDT will be
5
The Need for Autonomy
Autonomy refers to an individual’s perceived volition or control (Deci & Ryan, 2000). People have the desire to regulate and control their own behavior (Nikou & Economides, 2017). Opportunities for choice and non-controlling instructions have been known to enhance autonomy (Burgers, Eden, van Engelenburg, & Buningh, 2015). The main aim of Pokémon Go is acquiring all the different Pokémon, this can be achieved through hatching eggs, participating in raids, catching or trading Pokémon. The ability to choose one’s own activity indicates a sense of control within the game, which leads to an enhanced feeling of autonomy. Character customization options are also relevant to autonomy because these are directly linked to the freedom to make choices in play. At the time of data collection, Pokémon Go only provided aesthetic customization options. It is possible to alter the avatar by changing the gender, skin-color, eye-color and the clothing. In recent updates the customization options of avatars have become more prominent. At first players were only able to see their own avatar, nowadays it is possible to see the avatars of their friends as well. Although studies on
Pokémon have not stressed the importance of autonomy as a motivational need for players, autonomy is enhanced by aesthetic customization options games, resulting in more enjoyment (Kim et al., 2015). Therefore, customization is included as an indicator of autonomy
motivation.
The Need for Competence
Competence refers to the need to control the outcome and the need to experience mastery (Deci & Ryan, 2000). In order to improve and expand their skills player actively look for challenges (Burgers et al., 2015). Challenge refers to the balance between the skills of a player and the level of difficulty within a game, which includes completing specific missions, or fighting other players (Liu & Shiue, 2014). Overcoming challenges has been known to play
6 a crucial role in the motivations of players (Jin, 2014; Lee, Lee, & Choi, 2012). In Pokémon Go these challenges can include, gaining a level, gaining experience points, progressing rapidly in the game, collecting all the Pokémon, gathering virtual game objects or competing with others (Wu, Wang, & Tsai, 2010; Ghazali et al., 2019). All these challenges give players the opportunity to improve and expand their skills and to become effective when playing Pokémon Go. Consequently, overcoming these challenges will fulfill their need for competence.
One survey study by Ghazali, Mutum, & Woon (2019) found that the need-to-collect significantly influence players’ intention to continue playing Pokémon Go. Another survey study by Broom and Flint (2019) found that the most prominent reason to explain why users play Pokémon Go was the desire to experience competition. This competition consists for instance of the need to catch all Pokémon or the desire to be a Pokémon Master, thereby highlighting the importance of competence.
The Need for Relatedness
Relatedness refers to the need to interact with others and to feel connected to others (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Nikou & Economides, 2017). Research has shown that social interaction is a key factor in motivating players to take part in gaming (Yee, 2006; Hjorth & Richardson, 2017; Ghazali et al., 2019, Alha, Koskinen, Paavilainen, & Hamari, 2019). Participating in game communities enhances loyalty to gaming and has a positive effect on the continuance intention to play those games (Kim, Lee, & Hiemstra, 2004; Shang, Chen, & Liao., 2006; Brodie, Ilic, Juric, & Hollebeek, 2013; Zhang, Zhang, Lee, & Feng, 2015; Ghazali et al., 2019). Research on the motivations of Pokémon Go players has shown that players’
enjoyment of Pokémon Go has been ensured by using elements such as social interaction, the desire to meet new people or the desire to play with friends and family (Alha et al., 2019;
7 Ghazali et al., 2019). Pokémon Go requires a player to go outside, which makes it possible to encounter other players in real life and play together to reach in-game goals (Alha et al., 2019). Indeed, Pokémon Go cannot only strengthen the social band with friends and family, it can also act as an icebreaker and create a sense of belonging to a community (Vella et al., 2019).
The last few years, Pokémon Go has focused on enhancing the sense of community by adding social features. For instance, raids have been added to the game (2017), in which up to 20 players must come together in order to defeat a Pokémon. Since 2017, Pokémon Go-players can become friends with other Go-players, which in turn means that you can trade Pokémon, send gifts and fight each other. Additionally, community days have been added in 2018. These community days highlight a certain Pokémon during a period of 3 hours. During those hours this type of Pokémon will appear more frequently and can be shiny, a very rare edition of that Pokémon. When players are walking around in parks and cities during
community days, the probability of encountering other players is very high. All these aspects enhance the sociability of Pokémon Go. Thereby highlighting the importance of relatedness. Combining the three needs of SDT results in de following research question:
RQ1: To what extend do the three motivational needs of the Self-Determination Theory relate to usage of Pokémon GO among hardcore players?
Gender Differences
Motivations for playing Pokémon Go may differ between male and female players, mirroring the general gender differences in preference for specific game aspects seen in other video games. For instance, male players generally show a stronger preference for competition in games (Lucas & Sherry, 2004; Hartmann & Klimmt, 2006), indicating that male players are likely to show a stronger motivational need for competence. On top of that male players are
8 more likely to experience social motives, indicating that male players are likely to show a stronger motivational need for relatedness (Ferguson & Olson, 2013). Indeed, Malik et al. (2019) found that male players of Pokémon Go are not only more likely to seek achievement than female players, but also more likely to seek social interactivity. This indicates that when analyzing the data gender differences should be considered.
The Profitability of Pokémon Go
Free-to-play (or freemium) games refer to games that can be purchased and played for free (Voigt & Hinz, 2016; Hamari et al., 2017a). The main way these games generate revenue is through the sales of additional products and premium services (Hamari & Järvinen, 2011; Liu, Au, & Choi, 2014; Bouwman, Jöckel, & Droguel, 2015; Hamari, Hanner & Koivisto, 2017). Research has shown that over 70% of the top 1000 iPad games from the US top-grossing list are free-to-play games, underlining its popularity among game publishers and their players (Alha, Koskinen, Paavilainen, & Hamari, 2016; Hamari et al., 2017b). Pokémon Go is a free-to-play game, meaning that Pokémon Go players can play all the aspects of the game for free and they can make in-game purchases to enhance their gameplay. For instance, they can buy Pokémon Storage, which will make it possible to collect more Pokémon. Alternatively, they can buy Raid Passes, which means that they can do more than the raid per day. In 2019 Pokémon Go had a revenue of 894 million US dollars worldwide accumulated by player spending, making this the No. 5 top earner worldwide in the mobile games market in 2019. A recent study on Pokémon Go players and their in-game purchases in Taiwan found that 254 out of the 662 players (38.4%) have spent their money on mobile games (Hsiao, Lytras, & Chen), indicating that the majority of players have invested in free mobile games. The current research focusses on hardcore Pokémon Go players, therefor making it likely that a
9 Research by Hamari et al. (2017b) focused on reasons for spending money on free-to-play games. Six reasons for spending money on in-game content are: (1) unobstructed free-to-play, such as avoiding repetitional tasks or speeding up timers that are part of the game, (2) social interaction, such as giving gifts and customization, (3) competition, (4) economic rationale, for instance reasonable pricing or special offers, (5) indulging children and (6) unlocking content (Hamari et al., 2017b). Therefore, we ask the second research question:
RQ2: To what extend do hardcore players of Pokémon Go make in-game purchases?
Social Anxiety
Social anxiety can be defined as experiencing feelings of nervousness in social situations (Mennin et al., 2002). Those who suffer from sever social anxiety can be diagnosed with social anxiety disorder. Social anxiety disorder is defined by the Anxiety and Depression Association of America as “an intense anxiety or fear of being judged, negatively evaluated, or rejected in a social or performance situation” (ADAA, 2018). Previous research suggests that players who experience social anxiety prefer communicating online because of the anonymity that online games can provide (Caplan, 2003; Khalis & Mikami, 2018). Within Pokémon Go being around other people and face-to-face communication are a significant part of the game. To be able to achieve some targets it is even required to participate in the
Pokémon Go community, for instance in raids. This means that players need to interact with each other in real life. Those who are socially anxious may decide to avoid these situations which means that they will not be able to reach these in-game goals of Pokémon Go (Rapee & Heimberg, 1997; Leary & Jongman-Sereno, 2014; Khalis & Mikami, 2018). Pokémon Go has been shown to motivate even those who usually avoid social interacting to go outside (Kato et al., 2017). Research by Khalis and Mikami (2018) suggests that certain aspects of Pokémon Go can be used to create social opportunities for those who struggle with social anxiety. It has
10 also been found that Pokémon Go could reduce social anxiety and depression levels (Bonus et al., 2018), raise optimism, increase social interaction and improve players’ social behavior over time (LeBlanc & Chaput, 2016; Serino, Cordrey, McLaughlin, & Milanaik, 2016; Morin, 2016; Yang & Liu, 2017; Tabacchi, Caci, Cardaci, & Perticone, 2017; Kogan, Hellyer,
Duncan, & Schoenfeld-Tacher, 2017; Bonus et al, 2018; Alomar, Alsaleh, & Alarifi, 2019). Given the numerous social elements in Pokémon Go it seems unlikely that many hardcore Pokémon Go players would experience severe signs of social anxiety. Therefor we ask the following research question:
RQ3: To what extend is social anxiety related to usage of Pokémon Go among hardcore Pokémon Go players?
Internet Gaming Disorder
Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) is defined by ‘a persistent and recurrent involvement with videogames, often leading to significant impairments of daily, work and/or educational activities’ (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM-5] (APA, 2013). According to the DSM-5 (APA, 2013), IGD is indicated by endorsement of at least five core symptoms (out of nine) over a period of 12 months. These nine core symptoms are
preoccupation, tolerance, withdrawal, persistence, escape, problems, deception, displacement and conflict (APA, 2013; Lemmens, Valkenburg, & Gentile, 2015; Schivinski et al., 2018).
Six years ago, the American Psychiatric Association included IGD as a tentative disorder in the appendix of the DSM-5 (APA, 2013). Recently, Gaming Disorder (GD) was included in the World Health Organization’s 11th International Classification of Diseases ([ICD-11] WHO, 2018). In contrast to the DSM-5, the ICD-11 provides three clearly demarked criteria that describe gaming disorder as: 1) a pattern of gaming behavior
11 other activities, and; 3) continuation of gaming despite the occurrence of negative
consequences.
Although there is no scientific evidence of addicted Pokémon Go players, some researchers have warned that “users should be made aware of the particularly addictive nature of the Pokémon Go” (Pourmand, Lombardi, Kuhl, & O'Connell, 2017, p 16). The possible addictive nature of Pokémon Go is also mentioned in research by Broom et al. (2019). They asked non-users of Pokémon Go why they did not play Pokémon Go, and one of the reasons was the assumed addictive nature of the game. There may be one group of players who show increased susceptibility to problematic play. Socially anxious players experienced less well-being as a result of playing Pokémon Go (Bonus et al., 2018). Furthermore, socially anxious players were observed to catch less Pokémon and gained less experience points during gameplay (Khalis & Mikami, 2018). Since social anxiety has been shown to be an antecedent of game addiction (Lemmens, Valkenburg, & Peter, 2011), it is possible that socially anxious players of Pokémon Go are more likely to show signs of game addiction. Furthermore, if the game is truly as addictive as some claim, many of the hardcore gamers are likely to show signs of IGD. This leads to the fourth research question:
RQ4: To what extend do hardcore users of Pokémon Go show signs of behavior related to Internet Gaming Disorder?
Method Sample
A cross-sectional online questionnaire was distributed among Pokémon Go players. In total, 2131 respondents started the online questionnaire. However, a large group (n = 489) stopped responding after the initial usage items (< 25% of the survey) and therefore did not provide any information on the SDT motivations. Therefore, these respondents were removed from
12 the analysis. Another 12 respondents were removed for having relatively little experience with Pokémon Go. The term ‘hardcore gamer’ is widely by gamers who want to express the
strongest identification possible with gaming (Neys, Jansz, & Tan, 2014). In the current study, hardcore players were considered trainers who were level 25 or higher (N = 1630). Out of these 1630 Pokémon Go players included in our analyses, the majority was female (n = 989, 60.7%). 11 respondents reported ‘other’ as their gender. Age ranged from 16 (minimum age requirement for consent) to 75 years old (M = 36.8, SD = 11.62). The vast majority answered the Dutch version of the questionnaire (83.6%, n = 1363). There were no significant
differences between responses on the Dutch and English versions of the questionnaire on any of the relevant variables. Most of the respondents resided in the Netherlands (79.7%, n = 1299), followed by Singapore (8.5%, n = 139), Belgium (4.5%, n = 74), and the USA (4.5%, n = 73). All 1630 players in our sample had reached trainer level 25 or higher (M = 37.74, SD = 3.09), with almost half the sample (n = 796, 48.8%) having reached level 40, the highest trainer level available to date. Level progress in Pokémon Go requires exponential amounts of experience points (xp), meaning that the experience points required to get from level 25 to level 26 (190,000xp) is less than 4% of the amount of experience points required to get from level 39 to level 40 (5,000,000xp). For each Pokémon caught, players can receive between 100-1260xp, depending on their throw style and the novelty of that Pokémon to their
collection. More than 78% of all players with a trainer level of 40 indicated they had caught more than 25,000 Pokémon, with 31% indicating they had caught more than 50,000 Pokémon.
Procedure
In October 2019, an online questionnaire was distributed among players of Pokémon Go through Discord, an application designed for gaming communities that allows text, image, video and audio communication between users in a chat channel and through Facebook. The
13 study was approved by the ethics commission from the department of Communication at the University of Amsterdam. Several international and regional Discord communities and Facebook groups were contacted requesting its users to fill out the questionnaire. No compensation or prizes were awarded for filling in the questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of approximately 90 items measuring player demographics, characteristics, motivations, game use and its appeal, and problematic use. Specifically, we included age, gender, nationality, social anxiety, SDT-motivations, usage metrics, spending and gaming disorder. All included measures are further explained below. Respondents were asked to consult their Pokémon Go app for some of the usage metrics. Forced response was disabled for all items on the questionnaire. Completing the survey took about ten minutes after which respondents were thanked for their participation.
Measures
Usage. Player’s use of Pokémon Go was measured in three ways: (1) Time spent per
week; (2) Total amount of Pokémon caught; (3) Total experience points gained. First, players’ weekly hours spent playing Pokémon Go (1) was calculated by multiplying the days per week each respondent played (M = 6.31, SD =1.52) with the average number of hours each
respondent played the game on a regular day (M = 2.07, SD =1.48), resulting in the hours per week spent playing Pokémon Go (M = 13.27, SD =10.45). The total number of Pokémon caught (2) was measured using 11 scaled answer-categories with increments of 5,000, ranging from ‘< 5000’ through ‘more than 50,000’. The median was 5 (20,001 – 25,000, M = 5.40, SD = 3.41). Finally, total experience earned in Pokémon (3) was measured by asking for their current trainer level (range 25-40, M = 37.74, SD = 3.09) and transposing that to the total experience points (in millions) required to reach that level (range 0.71m – 20m, M = 14.01m, SD = 6.63m).
14
SDT-motivations. According to the Self Determination Theory, three essential innate
universal psychological needs motivate individuals to initiate behavior: the need for
autonomy, competence and relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Items for the three scales were adapted from previous studies on SDT motivations in Pokémon Go (Broom et al., 2019; Ghazali et al., 2019). Autonomy describes the desire to be causal agents of one's own life and act in harmony with one's integrated self (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Autonomy in Pokémon Go was measured using four items, with response categories ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). These four items are: 1) I enjoy collecting distinctive objects or clothing that have no functional value in the game; 2) It is important for me to customize my avatar; 3) I enjoy spending time customizing my avatar; 4) It is important to me that my avatar looks different from other avatars. The items were averaged to create the scale scores. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was .87, indicating good reliability (M = 2.28, SD = 0.93).
Competence describes the need to control the outcome and experience mastery (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Competence in Pokémon Go was measured using six items, preceded by ‘It is important for me to…”. These six items are 1) rise as quickly as possible in trainer level; 2) gather as many items as possible in Pokémon Go; 3) catch special Pokémon that many trainers do not yet have; 4) have better Pokémon than others; 5) defeat Pokémon in gyms to take over the gym; 6) beat other trainers in battles. Response categories ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The items were averaged to create the scale scores. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was .75, indicating acceptable reliability (M = 3.26, SD = 0.71).
Relatedness describes the need to experience interaction and be connected to others (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Relatedness in Pokémon Go was measured using six items, with response categories ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). These six items included: 1) I rather play Pokémon Go with other trainers than by myself; 2) I enjoy playing
15 Pokémon Go with other trainers in order to win raids; 3) I enjoy playing Pokémon go because it allows me to meet other trainers; 4) I enjoy playing Pokémon go because it allows me to help other trainers; 5) I enjoy playing Pokémon Go because it allows me to get to know other players who I now consider my friends; 6) I enjoy playing Pokémon Go because it has allowed me to have meaningful conversations with other players. The items were averaged to create the scale scores. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was .89, indicating good reliability (M = 3.41, SD = 0.90).
Spending. The amount of money players spent on Pokémon Go was divided into three
categories. The first category consists of players who have not spent any money on Pokémon Go (n = 412), the second category consists of players who have spent up to 50 euros on Pokémon Go (n = 615), and the third category consists of the players who have spent more than 50 euros on Pokémon Go (n = 602).
Social Anxiety. Social anxiety was measured using six items from the Social
Interaction Anxiety Scale (Mattick & Clarke, 1998; Peters, Sunderland, Andrews, & Mattick, 2012). This measure is focused on generalized social interaction anxieties (i.e., talking to friends and strangers, attending a social gathering). Response categories ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Sample items include: ‘I have difficulty making eye contact with others’ and ‘I tense up if I meet an acquaintance on the street’. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was .90, indicating good reliability (M = 1.83, SD = .80).
Internet Gaming Disorder. The DSM-5 describes Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD)
as persistent, recurrent and compulsive playing, to the exclusion of other interests, resulting in in clinically significant impairment or distress (APA, 2013). IGD is present when a person meets five (or more) of the nine criteria (Preoccupation, Tolerance, Withdrawal, Persistence, Escape, Problems, Deception, Escape, Conflict) during a period of 12 months. Every item on the IGD scale was preceded by the statement: “During the last 12 months . . .”, responding
16 with either no (0) or yes (1). Exploratory Factor Analysis of the responses of 1531
respondents indicated that the 9-item IGD scale (Lemmens, Valkenburg & Gentile, 2015) was two-dimensional, with four items (Conflict, Problems, Deception, and Persistence) that only loaded on a dimension that indicated interpersonal friction caused by excessive gaming. Nevertheless, the 9-item IGD scale showed acceptable reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha of .70 (M = 1.60, SD = 1.82). Scale scores ranged from 0 through 9 (M = 1.60, SD = 1.82). Using the 5-item cut-off point, 134 out of 1531 respondents who completed the IGD scale (8.8%) met the diagnosis for IGD.
Gaming Disorder. As described in the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (WHO, 2019), Gaming Disorder is characterized by a pattern of persistent or recurrent gaming behavior that involves compulsive-, obsessive- and problematic behavior. The three concepts were measured using selected items from the IGD scale (Lemmens, Valkenburg & Gentile, 2015). Compulsive behavior was measured using two items: ‘Were you unable to reduce your time playing Pokémon Go, after others had repeatedly told you to play less?’ and ‘Have you had arguments with others about the consequences of your
Pokémon Go gaming behavior?’ If a confirmatory answer was given to any of these two questions, this was considered as an indication of impaired control over playing Pokémon Go (n = 342, 22.3%). Obsessive behavior was measured using two items: ‘Have you lost interest in hobbies or other activities because Pokémon Go is all you wanted to do?’ and ‘Have you been feeling miserable when you were unable to play Pokémon Go?’ If a confirmatory answer was given to any of these two questions, this was considered as an indication of impaired thoughts over playing Pokémon Go (n = 359, 23.4%). Problematic behavior was measured by one item: ‘Have you experienced serious conflicts with family, friends or partner because of Pokémon Go?’ Out of 1531 responses, 90 players (5.9%) indicated they had experienced this type of conflict in the last six months. A small group of 42 players (2.7%) agreed to all three
17 criteria, which means they met the diagnosis for gaming disorder (WHO, 2019) by reporting obsessive, compulsive and problematic Pokémon Go use.
Results Motivational Differences
Male players (n = 630) and female players (n = 989) showed considerable differences across variables. Men played Pokémon Go for more hours each week (M = 14.67, SD = 11.62) than women (M = 12.34, SD = 9.46), t (1143) = 4.23, p < .001. Men also reported having caught more Pokémon (M = 6.12, SD = 3.45) than women (M = 4.96, SD = 3.30, t (1219) = 6.54, p < .001), which roughly translates into a difference of 5000 Pokémon. Likely because of these usage differences, men had accumulated much more experience points (M = 15.33m, SD = 6.24m) than women had (M = 13.19m, SD = 6.74m), t (1414) = 6.50, p < .001.
The need for relatedness scored significantly higher (M = 3.41, SD = 0.90) than both the need for competence (M = 3.26, SD = 0.71, t (1622) = 6.31, p < .001) and the need for autonomy (M = 2.28, SD = 0.93, t (1622) = -38.47, p < .001). The need for competence scored significantly higher (M= 3.26, SD = 0.71) than the need for autonomy (M = 2.28, SD = 0.93, t (1624) = 37.00, p < .001). This indicates that the need for relatedness scored highest among hardcore Pokémon Go players, followed by the need for competence and then the need for autonomy. Regarding those motivations, men felt a higher need for competence (M = 3.36, SD = .73) than women (M = 3.20, SD = .70, t (1613) = 4.19, p = .007). In addition, men also felt a higher need for relatedness (M = 3.50, SD = 0.85) than women (M = 3.36, SD = 0.93, t (1430) = 3.12, p = .002). Whereas, women felt a higher need for autonomy (M = 2.33, SD = 0.91) than men (M = 2.20, SD = 0.96, t (1617) = -2.75, p = .006).
The main aim of research question 1 was to understand to what extend the three needs of the Self-Determination Theory relate to usage of Pokémon Go. Table 1 provides insight
18 into the association between these three needs and the usage variables. There is a very weak and negative association between the need for autonomy and the amount of Pokémon caught, indicating that when the need for autonomy increases, the amount of Pokémon caught
decreases or vice versa. The need for autonomy has a weak positive association with hours per week spend playing, indicating that when the need for autonomy increases, the hours per week spend playing increases, or vice versa. There is a weak positive association between competence and hours per week spend playing and there is a very weak positive association between the need for competence and the amount of experience points gathered and the amount of Pokémon Caught. This indicates that when the need for competence increases, the amount of experience points, the amount of Pokémon caught and the hours per week spend playing increases or vice versa. There is a weak positive association between the need for relatedness and the amount of Pokémon caught, and there is a moderate positive association between the need for relatedness and the amount of experience points gained and the hours spent per week playing. This indicates that when the need for relatedness increases, the amount of experience points, the amount of Pokémon caught and the hours per week spend playing increases or vice versa.
Table 1. Zero-order correlations between motivations, player characteristics and usage.
Experience Points Pokémon Caught Hours per Week Spending
Age .25** .20** .09** .05* Autonomy -.03 -.05* .11** .01 Competence .05 .06* .25** .13** Relatedness .36** .25** .32** .25** Social Anxiety -.08** -.05 .05 -0.2 IGD .23** .22** .29** .20** Note: ** p <.001, * p <.05
19
Motivational Mediation Models of Gender and Play
To test whether there was an indirect relationship between the gender of the players (men 1, versus women 2) via motivations (autonomy, competence and relatedness) on the total amount of Pokémon caught by players, and the weekly time spent playing Pokémon Go, the PROCESS macro for SPSS (Hayes, 2012) was used to conduct a parallel mediation analysis using 5,000 bootstrap samples. The model is shown in in Figure 1, and the corresponding unstandardized effect sizes, standard errors, confidence intervals and significance levels are shown in Table 2.
The first model with gender as independent variable, the total amount of Pokémon caught as dependent variable and competence, autonomy and relatedness as mediators was significant: model R = .17, R2 = .03, F (1,1547) = 44.11, p < .001. The gender of respondents (male 1 – female 2) had a significant total effect on the amount of Pokémon caught (b* = -.34, t = -6.64, p < .001) indicating that men generally caught more Pokémon than women did. Gender also significantly influenced all motivations: autonomy (b* = .15, t = 2.79, p = .01), competence (β = -.21, t = -3.99, p < .001), and relatedness (b* = -.14, t = -2.74, p = .01). These effects indicated that women were more motivated by autonomy and men were more motivated by competence and relatedness. The mediating dimensions of autonomy and relatedness showed significant effects on the amount of Pokémon caught: autonomy (b* = -.07, t = -2.89, p = .004), and relatedness (b* = .23, t = 9.23, p < .001). These effects of the mediators indicated that players who were more motivated by autonomy generally caught less Pokémon, whereas stronger relatedness motivations among players lead to more Pokémon being caught. The 95% confidence intervals around the estimated indirect effects of autonomy and relatedness did not contain zero, indicating that gender also had an indirect effect on the amount of Pokémon that were caught through the need for autonomy and relatedness and not through the need for competence.
20 A second model with gender as independent variable, the weekly time spent playing Pokémon Go as dependent variable and autonomy, competence, and relatedness as mediators was significant: model R = .11, R2 = .01, F (1,1611) = 19.81, p < .001. The gender of
respondents (male 1 – female 2) had a significant total effect on the weekly time spent playing Pokémon Go (b* = -.23, t = -4.45, p < .001) indicating that men generally spent more time playing the game than women did. Gender also significantly influenced all motivations like the previous model: women were more motivated by autonomy and men were more motivated by competence and relatedness. The mediating motivations all showed significant effects on the weekly time spent playing Pokémon Go: autonomy (b* = .07, t = 2.76, p = .006),
competence (b* = .14, t = 5.62, p < .001), and relatedness (b* = .23, t = 9.34, p < .001). These effects of the mediators indicated that players with stronger motivations spent more time playing. None of the 95% confidence intervals around the estimated indirect effects contained zero, indicating that gender had an indirect effect on the weekly time spent playing Pokémon Go through the motivations of its players.
Figure 1.
The Mediating Effects of Motivations
Independent Variable Competence Relatedness Autonomy Dependent Variable A B D F C E G
21
Table 2. Total effects, direct effects, mediation effects and indirect effects of gender on Pokémon Go usage
Independent: GENDER
Total effect Direct Effect
G IV → Mediator (A, B, C) Mediator→ DV (D, E, F) Indirect effect (A,B,C + D,E,F)
b SE b SE Mediators b SE b SE b Boot SE LLCI; ULCI
Dependent:
-1.17*** .18 -1.01*** .17
Autonomy .14** .05 -.26** .09 -.04 .02 (-.08; -.01)
Total Pokémon Competence -.15*** .04 .03 .12 -.004 .02 (-.04; .03)
Relatedness -.13** .05 .88*** .10 -.11 .04 (-.20; -.03)
Dependent:
-2.35*** .53 -1.76*** .51
Autonomy .12** .05 .74** .27 .09 .05 (.01; .02)
Time per Week Competence -.15*** .04 2.03*** .36 -.31 .09 (-.51; -.14)
Relatedness -14** .05 2.64*** .28 -.37 .13 (-.63; -.14) Dependent: -.23*** .04 -.19*** .04 Autonomy .12** .05 -.01 .02 -.00 .00 (-.01; .00) Spending Competence -.15*** .04 .06* .32 -.01 .01 (-.02; -.00) Relatedness -14*** .05 .19*** .02 -.03 .01 (-.04; -0.01) Note: *** p <.001, ** p <.01, * p <.05
Table 3. Total effects, direct effects, mediation effects and indirect effects of social anxiety on Internet Gaming Disorder
Independent: Social Anxiety
Total effect Direct Effect
G IV → Mediator (A, B, C) Mediator→ DV (D, E, F) Indirect effect (A,B,C + D,E,F)
b SE b SE Mediators b SE b SE b Boot SE LLCI; ULCI
Dependent: .50*** .06 .48*** .06 Autonomy .21*** .03 .12** .05 0.03 0.01 (0.00; 0.05) Internet Gaming Disorder Competence .02 .03 .40*** .06 0.01 0.01 (-0.01; 0.03) Relatedness -.04 .03 .25*** .05 -0.01 0.01 (-0.03; 0.00) Note: *** p <.001, ** p < .01, * p <.05
22
Spending Differences
The main aim of research question 2 was to understand to what extend Pokémon Go players make game purchases. 74.7% of hardcore Pokémon Go players have spent money on in-game purchases in Pokémon Go (N= 1630). 79.8% of male players (n= 630) and 71.3% of female players (n= 989) indicated that they spent money on in-game purchases in Pokémon Go. When Pokécoins are bought (n = 1218) they are mostly used in order to purchase Storage upgrade (72.0%), Bag upgrades (70.4%), Adventure Boxes (66.6%) and Egg incubators (55.5%).
Those who spent money on Pokémon Go showed to have gained more experience points (M = 15.15m, SD = 6,19m) than those who did not (M = 10.61mm, SD = 6.74m, t (1628) = 12.07, p <.001). Those who spent money on Pokémon Go also played for more hours during the week (M = 14.23, SD = 10.89), than those who did not (M = 40.43, SD = 8.39, t (1628) = 7.35, p < .001). In addition, those who spent money indicated having caught more Pokémon (M=5.80, SD=3.44), than those who did not (M = 4.21, SD = 3.00, t (1562) = 8.76, p < .001).
The variable spending was divided into three categories. 25.3% of the players have not spent any money on Pokémon Go (n = 412). 37.8% of the players have spent up to 50 euros on Pokémon Go (n = 615). And 37.0% of the players have spent more than 50 euros on Pokémon Go (n = 602). There is a very weak positive association between age and spending, indicating that the older a player is, the more that player spends on Pokémon Go. Details can be found in table 1. There are weak positive associations between the need for competence, the need for relatedness, IGD and spending. Indicating that those who spend more on
Pokémon Go feel a higher need for competence and relatedness and score higher on the sum of IGD or vice versa.
23
Motivational Mediation of Gender and Spending
Similar to the previous tests, PROCESS was used to test the model that examined if there was an indirect relationship between gender via their motivations (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) on their reported spending. Spending was categorized in three groups, players who spent nothing, players who spent up to 50 euros and players who spent 50 euros or more on Pokémon Go. The model is shown in Figure 1, and the corresponding unstandardized effect sizes, standard errors, confidence intervals and significance levels are shown in Table 2. This model provided a significant prediction: model R = .14, R2 = .02, F (1,1610) = 33.96, p <.001. The gender of respondents (male 1 – female 2) had a significant total effect on the spending (b* = -.29, t = -5.84, p < .001) indicating that men generally spent more money on Pokémon Go than women did. Gender also significantly influenced all motivations like the previous model: women were more motivated by autonomy and men were more motivated by competence and relatedness. The mediation motivation of competence and relatedness
showed significant effects on the amount of money spent on Pokémon Go: competence (b* = .05, t = 2.12, p = .03) and relatedness (b* = .22, t = 8.58, p < .001). These effects of the mediators indicate that player with stronger need for competence and stronger need for relatedness spent more money on Pokémon Go. The 95% confidence intervals around the estimated indirect effect of competence and relatedness did not contain zero, indicating that gender had an indirect effect on spending through the need for competence and relatedness and not through a need for autonomy.
24
Social Anxiety, Internet Gaming Disorder and Pokémon Go Usage
The main aim of research question 3 was to understand if there is a relationship between feelings of social anxiety and usage of Pokémon Go. Results show that there is negative but very weak relationship between feelings of social anxiety and the amount of experience points gained. Indicating that those who feel more anxious have gained less experience points. Other usage variables showed no significant relations to feelings of social anxiety. Details can be found in table 1.
The main aim of research question 4 was to understand to what extend users of Pokémon Go show signs of behavior related to IGD. Both the DSM-5 and the ICD-11 have been used to answer this question. When using the DSM-5, analysis shows that 8.8% of the participants is addicted to Pokémon Go (n = 1531). Male players are significantly more addicted (11.4%, n = 579) than female players (7.1%, n = 942, x2(1) = 8.26, p < .005). When using the ICD-11, analysis shows that 2.7% of the 1531 participants are addicted. There is no significant difference between male and female players. Our data indicates that the sum of gaming disorder criteria (DSM-5) is positively related to total amount experience points, total amount Pokémon caught and hours per week spend playing Pokémon Go. Indication that those who score higher on the IGD scale score higher on the usage variables or vice versa. Details can be found in Table 1.
Motivational Mediation Models of Social Anxiety and Game Disorder
PROCESS was used to test two models that examined if there was an indirect relationship between the social anxiety levels of players via their motivations (autonomy, competence and relatedness) on their reported criteria for IGD. The model is shown in in Figure 1, and the corresponding unstandardized effect sizes, standard errors, confidence intervals and
25 R = .22, R2 = .05, F (1,1529) = 76.41, p < .001. Social anxiety had a significant total effect on the total sum of IGD criteria (b* = .21, t = 8.74, p < .001). Social anxiety significantly
influenced the motivational need for autonomy (b* = .18, t = 7.30, p < .001), but did not influence the other two motivational needs. The mediating motivations all showed significant effects on the sum of IGD criteria: competence (b* = .16, t = 6.33, p < .001), autonomy (b* = .06, t = 2.52, p = .01), and relatedness (b* = .12, t = 4.90, p < .001). These effects of the mediators indicated that stronger motivations generally increased signs of gaming disorder. The 95% confidence intervals around the estimated indirect effect of autonomy did not
contain zero, indicating that social anxiety had an indirect effect on the sum of IGD symptoms through the need for autonomy and not through the need for competence and relatedness.
Discussion
The aim of this research was to examine the characteristics and motivations of hardcore Pokémon Go players. Results from an online survey tell us that Pokémon Go is fanatically played by both male and female players. Male players tend to spend more time playing Pokémon Go each week and have caught more Pokémon. Likely because of these usage differences, men had gained more experience points than women. The motives for playing Pokémon Go were researched by using the Self-Determination Theory by Ryan & Deci (2000). This theory proposes that there are three essential innate universal psychological needs that motivate individuals to initiate behavior: the need for autonomy, competence and relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Relatedness was the most important motivational need among hardcore Pokémon Go players, followed by competence and autonomy. Men felt a higher need for competence and relatedness than women did, whereas women felt a higher need for autonomy than men did. Ferguson & Olson (2013) found that male players show a stronger motivational need for relatedness. Additionally, research by Malik et al. (2019) found
26 that male Pokémon Go players are more likely to seek social interactivity and achievement. Since achievement can be considered a part of competence and social interactivity as a part of relatedness, the findings that male player are more motivated by a higher need competence and relatedness is similar to the findings by Malik et al., (2019).
In general, those who feel a higher need for relatedness score higher on all the usage variables. The total amount of Pokémon caught is negatively related to autonomy, indicating that those who catch more Pokémon care less about the customization of their avatar. The mediation models emphasized the importance of relatedness especially among male players as the most important motivation factor for playing Pokémon Go. Previous research found that the most important motivational need in Pokémon Go is the need for competence (Broom et al., 2019). It may be that relatedness was not as important to players in the study by Broom et al (2019) because social elements such as the ability to form friendships with other trainers and the ability to trade Pokémon had not been implemented in the game yet.
A majority of hardcore Pokémon Go players have spent money on Pokécoins. The most common items purchased were Storage Upgrade, Bag Upgrade, Adventure Boxes and Egg Incubators. Although the survey did not ask why hardcore Pokémon Go players purchased these items, previous research might elucidate this. Both Storage Upgrades and Bag Upgrades enable the player to collect more items used to catch Pokémon and to collect more Pokémon, making it possible for players to play Pokémon Go without obstructions (Hamari et al., 2017b). Adventure Boxes consist of a collection of items such as Egg Incubators and Pokéballs. Players are aware of the content of Adventure Boxes before purchasing it. These Adventure Boxes are competitively priced; buying the items separately will cost more than buying a collection of items in a box. Therefore, a possible reason for buying these Adventure Boxes is economic rationale as suggested by Hamari et al. (2017b). Buying Egg Incubators makes it possible for players to hatch more eggs simultaneously which will make them gain
27 more experience points. This can be explained by wanting these players to collect them all, especially given that some Pokémon can only be acquired by hatching eggs and the desire of players to reach level 40.
In general, those spend money on Pokémon Go scored higher on all the usage variables than those who did not spent money on Pokémon Go. Spending money is also positively related to the need for competence and the need for relatedness. The mediation model
emphasized the importance of relatedness and competence, in which relatedness shows to be the most important motivational factor for spending money on Pokémon Go. Thus, spending money in Pokémon Go is mostly stimulated by the need for relatedness. In an interview with Anne Beuttenmüller, head of marketing of Niantic, it is stated that that social side is crucial. Beuttenmüller says: "If you persuade people to invest in a community around a game, they are less likely to stop playing" (Maessen, 2019). In addition, this study suggests that when you persuade Pokémon Go players to invest the Pokémon Go community, they are more inclined to spend money on the game.
Previous research on Pokémon Go and social anxiety indicated that social anxiety might prevent players from participating in all aspects of Pokémon Go (Rapee & Heimberg, 1997; Leary & Jongman-Sereno, 2014; Khalis & Mikami, 2018). Simultaneously, Pokémon Go might be used as a social opportunity for those who experience social anxiety (Kato et al., 2017; Khalis & Mikami, 2018). In this research, the more socially anxious someone feels, the less experience points they have gathered. The survey of this study cannot be used to diagnose players with social anxiety disorder. Therefore, the study cannot be used to tell us if Pokémon Go can be used to help those who suffer from social anxiety. However, in general hardcore Pokémon Go players showed little signs of social anxiety, possibly because of the relevance of the social aspects of the game. This is highlighted by the fact that the more socially anxious a player feels, the less experience points that player has gained.
28 IGD was present in 8.8% of the players. The higher the score on the IGD scale
(Lemmens et al., 2015), the higher the players scored on the usage variables. Previous research on Pokémon Go has not investigated the prevalence of IGD. However, research on IGD shows that prevalence ranges between the 0.5% and 6% (Lemmens et al., 2015; Petry, Rehbein, & O’Brien, 2015), indicating that IGD is more present among hardcore Pokémon Go players. However, previous research on IGD has not investigated hardcore gamers, which could explain why more gamers in this sample are addicted. The psychosocial characteristics and motivations of the ‘addicted’ players differ significantly. Addicted players show more social anxiety, which leads them to seek autonomy in games, not competition or relatedness as the others do. The more socially anxious and addicted players often do not seek
companionship, and therefore do not benefit from the social aspects of the game, thereby receiving less experience points. In line with a previous study by Khalis and Mikami (2018), we found that those with more social anxiety were observed to have gained less experience points during gameplay. Similar to users who benefit the most from social media (Kraut et al., 2002), players who are richer in social skills will benefit the most from playing Pokémon Go. When using the ICD-11 diagnostic criteria only 2.7% of the participants are game addicts. This means that most hardcore gamers (97.3%) are not addicted to Pokémon Go. This seems to be contradicting the expectations of both researchers and gamers. Previous research has warned for the addictive nature of Pokémon Go (Pourmand et al., 2017) and this possible addictive nature has been one of the reasons for gamers not to install the game (Broom et al., 2019).
This study is not without its limitations. Firstly, causality can only be assumed, not proven with a cross-sectional survey study. Additionally, a mistake was made in the phrasing of the survey items regarding spending. Since 37.0% of the players indicated having spent more than 50 euros, a wider range of answers would have been appropriate. And lastly,
29 players were asked what they had bought with their Pokécoins. This question missed the option ‘clothing’, which would have been an interesting addition, given that the need for autonomy focused on customization.
Pokémon Go has been a topic of research for over three years, but still contains many interesting questions. This research shows that the need for relatedness is very important amongst players, and Niantic has focused a lot on the Pokémon Go community. It would be interesting to figure out if players feel part of that community, and to what extend the
Pokémon Go community influences their lives. Moreover, determining whether Pokémon Go has a positive influence on those who are socially anxious and understanding which features may contribute to enhancing well-being among this vulnerable group seems relevant from a social and clinical perspective.
Conclusion
The aim of this study was to examine the characteristics and motivations of hardcore Pokémon Go players. Results from an online survey among 1630 hardcore Pokémon Go players tell us that male players played more and showed more progress in the game than female players. The most prominent motivation among hardcore players to play Pokémon Go is the need for relatedness. Male players felt a higher need for competence and relatedness than female players. Whereas, female players felt a higher need for autonomy than male players. The majority of players have spent money for in-game purchases in Pokémon Go, however they show relatively little signs of gaming disorder. Players of Pokémon Go are primarily motivated by social interactions and contact with their community and thereby experience more success in the game. Given the importance of relatedness, the focus on the Pokémon Go community by Niantic has been a great strategy.
30
References
ADAA. (2018). Social Anxiety Disorder | Anxiety and Depression Association of America, ADAA. Retrieved January 15, 2020 from
https://adaa.org/understanding-anxiety/social-anxiety-disorder
Alha, K., Koskinen, E., Paavilainen, J., & Hamari, J. (2016, August). Critical Acclaim and Commercial Success in Mobile Free-to-Play Games. In DiGRA/FDG.
Alha, K., Koskinen, E., Paavilainen, J., & Hamari, J. (2019). Why do people play location based augmented reality games: A study on Pokémon GO. Computers in Human Behavior, 93, 114-122.
Alomar, N., Alsaleh, M., & Alarifi, A. (2019). Behavioral consequences of Pokémon GO: The exaggerated picture. Computers in Human Behavior, 90, 223-245.
Althoff, T., White, R. W., & Horvitz, E. (2016). Influence of Pokémon Go on physical activity: study and implications. Journal of medical Internet research, 18(12), e315. APA (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition.
Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association
Bonus, J. A., Peebles, A., Mares, M. L., & Sarmiento, I. G. (2018). Look on the bright side (of media effects): Pokémon Go as a catalyst for positive life experiences. Media Psychology, 21(2), 263-287.
Bouwman, N. D., Jöckel, S., & Dogruel, L. (2015). “The app market has been candy crushed”: Observed and rationalized processes for selecting smartphone games. Entertainment computing, 8, 1-9.
Brodie, R. J., Ilic, A., Juric, B., & Hollebeek, L. (2013). Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis. Journal of business research, 66(1), 105-114.
31 Broom, D. R., & Flint, S. W. (2018). Gotta catch ‘em all: Impact of Pokémon Go on physical
activity, sitting time, and perceptions of physical activity and health at baseline and three-month follow-up. Games for health journal, 7(6), 401-408.
Broom, D. R., Lee, K. Y., Lam, M. H. S., & Flint, S. W. (2019). Gotta catch ‘em all or not enough time: Users motivations for playing Pokémon Go™ and non-users’ reasons for not installing. Health Psychology Research, 7(1).
Burgers, C., Eden, A., van Engelenburg, M. D., & Buningh, S. (2015). How feedback boosts motivation and play in a brain-training game. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 94-103.
Caplan, S. E. (2003). Preference for online social interaction: A theory of problematic Internet use and psychosocial well-being. Communication research, 30(6), 625-648.
Chapple, C. (2020, 9 January). Pokémon GO Has Best Year Ever in 2019, Catching Nearly $900 Million in Player Spending. Retrieved January 15, 2020 from
https://sensortower.com/blog/pokemon-go-has-best-year-ever-in-2019-catching-nearly-900m-usd-in-player-spending
Cheng, Y. (2019). The mediating effects of motivation for playing Pokémon Go on internet gaming disorder and well–being. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 1-18. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale:
Self-determination in personality. Journal of research in personality, 19(2), 109-134.
Ferguson, C. J., & Olson, C. K. (2013). Friends, fun, frustration and fantasy: Child motivations for video game play. Motivation and Emotion, 37(1), 154-164.
Ghazali, E. M., Mutum, D. S., & Woon, M. Y. (2019). Multiple sequential mediation in an extended uses and gratifications model of augmented reality game Pokémon
32 Hamari, J., & Järvinen, A. (2011). Building customer relationship through game mechanics in social games. In Business, Technological, and Social Dimensions of Computer Games: Multidisciplinary Developments (pp. 348-365). IGI Global.
Hamari, J., Alha, K., Järvelä, S., Kivikangas, J. M., Koivisto, J., & Paavilainen, J. (2017b). Why do players buy in-game content? An empirical study on concrete purchase motivations. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 538-546.
Hamari, J., Hanner, N., & Koivisto, J. (2017a). Service quality explains why people use freemium services but not if they go premium: An empirical study in free-to-play games. International Journal of Information Management, 37(1), 1449-1459. Hartmann, T., & Klimmt, C. (2006). Gender and computer games: Exploring females’
dislikes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(4), 910-931. Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable
mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling.
Hjorth, L., & Richardson, I. (2017). Pokémon GO: Mobile media play, place-making, and the digital wayfarer.
Howe, K. B., Suharlim, C., Ueda, P., Howe, D., Kawachi, I., & Rimm, E. B. (2016). Gotta catch’em all! Pokémon GO and physical activity among young adults: difference in differences study. bmj, 355, i6270.
Hsiao, K. L., Lytras, M. D., & Chen, C. C. (2019). An in-app purchase framework for location-based AR games: the case of Pokémon Go. Library Hi Tech.
IBM Corp. Released 2015. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 23.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
Jenkins, N. (2016, August 22). Pokémon Go May Have Just Shown Us What the End of the World Looks Like. Retrieved January 15, 2020 from https://time.com/4460911/ pokemon-go-taipei-stampede-snorlax-mob-xinbeitou-taiwan/
33 Jin, C. H. (2014). The role of users’ motivations in generating social capital building and
subjective well-being: The case of social network games. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 29-38.
Jula, M. (2016, July 11). Pokémon Go Players Take Their Hunt to the Streets of New York. Retrieved January 15, 2020 from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/nyregion/ pokemon-players-take-their-hunt-to-the-streets-of-new-york.html
Kato, T., Teo, A., Tateno, M., Watabe, M., Kubo, H., & Kanba, S. (2017). Can Pokémon GO rescue shut‐ins (hikikomori) from their isolated world? Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 71(1), 75-76.
Khalis, A., & Mikami, A. Y. (2018). Who's Gotta Catch' Em All?: Individual differences in Pokémon Go gameplay behaviors. Personality and Individual Differences, 124, 35-38. Kim, K., Schmierbach, M. G., Chung, M. Y., Fraustino, J. D., Dardis, F., & Ahern, L. (2015).
Is it a sense of autonomy, control, or attachment? Exploring the effects of in-game customization on game enjoyment. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 695-705. Kim, W. G., Lee, C., & Hiemstra, S. J. (2004). Effects of an online virtual community on
customer loyalty and travel product purchases. Tourism management, 25(3), 343-355. Kogan, L., Hellyer, P., Duncan, C., & Schoenfeld-Tacher, R. (2017). A pilot investigation of
the physical and psychological benefits of playing Pokémon GO for dog owners. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 431-437.
Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of social issues, 58(1), 49-74.
Leary, M. R., & Jongman-Sereno, K. P. (2014). Social anxiety as an early warning system: A refinement and extension of the self-presentation theory of social anxiety. In Social anxiety (pp. 579-597). Academic Press.
34 LeBlanc, A. G., & Chaput, J. P. (2017). Pokémon Go: A game changer for the physical
inactivity crisis?. Preventive medicine, 101, 235-237.
Lee, J., Lee, M., & Choi, I. H. (2012). Social network games uncovered: Motivations and their attitudinal and behavioral outcomes. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(12), 643-648.
Lemmens, J. S., Valkenburg, P. M., & Gentile, D. A. (2015). The Internet gaming disorder scale. Psychological assessment, 27(2), 567.
Lemmens, J. S., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2011). Psychosocial causes and consequences of pathological gaming. Computers in human behavior, 27(1), 144-152.
Liu, C. Z., Au, Y. A., & Choi, H. S. (2014). Effects of freemium strategy in the mobile app market: An empirical study of google play. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31(3), 326–354.
Liu, H. J., & Shiue, Y. C. (2014). Influence of Facebook game players' behavior on flow and purchase intention. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 42(1), 125-133.
Lucas, K., & Sherry, J. L. (2004). Sex differences in video game play: A communication-based explanation. Communication research, 31(5), 499-523.
Maessen, L. (2019, Mei 15). ‘Pokémon Go’ leeft nog steeds, net als voorloper ‘Ingress’. Retrieved on September 25, 2019 from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2019/05/15/ pokemon-go-leeft-nog-steeds-onder-fans-net-als-voorloper-ingress-a3960297 Malik, A., Hiekkanen, K., Hussain, Z., Hamari, J., & Johri, A. (2019). How players across
gender and age experience Pokémon Go?. Universal Access in the Information Society, 1-14.
35 Marquet, O., Alberico, C., & Hipp, A. J. (2018). Pokémon GO and physical activity among
college students. A study using Ecological Momentary Assessment. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 215-222.
Mattick, R. P., & Clarke, J. C. (1998). Development and validation of measures of social phobia scrutiny fear and social interaction anxiety. Behaviour research and therapy, 36(4), 455-470.
Meggiato, R., Goïnga Nynke, & Regenboog, M. (2016). Pokémon Go voor dummies. Amersfoort: BBNC uitgevers.
Mennin, D. S., Fresco, D. M., Heimberg, R. G., Schneier, F. R., Davies, S. O., & Liebowitz, M. R. (2002). Screening for social anxiety disorder in the clinical setting: using the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale. Journal of anxiety disorders, 16(6), 661-673.
Morin, A. (July 18, 2016). The Psychology Behind The “Pokémon GO” Obsession. Retrieved December 29, 2019 from https://www.forbes.com/sites/amymorin/2016/07/18/the-psychology-behind-the-pokemon-go-obsession/#2e4518de4375
Newzoo (2019). Retrieved December 29, 2019 from https://newzoo.com/insights/trend-reports/newzoo-global-games-market-report-2019-light-version/
Neys, J. L., Jansz, J., & Tan, E. S. (2014). Exploring persistence in gaming: The role of self-determination and social identity. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 196-209.
Nikou, S. A., & Economides, A. A. (2017). Mobile-Based Assessment: Integrating acceptance and motivational factors into a combined model of Self-Determination Theory and Technology Acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 83-95.
Peters, L., Sunderland, M., Andrews, G., Rapee, R. M., & Mattick, R. P. (2012).
Development of a short form Social Interaction Anxiety (SIAS) and Social Phobia Scale (SPS) using nonparametric item response theory: The SIAS-6 and the SPS-6. Psychological assessment, 24(1), 6SPS-6.
36
Petry, N. M., Rehbein, F., Ko, C. H., & O’Brien, C. P. (2015). Internet gaming disorder in the DSM-5. Current psychiatry reports, 17(9), 72.
Pourmand, A., Lombardi, K., Kuhl, E., & O'Connell, F. (2017). Videogame-related illness and injury: a review of the literature and predictions for Pokemon GO!. Games for health journal, 6(1), 9-18.
Qualtrics, L. L. C. (2014). Qualtrics [software]. Utah, USA: Qualtrics.
Rapee, R. M., & Heimberg, R. G. (1997). A cognitive-behavioral model of anxiety in social phobia. Behaviour research and therapy, 35(8), 741-756.
Rubin, A.M.: Uses and gratifications. In: The SAGE Handbook of Media Processes and Effects, pp 147–159. SAGE, Los Angeles (2009).
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. 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. Schivinski, B., Brzozowska-Woś, M., Buchanan, E. M., Griffiths, M. D., & Pontes, H. M.
(2018). Psychometric assessment of the internet gaming disorder diagnostic criteria: an item response theory study. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 8, 176-184.
Serino, M., Cordrey, K., McLaughlin, L., & Milanaik, R. L. (2016). Pokémon Go and augmented virtual reality games: a cautionary commentary for parents and pediatricians. Current opinion in pediatrics, 28(5), 673-677.
Shang, R. A., Chen, Y. C., & Liao, H. J. (2006). The value of participation in virtual consumer communities on brand loyalty. Internet research, 16(4), 398-418.
Tabacchi, M. E., Caci, B., Cardaci, M., & Perticone, V. (2017). Early usage of Pokémon Go and its personality correlates. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 163-169.
37 Tamborini, R., Grizzard, M., Bowman, N. D., 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.
Vella, K., Johnson, D., Cheng, V. W. S., Davenport, T., Mitchell, J., Klarkowski, M., & Phillips, C. (2019). A sense of belonging: Pokemon GO and Social
Connectedness. Games and Culture, 14(6), 583-603.
Voigt, S., & Hinz, O. (2016). Making digital freemium business models a success: predicting customers’ lifetime value via initial purchase information. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 58(2), 107-118.
World Health Organization. (2018). International classification of diseases for mortality and morbidity statistics (11th Revision). Retrieved January 15, 2020
from https://icd.who.int/browse11/l-m/en
Wu, J. H., Wang, S. C., & Tsai, H. H. (2010). Falling in love with online games: The uses and gratifications perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1862-1871.
Wulf, T., Rieger, D., & Schmitt, J. B. (2018). Blissed by the past: Theorizing media-induced nostalgia as an audience response factor for entertainment and well-being. Poetics, 69, 70-80.
Xian, Y., Xu, H., Xu, H., Liang, L., Hernandez, A. F., Wang, T. Y., & Peterson, E. D. (2017). An initial evaluation of the impact of Pokémon GO on physical activity. Journal of the American Heart Association, 6(5), e005341.
Yang, C. C., & Liu, D. (2017). Motives matter: motives for playing Pokémon Go and implications for well-being. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
38 Zhang, H., Zhang, K. Z., Lee, M. K., & Feng, F. (2015). Brand loyalty in enterprise
microblogs: influence of community commitment, IT habit, and participation. Information Technology & People, 28(2), 304-326.
