The Power of Minecraft

The Power of Minecraft

Maren Scheffler (10356894)

Research Master Degree, Communication Science

Graduate School of Communication

University of Amsterdam

June 29, 2017

Supervisor:

Dr. Jessica Piotrowski

Author Note

This research was supported in parts by a grant from Kennisnet (Study 1), small gifts

from the Microsoft Corporation (Study 2), two books from Meis & Maas (Study 2), and

financial support from the Graduate School of Communication, University of Amsterdam

(Study 2). Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Maren Scheffler,

Acknowledgements

First, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Jessica

Piotrowski. Her support, patience, words of encouragement, immense knowledge and

expertise during all phases of this Master’s thesis helped me to learn, grow, and always strive

for the best of my abilities. She always knew exactly how to guide me into the right direction

and achieve the goals I was aiming for – when I missed the forest for the trees. I could not

have imagined a better supervisor for my Master’s thesis.

Besides my supervisor, my sincere thanks also goes to Dr. Sindy Sumter for her

support and assistance, especially during the focus group sessions and preparation for the

survey – which both required academic research skills and experience, and an excellent

command of the Dutch language. Her insightful comments helped me to improve my research

and widen my perspective.

I would also like to thank the supporters and sponsors of this project: Kennisnet (with

special thanks to Remco Pijpers), The Microsoft Corporation (especially Martin Diepeveen),

Meis & Maas, and of course the Graduate School of Communication (University of

Amsterdam) who provided my with the precious possibility to offer incentives to my research

participants, use their networks for recruitment purposes, and access laboratory and research

facilities.

Finally, I want to particularly single out the adolescents who participated in my

research. Withouth them, this thesis would not have been possible. Thank you very much,

Abstract

Despite the global popularity of the game Minecraft among male and female

adolescents, little is known about the motivation behind this gameplay and why the game

(unlike so many others) seems to appeal equally to both genders. Guided by predictions of

selective exposure and uses and gratifications theory, two complementary studies were

conducted to address this gap. In Study 1, focus groups were conducted with thirty-five

adolescents to explore these motivations. Results indicated that, while all adolescents select

the game for its exciting, entertaining, and social aspects, girls explicitly note its peaceful,

care-giving features while boys highlight thrill-seeking and competitive motivations.

Additionally, girls prefer creative and single-player Minecraft-mode while boys prefer

survival and multi-player mode. Finally, tweens (aged eleven to twelve) select more basic

and safe gameplay options while teens (aged thirteen to fifteen) choose more advanced and

risky play options. In Study 2, these findings were deductively investigated through an online

survey with 155 adolescents. Supporting Study 1, Study 2 found that adolescents indeed are

motivated to play Minecraft as a result of its entertaining and social features. However, in

contrast to Study 1, adolescents are not only motivated by the games potential to excite them,

but also for its potential to calm them down – suggesting attributes of mood management.

Similar to Study 1, Study 2 found that boys’ motives are indeed more competitive when

compared to girls. Also supporting Study 1, Study 2 showed that girls prefer creative and

single-player mode, compared to boys who prefer survival and multi-player mode. Finally, in

line with Study 1, Study 2 showed that tweens prefer more basic play while teens favor more

advanced play. All told, it seems that the motivation to play Minecraft is attributable to its

customizability - allowing tweens and teens of both genders to play the game in ways which

The Power of Minecraft

Today’s tweens and teens are spending an ever-increasing amount of their free time

playing digital games. Indeed, it seems that playing games on online platforms is an essential

part of what it means to grow up in the Western culture. And perhaps not surprising given the

popular rhetoric of the day, the existing scholarship shows that gender often (greatly)

influences game selection – leading to dramatically different sets of “popular” games for

boys and girls, with girls preferring games such as Candy Crush and The Sims, and boys

more frequently noting content such as Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto (GTA;

Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017). Interestingly, however, in recent years – one specific game

has been emerging as popular amongst both boys and girls – Minecraft (Valkenburg &

Piotrowski, 2017).

Minecraft is one of the most successful digital games of our times with more than one

hundred million registered gamers worldwide (Super Data, 2015; The New York Times,

2016). Unlike nearly any other game before it or since its time, it has attracted the interest of

boys and girls in almost equal numbers; so much so that The New York Times has referred to

the millions of tweens and teens playing this game as the ‘Minecraft Generation’. From a

societal perspective, the game has certainly left its mark, and continues to leave its mark on

millions of children worldwide. But this game also represents a complete separation from the

games before it, leaving many scholars and media developers wondering just what is it about

Minecraft that makes it so unique. What are the general motivations behind playing this game

and, more specifically, how is this game able to meet these motivations for both genders,

when so many games before it were unable to do so? Through a multi-methodological

two-study approach, this research aims to tackle these questions in order to both contribute to our

theoretical understanding of how media motivations influence media use, but also to offer

important information for media developers interested in creating gender-neutral games for

youth today.

What is Minecraft?

To study Minecraft, one must understand what the game entails. Minecraft is a game

that is built entirely of cubic bricks, offering a limitless map for players to explore, build, and

survive in. It is often referred to as ‘virtual Lego’, because its building blocks resemble Lego

bricks. Different than Lego however, players can not only build static buildings, but also

develop simulations of moving objects (Banks & Potts, 2010). The New York Times describes

the ‘open sandbox game’ as something that:

Doesn’t really feel like a game. It’s more like a destination, a technical tool, a cultural

scene, or all three put together: a place where kids engineer complex machines, shoot

videos of their escapades that they post on YouTube, make art and set up servers,

online versions of the game where they can hang out with friends. It’s a world of trial

and error and constant discovery, stuffed with byzantine secrets, obscure text

commands and hidden recipes. (The New York Times, 2016; p. 2)

Minecraft can be played on desktop or laptop computer, iPad or tablet, game console,

or smartphone. The game was created by Markus Persson, the founder of Mojang AB, and

officially released on November 18, 2011 (Minecraft Wiki, 2016). Players use the

three-dimensional gaming environment to break and place the iconic cubic blocks from different

materials to build “creative structures, creations, and artwork on multi-player servers and

single-player worlds across multiple game modes” (Minecraft Wiki, 2016). The game is one

of the most successful international computer games of all times, with 26.2 million sales as of

June 14, 2017. In single-player mode, the player moves, builds, and survives in his or her

own world, without interfacing with other gamers. In multi-player mode, the player visits the

worlds of other gamers, joins them to play minigames, or even fights epic battles together.

Very often, gamers in multi-player mode connect via the chat function, or talk to each other

via Skype. Since Minecraft does not have a storyline, it is unrestricted and has no right or

wrong way to be played (Duncan, 2011).

Valkenburg and Piotrowski (2017) argue there are three broad genres for digital

games: Action games, strategy games, and process-based games. They further argue that

most digital games are combinations of these three genres (Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017).

This also applies to Minecraft, with its five substantially differing gaming modes: Survival,

creative, hardcore, adventure, and spectator mode (Gamepedia, 2017). As a result, it is

challenging to classify Minecraft as one specific type of game, or even a genre - Minecraft is

a multi-faceted game that is “all about exploration, adventure, and creativity. You can

literally go anywhere and do anything” (Banks & Potts, 2010; p. 4). The question is – with so

many different modes of play, what exactly are the motivations behind adolescents’’ choice

to play Minecraft? And to what extent do these motivations differ between girls and boys?

Study 1

Theoretical Framework

Gaming Motivation.

In order to understand why adolescents play Minecraft – and

the potential differences in reasons between boys and girls – this means investigating players’

gaming motivations. In this study, we examine gaming motivations within the context of

selective exposure and uses & gratifications theory (Katz, Blumler & Gurevitch, 1973;

Zillmann & Bryant, 2013). Selective exposure theory explains that, due to limited cognitive

processing, individuals can never take in all information that is available at all times, and

therefore focus their perception on, for example, specific media messages (Zillman & Bryant,

2013; p. 1). This selective process can either be automatic and unconscious, or deliberate and

volitional (Zillman & Bryant, 2013). Uses & gratifications theory additionally posits that

individual’s different social and psychological needs influence their expectations of mass

media, and therefore their choice for specific media (Katz, Blumler & Gurevitch, 1973; p.

510). Moreover, the theory explains that individuals seek gratification of these needs through

their consumption of media (Katz, Blumler & Gurevitch, 1973). Taken together, selective

exposure and uses & gratifications theory explain that people consciously and unconsciously

choose specific media based on their social and psychological backgrounds, individual

beliefs, and motives (Dylko, 2015). Applying this to the topic of the current study, these

theories – in tandem – suggest that male and female gamers choose Minecraft in accordance

to their specific circumstances and needs at certain moments.

Motivation to Play Minecraft.

Motivation can be defined as the desire to do

something, or the reason for behaving in a certain way (Canossa, Martinez, & Togelius,

2013). When it comes to digital games, players’ gaming motivations reflect the reasons why

they desire to play a certain game, or choose to play it in a certain way (Canossa et al., 2013).

When digital games first became popular in the early 1980s, Malone (1981) suggested three

primary motivations for gameplay – namely, challenge, fantasy, and curiosity (p. 333). Years

later, building on these concepts, Valkenburg and Piotrowski (2017) distinguish between six

(not mutually exclusive) gaming motivations: Competition, obtaining control, overcoming

challenges, exploration, social motives, and physiological arousal.

When it comes to Minecraft, it is often suggested that it is the balance between the

thrilling and creative aspects of the game that explain its success (Brand & Kinash, 2013;

Canossa et al., 2013; Duncan, 2011). Experts also often mention social reasons (Lastowka,

2011; Robertson, 2010; Pijpers, 2013), or using the game as an educational tool (Ekaputra,

Lim, & Eng, 2013; Nu.nl, 2016; Pijpers, 2013; Short, 2012) as other possible factors of

Minecraft’s success. Yet while some of these suppositions have been supported in empirical

work with adults (also a large group of Minecraft players; Canossa et al., 2013), adolescents’

motivations for Minecraft play have not yet been empirically investigated. Given that

adolescents significantly differ from adults in their physical, cognitive, and psychological

development (Valkenburg & Peter, 2013), alongside the popularity of Minecraft among this

audience, studying the motivations behind their game play is a relevant direction for the field

– and a key aim of this project.

Research Question 1:

What are adolescents’ motivations to play Minecraft?

Gender.

Research has shown that gender has a strong influence on gaming preference

(Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017). Yee (2006), for example, found that male players are more

often motivated by achievement-components, while female players more often seek

relationship gaming-components. Interestingly, however, Minecraft seems to satisfy gaming

motivations for both genders – as shown by the fact that Minecraft is among the top five

favorite games for both boys and girls (Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017). It is unclear,

however, as to why Minecraft is appealing to both genders. Does Minecraft fulfill the same

motivations for both genders? Or, perhaps given the different modes of play, Minecraft is

able to fulfill different motivations for boys and girls? Given that most scholarship has shown

that gender influences gaming motivation, understanding why Minecraft appeals to both

genders can provide important information to scholars and game designers alike. As such,

understanding gender differences among adolescents’ motivation to play Minecraft is a

second key aim of this project.

Research Question 2:

Are children’s motivations to play Minecraft influenced by

gender?

Study 1 Method

Design.

Given that there is presently no scholarship on the motivations for Minecraft

gameplay among youth, an exploratory design was used – namely focus groups – to initially

investigate what motivates male and female adolescents to play Minecraft. Focus groups are

an excellent exploratory research method to investigate pre-existing individual opinions

(rationalist perspective) and experiences and learn from meaning-making interaction between

participants (dialogic perspective; Belzile & Öberg, 2012; Kitzinger, 1995; Polak & Green,

2016).

Sample.

Participants were recruited from all levels of elementary and second school

education to achieve a good representation of all educational backgrounds. In line with the

recommendation of Carlsen and Glenton (2011) and Guest, Bunce, and Johnson (2006),

sampling based on progressive insights was applied. Participants were recruited through

personal referral, posts on Twitter, and the distribution of recruitment flyers (see appendix A)

at local high schools (in all main neighborhoods of Amsterdam as found on

www.kiesjeschool.nl), parks, and sports clubs for children. The age-range between eleven

and fifteen years was chosen due to the popularity of Minecraft in this group. Thus, to be

eligible to participate, children simply had to be between eleven and fifteen years of age.

Minecraft-experience was not required, since it might have been interesting to analyze why

some children did not choose to play the game. Nevertheless, all who ultimately participated

reported either intermediate or high levels of experience with the game. Only two participants

mentioned they only started playing a few weeks prior to the focus group session. Seven

focus groups were conducted at the ASCoR research laboratory in Amsterdam in a

time-period of one month. Sessions lasted between 1.5 and two hours, and participants were

rewarded with an incentive of a 15€ redeem card from the online shop bol.com.

In total, thirty-five adolescents took part in the focus groups. All participants were

between eleven and fifteen years old (M = 12.38 years), spoke Dutch, and lived in or close to

Amsterdam in the Netherlands. Most of the participants were boys (n = 30); only five girls

took part in the study. Participants were appointed to mixed-gender groups based on their

age. There were group sessions for younger adolescents, ages eleven and twelve (defined as

‘tweens’; n = 19); and groups for older adolescents between the ages of thirteen to fifteen

(defined as ‘teens’; n = 16). This division was based on the pragmatic idea of making

participants feel as comfortable as possible by being paired with peers of their own age

group. The sessions were audio and video-recorded to enable transcription and analysis of

verbal and physical communication between the participants and the moderator (Broaders &

Goldin-Meadow, 2010). After seven focus groups, the point of data saturation occurred (see

methodological memo in appendix B).

Procedures & Measurement.

Before the start of the session, we collected the signed

informed consent-forms of participants and parents (see appendix C). Participants were

provided with snacks and drinks, and strategically seated to spread participants who knew or

did not knew each other, as well as female and male participants evenly along the discussion

table (Krueger & Casey, 2000). All sessions were moderated by a 24-year old female

researcher (in two sessions, an additional male moderator was present). Both moderators

were instructed to not only stimulate the sharing of individual, pre-existing opinions of

participants, but also the meaning-making interaction between participants in the focus group

sessions (Belzile & Öberg, 2012). In the beginning, the moderator first laid out the aim and

rules of the discussion, and showed the official Minecraft trailer to the group to prepare the

participants to talk about the game. All participants were provided with a nametag to simplify

group discussion. After a general introduction, the moderator explained the first part of the

session: The “card-game”.

In this card-game assignment, participants were asked to choose their top five

motivations of playing Minecraft from the Reiss motivation profile with its sixteen items

(RMP; Canossa et al., 2013; Reiss, 2004; see appendix D for cards with motivations). Reiss’

hermeneutic grid defines all motivations as basic desires that drive human behavior (Canossa

et al., 2013). After choosing the cards with their top five motivations, participants ranked

them in importance. Then, as a group, they discussed their motivations and arrived at the top

five motivations for the entire group (Kitzinger, 1995). Finally, one representative of the

participants was asked to present the five gaming motivations the group had chosen. This first

part of the session took approximately one hour and was followed by a short break of five

minutes.

Following the break, participants were shown five photos of situations that relate to

Minecraft: Three positive (learning with Minecraft, playing together, making friends), and

two negative (gaming addiction, problems with parents; see appendix E for photos).

Participants were asked to share their first associations and ideas or experiences with the

depicted situations. For example, participants might describe personal experiences of fighting

with their parents about time limitations for gaming, or gaming together with classmates

during a school break. The photo interview was considered a helpful tool to trigger focus

group participants to share and discuss their personal views and/or experiences with a topic

(Vila, 2013).

Finally, the moderator summarized the session and asked participants whether they

had anything to add that was not discussed yet. Summarizing and debriefing helped to

emphasize the main topics that were discussed, and thereby avoid later misinterpretation in

the phase of analysis (Krueger & Casey, 2000). Additionally, the casual atmosphere that

occured in the informal debriefing phase offered participants the chance to add more sensitive

or controversial ideas they were hesitant to mention during the official session. In the end,

participants were thanked for their participation and provided the gift voucher.

Analytic Approach.

The video-recordings were analyzed after each session in an

iterative process of transcribing, coding, and peer discussion to theorize about new concepts

and decide whether additional sessions are expected to add new insights (Medved, Ryan, &

Okimoto, 2016; see appendix F for transcript and appendix G for analysis memos). In line

with RQ1 and RQ2, the analysis was aimed at mapping the variation of adolescents’

motivations to play Minecraft and linking them to their gender. Interestingly, during the

analysis of the first focus groups, a second main theme emerged very clearly from the data:

Participants’ age. The previously more practically inclined division of participants into two

groups (tweens and teens) revealed that children in both age groups reported strikingly

different Minecraft motivations or described a change in their motivation as they grew older.

We found this somewhat unexpected discovery to be consistent with theory on pubertal

development suggesting that children from around twelve years onwards differ significantly

from younger children, likely a result of their cognitive development (Piaget, 2000). Thus,

participants’ age from there onwards was included in the analysis, and reported in the

findings. For more detailed information about the method of qualitative analysis, please see

the methodological and analysis memos (see appendix B and G respectively). For a reflection

on the methodology, please see the reflective memo (see appendix H).

Study 1 Results

Overall Motivations (RQ1).

Previous literature regarding Minecraft mainly specified

the game’s social, exciting, educational, and creative gaming environment. Moreover, the

game is often described as limitless, safe, customizable, and entertaining. The focus group

sessions revealed that adolescents confirm this description of the game, noting that the game

is limitless, entertaining, creative, social, educational, safe, customizable, and exciting. Given

these attributes, it is not surprising that – when it comes to motivations for play (RQ1) – the

most popular overall motivations were entertainment, excitement, and social motives. Indeed,

the most popular RMP-motivations during the card-game were also linked to these three

concepts (see appendix I for classification of RMP-motivations). For example, participants

often picked social contact (classified as social motive), curiosity (classified as

entertainment-motive), and power (classified as excitement-motive) during the card-game. That said, the

specific motivations did vary by gender and by age (see appendix J for concept-indicator

model of results).

Minecraft Motivations and Gender (RQ2).

Overall, most participants concurred that

Minecraft is enjoyable for both girls and boys equally, but that girls and boys in fact have

different motives and preferences for playing the game. For example, one participant (male,

13 years) noted that he thinks “gaming in general is more for boys than for girls”. Another

participant (male, 13 years) stated that he thinks “there are little differences anymore, but in

human evolution ‘girl and boy things’ were invented, and some still think it is weird to do

things that are meant for the other gender”. Similarly, one of the female participants (11

years) mentioned that most of the girls in her class “don’t even know the game”, and another

girl (11 years) said that most of the girls in her class are “only busy with Snapchat,

Instagram, and so on”, and do not like to play Minecraft as much as she does. Nevertheless,

all girls who participated in the focus groups stated they greatly enjoy playing the game,

although some differences in how girls and boys play the game were evident.

The variation in how girls and boys play Minecraft appeared very clearly in the quotes

of a 13-year old girl who mentioned she “usually build[s] houses and farms in creative mode”

alone and a 13-year old boy who explained he always “builds cannons for his team on an

online multiplayer survival server”. All participants also stated they explicitly choose the

female or male version of the game character (i.e., Steve/ Alex), in accordance with their own

gender. Even though this is a very simplistic generalization of how girls and boys play

Minecraft, the discussions in the focus groups implied that most boys indeed like to play in

survival mode, either offline alone, or on online servers in groups. For example, some boys

mentioned the online multi-player server Factions, where players fight each other in groups

to gain power over the map (Gamepedia, 2016). On the contrary, female participants mostly

stated they liked to first build in single-player creative mode, and then care for and revisit

their own, or friends’ farms, villages, or worlds. Some other girls mentioned that if they play

online, they choose more peaceful minigames like Maze Runner, or creative building-games

like Build It that are offered on specific servers. Thus, addressing RQ2, boys generally

reported more exciting, thrill-seeking, and competitive motivations to play Minecraft while

girls reported more peaceful, care-giving, and creative motives. Based on these implications,

all RMP-motivations were categorized into more peaceful and care-giving on the one hand

and more thrill-seeking and competitive motives on the other hand (see appendix K for the

categorization of all RMP-motivations). Corresponding with this, most girls chose more

peaceful, care-giving RMP-motivations such as curiosity, order, and independence during the

card-game, whereas boys selected more thrill-seeking, competitive motivations such as

power, vengeance, and status.

Despite the apparent variation by gender, some very important similarities why both

girls and boys play the game were found: As noted before, they all mentioned they play the

game to be entertained and because it is exciting. For example, participants mentioned

selecting survival mode to release tension after a long school day, whereas others reported

playing creative mode to calm down after playing a thrilling shooting game. In line with this,

both girls and boys reported modifying the gaming mode and difficulty based on their own

experience and current mood – noting they like they game to be exciting and/or inspiring, but

not too challenging. In fact, almost all participants mentioned that the aspect they liked most

about Minecraft is the possibility to adjust the way of playing it to one’s specific needs and

preferences at certain times. The ‘sweet spot’ between boredom and anxiety is well-known to

gaming experts, and is described in flow theory (Csikszentmihalyi & Csikszentmihalyi, 1992)

as well as by predictions of the moderate discrepancy hypothesis (Valkenburg & Vroone,

2004). Finally, participants also often mentioned they liked having full control over

everything in Minecraft, in contrast to their real, often chaotic lives that are very much

structured and controlled by teachers or parents. For example, they mentioned enjoying

“diving into” the fantastic worlds in Minecraft’s creative mode where they can focus on

independently building whatever they imagine. And lastly, the social aspects of the game

were also greatly appreciated by both female and male participants equally. For example, one

participant (male, 12 years) stated that “gaming online with friends – it’s the best”, and a

female participant (11 years) mentioned she likes to play online on servers with her friends,

too.

Age

. As previously mentioned, the division of participants into the two age groups of

tweens versus teens resulted in some unexpected, yet striking results. In general, most of the

teens were less enthusiastic about the game than the tweens. It was repeatedly mentioned that

participants had less free time to play the game when they started going to high school. For

example, one boy (13 years) said that younger kids in elementary school probably play

Minecraft more often since “they have nothing else to do”. Moreover, three participants (13,

14 and 15 years) mentioned that they became bored of Minecraft after they have played for

about four years, and started playing other games instead (e.g., Call of Duty and GTA).

Another boy (14 years) sarcastically mentioned that “it used to be cool to play Minecraft” in

elementary school, implying that it is ‘not cool’ anymore in middle school. On this more

critical note, one participant (male, 13 years) even said that he thinks “Minecraft is a little

nerdy”, whereas another boy (13 years) said that his classmates who still play Minecraft are

“a bit more childish” than the group who plays other games like GTA. Other participants

explained that “their interests simply switched” (male, 13 and 14 years old), or that they are

“more interested in girls now” instead (male, 13 years). Overall, the implication that teenage

participants in general were less enthusiastic about Minecraft than tweens was substantiated

by one of the younger participants who noted that some of his older friends “became the

biggest ‘tough doers’ one of a sudden”, and do not like to join him to play Minecraft anymore

(male, 11 years). Nevertheless, several of the teenage participants still enjoyed playing

Minecraft with their friends on online servers; One even mentioned that “Minecraft will

always have a place in his life” (male, 13 years).

Teenage participants also seemed to differ from tweens regarding the ways in which

they played Minecraft. For example, in contrast to tweens, most teenagers reported joining

Minecraft clans online, where they would fight against other gamers. Tweens on the other

hand most often reported playing offline in creative mode, where they are safe from

Minecraft monsters or other gamers. Thus, it seems that teenagers in general prefer the more

‘risky’ components of Minecraft (e.g., fighting in clans online), whereas tweens prefer the

‘safer’ modes of the game (e.g., building in creative mode).

Moreover, some participants noted they started playing the Minecraft on iPads,

tablets, or smartphones, and then switched to computers or gaming consoles later. In fact,

almost all tweens reported playing on smartphones or tablets, whereas most of the teens were

playing the more advanced version for computers, or consoles. Looking back to playing on a

tablet or smartphone, some teens mentioned the pocket edition for smartphones or tables is a

more basic way to play Minecraft. For example, a boy (14 years) mentioned that he considers

playing on a tablet or smartphone a “lower kind of gaming”. He, and many other participants,

considered it to be typical behavior for Minecraft players to start on a smartphone or tablet

and then switch to a computer or console once they become more experienced with the game.

In sum, this suggests that tweens prefer more basic and safe Minecraft-play, whereas teens

favor more advanced and risky play.

Study 1 Discussion

Given the unique popularity of Minecraft among both boys and girls, the first aim of

Study 1 was to understand what motives the game fulfills and the extent to which these

motivations are similar or different by gender. Overall, results show that children in general

like playing Minecraft because it is entertaining, exciting, and offers a social platform.

Moreover, Minecraft – by virtue of its different modes of play – is able to fulfill a variety of

motivations which do in fact differ by gender. Indeed, even though girls and boys seem to

equally like the game for its exciting, entertaining, and social aspects, girls more often

reported to play the game due to its peaceful, care-giving, and creative features, whereas boys

focused on more exciting, thrill-seeking, and competitive gaming motivations. This finding is

in line with existing literature on sex-differences in games that children play, which shows

that boys more often choose games that prepare them for leading societal roles while girls

more often choose games that prepare them for more care-giving social roles (Lever, 1998).

Thus, while girls and boys both play Minecraft to be entertained, excited, and for social

reasons, these motivations are fulfilled through different gaming attributes (i.e., boys select

more competitive and thrill-seeking aspects of Minecraft while girls opt for more peaceful,

care-giving attributes of the game). Additionally, the different motivations also lead to

preference for different gaming modes among girls and boys: Girls more often choose

creative and single-player mode, whereas boys prefer survival and multi-player Minecraft

play.

Beyond gender, the age-division of the focus groups allowed for an exploration of

whether age influences children’s motivation of playing Minecraft. In general, it is known

that age is among one of the best predictors of media use – and the results of Study 1 confirm

that age also influences Minecraft-play. In particular, it seems that the onset of puberty is a

transition point in the game’s appeal. Teens in general were less enthusiastic about Minecraft,

and reported different play style (i.e., more advanced and risky gameplay), compared to

tweens (i.e., more basic and safe play). Even though these findings were not a priori

anticipated, they are in line with existing literature suggesting that after entering puberty,

adolescents are particularly interested in games which allow them to overcome challenges,

obtain control, explore, interact socially, and experience physiological arousal (Valkenburg &

Piotrowski, 2017).

These age-related findings also more generally suggest that it is the customizability of

the game that helps, in part, to explain its appeal. In line with moderate discrepancy theory

and flow theory (McCall & McGhee, 1977; Valkenburg & Vroone, 2004), the game is able to

provide players with content that challenges them slightly more than they are used to, but not

enough to demotivate them. Following this logic, it is not surprising that all participants

reported adjusting gameplay to their preferences and needs at specific moments. The game’s

elements of personalization (e.g., different gaming modes, online/ offline play, etc.) seem to

increase gamers’ overall motivation of playing it, as there is almost always a way of playing

it that fits their circumstances and needs (e.g., connected to gender or age). Thus, supporting

predictions of selective exposure and uses and gratifications theory, and corresponding with

best practices in game design as predicted by moderate discrepancy theory and flow theory, it

seems that the high level of customizability in Minecraft may be one of the explanations

behind the game’s great popularity among both genders and across ages.

Study 2

Study 1 is the first of its kind to provide insight into adolescents’ motivations for

Minecraft play. The use of focus groups provided rich detail that allowed not only for the

exploration of gender differences, but also enabled the unexpected (but theoretically logical)

findings for age differences as well. However, the limited number of females that

participated in Study 1 is a limitation of this work, and – as with other qualitative scholarship

– the focus group methodology brings with it the challenges of subjective interpretations

since researchers are constructors of meaning (Charmaz, 2006; Glaser, 2002; see reflection

memo in appendix H). Study 2 was designed to complement Study 1, whereby the limitations

of Study 1 could be addressed via a quantitative research design (i.e., cross-sectional survey)

with adolescent males and females. In particular, Study 2 aimed at confirming the most

prevalent overall motivations of adolescents to play Minecraft that were found in Study 1

(i.e., entertaining, exciting, social), as well as provide validation for the focus group findings

that gender (i.e., girls’ more peaceful, care-giving motivations, and preference for

single-player and creative mode versus boys’ more thrill-seeking, competitive motives and

preference for online and multi-player mode) and age influence adolescents’ motivations of

playing Minecraft (i.e., tweens’ basic and safe play preference versus teens’ more advanced

and risky preferences). As such, in line with Study 1 findings, the following hypotheses were

investigated:

Hypothesis 1:

Adolescents most prevalent motivations to play Minecraft are due to its

exciting, entertaining, and social aspects.

Hypothesis 2A:

Adolescents’ motivations to play Minecraft are moderated by gender

such that (a) girls express more peaceful, care-giving motives for playing Minecraft, while

(b) boys express more thrill-seeking, competitive gaming motivations.

Hypothesis 2B:

Adolescents’ style of Minecraft-play is moderated by gender such

that (a) girls prefer creative and single-player mode whereas (b) boys prefer survival and

multi-player mode.

Hypothesis 3

: Adolescents’ style of Minecraft-play is moderated by age such that (a)

tweens prefer the more basic, safer components of Minecraft, while (b) teens prefer the more

advanced, riskier components of Minecraft.

Study 2 Method

Design.

To validate and extend the qualitative findings of Study 1 with a quantitative

design, an online survey using the software Qualtrics was launched in the Netherlands over a

23-day period. The survey included an informed consent form, questions about children’s

gaming preferences (i.e., preferred Minecraft-mode, devices, online/ offline, single or

multi-player), their overall motivations to play Minecraft (RMP), more specific motivations that are

linked to the game (based on Yee, 2006), and demographic questions (see appendix L for

complete survey). At the end, respondents could leave their email address to enter the lottery

for the main prize (Minecraft-workshop at the main office of the Microsoft Corporation in

Amsterdam and two Minecraft-books) or one of four gift-vouchers (10€ value on bol.com).

On average, participants completed the survey in approximately fifteen minutes.

Sample

. Just as in Study 1, adolescents in Study 2 were between eleven and fifteen

years old. Again, respondents aged eleven and twelve were defined as tweens, and

respondents from thirteen to fifteen years as teens. Logically, respondents had to know and

play Minecraft, but it did not matter whether they were more or less experienced Minecraft

players. As the survey was composed in Dutch, all respondents were required to speak Dutch.

The study was promoted by the researchers on Twitter, Facebook, and email – allowing

children from all over the Netherlands to participate (see appendix M for examples of online

recruitment). However, recruitment mostly took place offline, at schools of all educational

levels, sport clubs and events, and at popular shopping streets in Amsterdam. When

adolescents showed interest in participating, they were presented with an informational flyer

and informed consent form for their parents (see appendix N). When parents returned the

signed form, they were provided with a personalized link to the survey to pass on to their

children. Respondents who were recruited offline were presented with the small reward of a

key-chain.

After the data collection-period, a total of 219 adolescents subscribed to take part in

the survey by handing in consent forms. However, fifty-seven respondents who originally

signed up for the study did not finish the survey. The data of respondents who did not answer

all questions, were too young or too old (younger than eleven or older than fifteen), or had

never played Minecraft, was dismissed from the dataset, resulting in a total of 155 survey

responses. Forty-nine of the respondents were female (31.6%) and 106 male (68.4%). The

average age was 12.01 years (N = 155; SD = 1.154), with 110 tweens (71%) and forty-five

teens (29%). Approximately one-third of the respondents lived in and around Amsterdam; the

rest of the respondents came from all over the Netherlands. Concerning their level of

education, 60.6% (n = 94) of respondents visited elementary school, compared to 18.7% (n =

29) children from the highest level of high school education (i.e., the Dutch VWO or

gymnasium), 9.0% (n = 14) of each, the lowest and mediate levels of high school education

(i.e., the Dutch VMBO and HAVO), and four children were enrolled in special education.

Procedures & Measurement.

The personalized link to the survey could be opened

on any smartphone, tablet, or laptop. After giving their consent, gender and age, respondents

were asked if they had ever played, or still played Minecraft. Participants who were younger

than eleven, older than fifteen, or had never played the game, were thanked and directly

presented with the debriefing statement.

General Minecraft Motivations: RMP.

Replicating the motivation-assessment in

Study 1 (i.e., the card-game), Study 2 included the RMP together with short explanations of

each of the sixteen motivations (Canossa et al., 2013; see appendix L) in order to investigate

H1 and H2A. The RMP was used as a tool to assess children’s general gaming motivations

regarding Minecraft as it focuses on all basic motivations that drive human behavior (Reiss,

2004).

Participants were first asked to choose their top five motivations, and subsequently

rank their chosen motivations in order of perceived importance.

To analyze H1, based on the classification in Study 1, the RMP-motivations of

curiosity, saving, and independence were considered specific entertainment-motives; while

power, vengeance and status were considered excitement-motives; and social contact,

the categorization of RMP-motives in Study 1 into more peaceful and care-giving versus

more thrill-seeking and competitive motivations from Study 1 was used (see appendix K).

Specific Minecraft Motivations: Yee’s (2006) Online Gaming Motivations.

As

mentioned before, the RMP is an appropriate tool to assess general motivations for human

behavior (Reiss, 2004). However, it does not specifically relate to components of Minecraft,

and some of the motives in Reiss’(2004) inventory could not specifically be classified as

entertainment, excitement, or social motives in Study 1(see unclassified motivations in

appendix I). For example, finding that adolescents’ Minecraft play might be motivated by

idealism (i.e., an unclassified RMP-motivation) would not specifically indicate to which

elements of the game they are drawn, and whether this would be inspired by entertainment,

social, or excitement-motives - or maybe even different, not yet discovered motivations.

Thus, in addition to the general motivations of the RMP, Study 2 used Yee’s (2006)

assessment of online-gaming motivations, which allowed for a Minecraft-specific adaption -

and therefore a more detailed investigation of adolescents’ overall and gender-related

motivations to play Minecraft. For example, one question was: “How much do you enjoy

exploring the Minecraft-world just for the sake of exploring it?” – reflecting the specific

enjoyment of discovery elements (i.e., an entertainment motive) – while the RMP might only

have indicated the very general motivation of curiosity (Yee, 2006).

Since the scale uses questions that are very specific – and might therefore have

directed participants of a focus group into predefined patterns of looking at their motivations,

already using Yee’s (2006) items in Study 1 was considered problematic. However, using the

inventory to validate findings (H1, H2A) that emerged in Study 1 is appropriate, since

findings suggest that children’s Minecraft gaming motivations are generally in line with

Yee’s (2006) categorization: In Yee’s (2006) study, the 39-items were grouped into ten

motivation-subcomponents that were further categorized into the three overarching

motivations Achievement (i.e. subcomponents Advancement, Mechanics, and Competition),

Social (i.e., subcomponents Socializing, Relationship, Teamwork), and Immersion (i.e.,

subcomponents Discovery, Role-Playing, Customization, and Escapism). Comparing this

categorization to Study 1 findings, the Minecraft motivations of excitement and entertainment

are located within Yee’s (2006) components of Achievement and Immersion, while Yee’s

Social component corresponds with social motives found in Study 1. Thus, all 39-items were

translated into Dutch and adapted to more comprehensible language for adolescents of the

studied age-group (see appendices L and O for all 39-items of the adapted Yee-scale).

Minecraft Style of Play.

To assess preferred style of Minecraft play (H2B, H3),

respondents were asked whether they preferred playing online (e.g., on servers), offline, or

both equally. Next, they were asked about their preference for single or multi-player mode,

and which device they most often play on (e.g., smartphone, tablet/ iPad, computer/ laptop,

gaming consoles). Based on the varying complexity of the game for different devices (as

discussed in Study 1), playing on tablets or smartphones, or playing offline was

operationalized as basic play, whereas playing on computers or consoles, or playing online

was operationalized as more advanced play. Moreover, also based on Study 1, creative mode

was defined as safer play, whereas survival mode was considered a riskier gaming mode.

Demographic Questions.

Respondents were asked their level of education,

hometown, and nationality. These variables served as control variables in all analyses.

Study 2 Results

Overall Minecraft Motivation (H1).

Hypothesis 1 predicts that adolescents’ primary

motivations for Minecraft-play are the desire for excitement, entertainment, and social

contact. Working with the RMP ranking-data, we find that participant’s overall top five

motivations for playing Minecraft were curiosity, tranquility, social contact, saving, and

independence (see table 1). Finally, order was ranked sixth, with an almost equal average

score as independence (see table 1).

Table 1

Respondents’ top six RMP-motivations, sorted by ranking

RMP Motivation

Means (SD)

Frequency

1. Curiosity

2.39 (2.09)

102

2. Tranquility

1.59 (1.91)

76

3. Social Contact

1.57 (2.00)

71

4. Saving

1.35 (1.78)

69

5. Independence

1.33 (1.77)

68

6. Order

1.32 (1.71)

68

As categorized in Study 1, curiosity, saving, and independence all seem to reflect

entertainment-motives – as they indicate the desire to explore the Minecraft-world (curiosity),

save different materials or treasures (saving), and make independent gaming-decisions

(independence; see appendix I for classification of RMP-motivations). Thus, these

motivations provide support that adolescents primarily play Minecraft to be entertained.

Moreover, as used in Study 1, the RMP-motive of social contact reflects social gaming

motivations, which again supports hypothesis 1 in that adolescents play Minecraft for social

reasons (see appendix I). Interestingly, however, tranquility and order both present

unexpected findings, since they did not emerge as very popular gaming-motivations in Study

1 and were therefore not yet classified as specific Minecraft motivations. Even stronger -

based on Study 1, more excitement-related motives were expected (e.g., RMP-motivations of

power, vengeance, or status; see appendix I). Thus, hypothesis 1 received only partial

support: While adolescents are indeed motivated to play Minecraft for entertainment and

social reasons, Study 2 suggests that adolescents also seem to turn to Minecraft for its

calming and orderly attributes.

To further test hypothesis 1, data from Yee’s (2006) motivation scale was also

analyzed. The benefit of this scale is that, compared to the RMP, it more directly reflects

Minecraft-play, and thereby allows for a more detailed analysis of adolescents’ motivations.

Exploratory factor analysis (PCA with varimax rotation) was first used to scale the 39-items,

following procedures described in Yee (2006). Kaiser’s Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling

adequacy was never lower than .74, while Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was significant in all

cases, p = .000. Ten subcomponents with eigenvalues greater than 1 and loadings greater

than .40 emerged (see table 2). For the most part, the resulting scales were identical to Yee

(2006) – with some exceptions. For example, some items that Yee (2006) previously

categorized as Advancement, could more accurately be described as Competition in the

current study (see appendix O for list of all items, factors, factor-loadings, and Cronbach’s

alphas). Even though most of the subcomponents had an acceptable Cronbach’s alpha of over

.60, some of the scales showed lower internal consistency (i.e., Mechanics with .58,

Independence with .50, and Customization with .54). Nevertheless, it was argued that since

the components present validated scales (Yee, 2006) – they could be taken into further

analysis in order to investigate overall trends. Following procedures described in Yee (2006),

the ten subcomponents were further reduced into three primary motivations, with higher

scores representing greater motivation (see table 2). Interestingly, Yee (2006) previously

found the overarching concepts of Advancement, Social, and Immersion. However, the

current Minecraft-specific adjustment of the items resulted in three overarching concepts

which may better be labeled Entertainment, Social, and Customizability (see table 2). This

categorization was based on the game-specific meaning of the items that grouped under a

factor (see table 2 for subscales and appendix O for all items). Together, the three factors

account for 60.74% of the variance, and had Cronbach’s alphas of .72 (Entertainment), .69

(Social), and .51 (Customizability). Even though the reliability of the

Customizability-measurement is moderate to low, it was also taken into further analysis to investigate overall

trends.

On average, respondents scored highest on the primary motivation of Entertainment

(M = 3.39; SD = .58), followed by Social motivations (M = 3.14; SD = .61), and

Customizability (M = 2.64; SD = .78; see table 2). Altogether, these findings provide

additional support for hypothesis 1 in that adolescents indeed seem to play Minecraft to be

entertained, and for social reasons. As depicted in Table 2, the entertainment-components of

Discovery and Independence, and social aspects of Teamwork and Advancement/ Social

Comparison were particularly meaningful for this audience.

Table 2

Exploratory Factor Analysis With Varimax Rotation of Yee’s (2006) Gaming Motivations

Component

Ent.

Soc.

Cus.

Mean (SD)

Discovery

(discovering new

locations, creatures, or materials)

.80

3.91 (.62)

Escapism

(escaping real world,

diving into fantasy-world)

.70

3.01 (.90)

Independence

(being strong,

independent single-player)

.67

3.67 (.76)

Mechanics

(knowing about rules

and possibilities of the game)

.51

.43

.49

2.95 (.83)

Teamwork

(playing with others,

helping others out)

.79

3.86 (.70)

Competition

(competing with/

winning against other players)

.79

3.21 (.95)

Relationship

(supporting other

gamers)

.41

.55

1.83 (.98)

Advancement/ Soc. Compar.

(aiming for higher ranks, better

materials)

.33

.55

3.65 (.77)

Customization

(matching game

character to roles)

.93

2.75 (1.11)

Role-Playing

(experimenting

with character, visiting cosplays)

.40

.57

2.53 (.76)

% of Variance

36.51%

14.07%

10.16%

Cronbach’s α

.72

.69

.51

Means on Primary

Components (SD)

3.39 (.58)

3.14 (.61)

2.64 (.78)

Note. For ease of reference, items are sorted using their factor loadings, excluding factor loadings less than .30.

Motivations by Gender (H2A)

Hypothesis 2A posited that girls would report more peaceful, care-giving motives for

playing Minecraft, while boys would report more thrill-seeking, or competitive motivations.

Based on the patterns and categorization from Study 1, this means that girls were expected to

identify the RMP-motives of curiosity, idealism, honor, tranquility, social contact, saving,

family, or order more often than boys; who were expected to more frequently rank

RMP-motivations of power, independence, status, eating, physical exercise, romance, acceptance,

or vengeance (see appendix K). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) models were used

to compare whether there were differences in the top five RMP-motivations by gender.

Despite differences in cell size, Levene’s test revealed no concerns associated with

homogeneity of variance (p

= .032; p

= .052; p

= .702; p

=

.538; p

= .349; p

= .659).

Results of one-way ANOVA show that none of the differences in girls’ and boys’

ranking of their top five RMP-motivations were statistically significant, suggesting that male

and female respondents did in fact not statistically differ regarding their general motivations

of playing Minecraft. As Table 3 shows, the top five RMP-selected motivations were nearly

identical across boys and girls, with girls ranking curiosity, social contact, tranquility,

independence, and saving and boys’ almost similarly ranking curiosity, tranquility, social

contact, saving, and order as their top five motivations. Thus, the evidence from the RMP

rejects Hypothesis 2A – in fact, both boys and girls showed mostly peaceful and care-giving

overall motivations of playing Minecraft (with the only exception of the more thrill-seeking

and competitive motivation of independence; see table 3).

Table 3

Respondents’ Top Six RMP-Motivations, Sorted by Overall Ranking, Grouped by Gender

RMP-Motivation Male Means (SD)

Female Means (SD) Gender Differences

1. Curiosity

2.30 (2.11)

2.59 (2.06)

F = .65; p = .423

2. Tranquility

1.58 (1.93)

1.61 (1.88)

F = .01; p = .934

3. Social Contact

1.54 (1.92)

1.65 (2.18)

F = .12; p = .739

4. Saving

1.41 (1.85)

1.22 (1.62)

F = .35; p = .556

5. Independence

1.25 (1.75)

1.49 (1.81)

F = .60; p = .442

6. Order

1.40 (1.73)

1.16 (1.65)

F = .63; p = .430

Note. a _{Levene’s test for homogeinity of variance in sample marginally significant, p = .032.} b _{did not appear in boys’ top five RMP motivations.}

c _{did not appear in girls’ top five RMP motivations.}

Although the general motivation-assessment of the RMP indicated no significant

gender differences, the more game-specific measurement based on Yee (2006) detected some

variation. Recall that hypothesis 2A posited that girls would express greater peaceful,

care-giving motivations (i.e., operationalized as the Entertainment-subscale of Discovery; and the

Social-subscales of Relationship and Teamwork on the Yee Motivation Inventory), while

boys were expected to express greater thrill-seeking, competitive motivations (i.e.,

operationalized as the Entertainment-subscale of Independence; and the Social-subscale of

Advancement, Competition on the Yee Motivation Inventory). While no difference based on

gender was found for the Entertainment-subscale of Discovery, the Entertainment-subscale of

Independence, the Social-subscales of Relationship, or the Social-subscale of Advancement,

results did show that that male respondents reported statistically significantly higher scores

on the Social components of Teamwork (M = 4.00; SD = .60; n = 106; girls: M = 3.55; SD =

.79; n = 49; F(1,153) = 15.82, p = .000, 95% CI [- .69, - .24]) and Competition (M = 3.41;

SD = .89; n = 106; girls: M = 2.77; SD = .95; n = 49; F(1,153) = 16.39, p = .000, 95% CI [-

Table 4

Gender Differences on Subcomponents of the Primary Component ‘Social’

Factor Male Means (SD)

Female Means (SD) Gender Differences

Teamwork

4.00 (.60)

3.55 (.80)

F = 15.82; p = .000

Competition

3.41 (.89)

2.77 (.95)

F = 16.39; p = .000

Relationship

1.87 (.92)

1.75 (1.11)

F = .56; p = .457

Adv./ Soc. Comp.

3.72 (.68)

3.48 (.92)

F = 3.27; p = .073

Note. a _{Levene’s test for homogeneity of variance in sample significant, p = .013.} b _{significant difference between male and female participants.}

c _{Levene’s test for homogeneity of variance in sample significant, p = .009.}

Thus, in line with hypothesis 2A, boys indeed reported more competitive gaming

motivations than girls. However, contrary to expectations of hypothesis 2A, boys were also

found to score higher on Teamwork, a motivation that was expected to be more important to

girls - as it was categorized as a more care-giving and peaceful motive. That said, it is

important to acknowledge the assumption of homogeneity of variance for the Teamwork

subcomponent was violated, and as such, results for this subcomponent should be treated

with careful consideration (Levene's F(1,153) = 6.28, p = .013).

Taking together the findings of the RMP and Yee’s (2006) adapted scale, there is

limited support for hypothesis 2A. While respondents did not significantly differ by gender in

their general RMP-motives for playing Minecraft, findings of Yee’s (2006) more nuanced

motivation-scale suggests that boys prefer the more competitive and teamwork aspects of

Minecraft compared to girls.

Style of Minecraft Play by Gender (H2B)

Results for hypothesis 2B show that - as expected - boys significantly more often

favor survival mode (70.5%), compared to girls (33.3%), who in turn prefer creative mode, χ

= 13.30, p = .000 (see table 5). Moreover, male respondents also significantly more often

reported playing in multi-player mode (87.7%), compared to girls (65.3%), who in turn

generally more often play in single-player mode, χ

_{= 10.81, p = .001 (see table 5). In sum,}

Study 2 findings support hypothesis 2B in that adolescents’ preferences for specific

Minecraft-modes are moderated by gender. Girls prefer creative and single-player mode,

whereas boys favor survival and multi-player mode.

Table 5

Respondents’ Gaming Preferences, Sorted by Gender

% Boys

% Girls

% Total

Gender Differences

Creative Mode

29.5%

66.7%

40.5%

Survival Mode

70.5%

33.3%

59.5%

χ

= 13.30; p = .000

Single-Player

12.3%

34.7%

19.4%

Multi-Player

87.7%

65.3%

80.6%

χ

= 10.81; p = .001

Note. a _{statistically significant difference.}

Style of Minecraft Play by Age (H3)

Regarding age, hypothesis 3 posited that tweens prefer more basic, safer components,

while teens prefer more advanced, riskier components of Minecraft. As hypothesized, 38.5%

of all tweens reported a statistically significant preference for more basic play (i.e., playing

the pocket edition on smartphones or tablets), compared to 17.8% of all teens, χ

_{= 6.26, p =}

.012 (see table 6). Yet, contrary to expectations of hypothesis 3, tweens actually more often

played online (65.8%) compared to teens (48.6%) although these differences were not

statistically significant, χ

_{= 3.03, p = .082 (see table 6). Moreover, hypothesis 3 also}

expected that tweens prefer the safer creative mode (where they are protected from monsters),

compared to teens who were expected to prefer survival mode. While trends were in support

of this hypothesis (i.e., 46.2% of all tweens reported favoring creative mode, compared to

only 27.3% of tweens), the finding was also not statistically significant, χ

_{= 3.43, p = .064}

(see table 6).

Table 6

Respondents’ Gaming Preferences, Sorted by Age (tweens versus teens)

% Tweens

% Teens % Total

Age Differences

Basic

38.5%*

17.8%*

32.5%

Advanced

61.5%*

82.2%*

67.5%

χ

= 6.26; p = .012

Online

65.8%

48.6%

60.5%

Offline

34.2%

51.4%

39.5%

χ

= 3.03; p = .082

Creative Mode

46.2%

27.3%

40.5%

Survival Mode

53.8%

72.7%

59.9%

χ

= 3.43; p = .064

Note. a _{basic gameplay includes playing the pocket version on smartphones or tablets.} b _{advanced gameplay includes playing Minecraft on computers, laptops or gaming consoles.} c _{statistically significant difference}

Altogether, findings of Study 2 provide partial support to hypothesis 3. When it

comes to gaming device, tweens were found to prefer more basic play compared to teens -

although this difference did not translate to a preference for online or offline play.

Unexpectedly, tweens and teens also do not differ in their choice for safer or riskier Minecraft

play (i.e., creative or survival mode), although trends do suggest this pattern.

Study 2 Discussion

Study 2 was aimed at validating and extending Study 1 findings regarding

adolescents’ overall motives for playing Minecraft, as well as differences based on gender

and age. Following Study 1, it was expected that adolescents generally play Minecraft due to

its exciting, entertaining, and social aspects. Results of Study 2 provide some clarification to

these assumptions. In line with Study 1 findings and literature on media enjoyment,

adolescents were found to play Minecraft because it is entertaining (i.e., curiosity: Exploring

the Minecraft world; saving: Accumulating materials needed for building; Independence:

Making their own decisions), and because it offers a social platform (i.e., social contact:

Playing together with others; The New York Times, 2016; Vorderer, Klimmt, & Ritterfeld,

2004). Unexpectedly however, they were found to not primarily play Minecraft because of its

exciting features per se but rather because of its potential for providing order and tranquility.