What Will You Choose: Leap Through the Window or Fight? How Entertaining Is Interactive Storytelling and Why?
Ana Maria Sedlețchi 11120029 Master’s Thesis
Graduate School of Communication Master’s programme Communication Science
Susanne Baumgartner 31.01.2019
Abstract
Interactive storytelling is potentially a very promising new media genre, that can be more entertaining than traditional cinematographic offerings. Many scholars have previously assumed that interactive storytelling can expand the present boundaries of traditional
cinematography towards a more enjoyable form of digital entertainment, however not many studies have been conducted to demonstrate the effects. Hence, it is important to fill in the research gaps that concern the topic of interactive storytelling. This study attempted to provide an answer on how exactly interactive storytelling affects users’ entertainment experience. An experiment was conducted on a sample of 60 young adults, mostly based in the Netherlands. This study has revealed a wide range of dimensions that interactive
storytelling can facilitate. The results showed that interactive storytelling increases the sub-constructs of entertainment experience, namely: hedonic entertainment, evaluation of media offering, empathy and suspense. Immersion proved to mediate the effect, more specifically interactive storytelling makes viewers feel more immersed into the narrative, which then results in higher entertainment experience. Curiosity proved to only partially mediate the effect, while genre preference proved to be non-significant as a moderator of the effect. This research offers important perspectives regarding the effects of interactive storytelling on entertainment experience.
Keywords: interactive storytelling, entertainment experience, immersion, quantitative study, experiment
What Will You Choose: Leap Through the Window or Fight? How Entertaining Is Interactive Storytelling and Why?
Although the interactive nature of video games has made them a very popular form of entertainment (Grodal, 2000), interactive features have not been used as frequently in narratives other than games. Nevertheless, interactive features in narratives have been explored by researchers and content creators to engage their audiences in new ways (Caires, 2007). Integrating interactive features in narratives like books or movies provides the audience with an intensity of user
participation, freedom of choice, and depth of immersion (Ryan, 2009). These characteristics are important and may lead to higher enjoyment of the narrative content. An example in the literature is the series of books for children, where depending on the choice you make, you skip to a specific page to learn the outcome. Similarly, there are some examples of less popular movies, which
resemble episodic video-games, that are good examples of attempts to introduce interactive features in media content beyond video-games.
New technological developments make interactivity in narratives more accessible and thus more common (El-Nasr, 2012). One recent and strong example is the popular “Black Mirror: Bandersnatch”, a hyper-experimental interactive movie produced by Netflix (Kilic, 2019). Bandersnatch is an interactive movie, in which at various points viewers can decide on the main character’s actions by choosing one of two options. The options appear on the screen whenever a choice needs to be made. The viewer then has a limited time to decide. If a choice is not made within 30 seconds, the movie will continue with a randomly chosen option. Each option leads to a different branch of story development. The technical design of the movie is impressive, since the software was developed specifically to ensure that users can see all the different story endings without experiencing too much repetition. Netflix used the same software principle when designing a whole season of the interactive series “You vs. Wild” featuring Bear Grylls.
Despite these recent successes, it remains largely unknown how viewers react to interactive storytelling. Previous research shows multiple attempts of creating interactive algorithms,
developing technological interactive features, but not exactly researching how these technological features affect the entertainment experience or any sorts of audiences’ evaluations (El-Nasr, 2012; Murtagh, 2011). The research gap regarding the effect of interactive storytelling on entertainment experience signals a dire need to contribute with new research. New theorizing and new models need to be built and tested to help explain how the processes of interactivity influence user experiences (Vorderer, 2000). This is particularly important since due to technological
developments, interactive storytelling might become more wide-spread, or even define the future of entertainment.
Based on the societal relevance of studying a new ambitious media genre, and the research gap around the concepts of interactive storytelling and entertainment experience, this leads to the formulation of the research question, namely:
RQ: How does interactive storytelling in movies affect users’ entertainment experience?
Entertainment experience in interactive storytelling
Scholars have studied the role and the experience of entertainment for a very long time and have come up with various definitions. Entertainment research is confronted with a large number of different demonstrations and uses of its definitions, motives and objectives (Klimmt, 2008). The traditional understanding of entertainment is that of a specific part of leisure that centers on the concept of emotions like happiness (Dyer, 2005). Sometimes it is referred to as a form of coping with reality, an activity that is most often characterized by different forms of pleasant actions (Vorderer, 2001). Also, Vorderer (2004) argues that enjoyment lies at the heart of entertainment, a pleasurable emotion that manifests itself in manifold forms. Other scholars define entertainment as any activity designed to delight and, to a smaller degree, enlighten through the exhibition of fortunes
and misfortunes of others, but also through the display of special skills by others (Zillman, 1994). Tan (2008) defines the entertainment experience as an episode of emotions in response to specific content. Similarly, Klimmt (2008) refers to entertainment as an elaborate phenomenon that is driven by various motives, that can refer to different media products, and is connected to complex responses to those media products. Overall, entertainment in a broad sense is conceptualized as a positive mood-like meta-emotion, which rises from the appreciation of primary positive emotions (Vorderer, 2009).
Vorderer (2001) argues that defining entertainment as a primarily positive experience helps understand why users seek entertainment intensively in the first place, since it is easily explained in the “desire to have a good time”. Hence, media consumers consciously select which entertainment content to view according to what they find worthy or gratifying (Vorderer, 2000). This view of traditional entertainment is supported by the Uses and Gratifications theory, which assumes that audiences consciously choose specific content to satisfy their needs and to achieve their goals (Katz, 1973). Thus, traditionally within the framework of Uses and Gratifications, entertainment audiences choose experiences that make them laugh, feel arousal, interest, empathy or keep them at the edge of their seats (Bartsch, 2010). Scholars describe entertainment in various constructs and concepts. For instance, Vorderer (2001) illustrates the concept of ‘Experience of entertainment’, in a study about the effects of interactivity on entertainment, in the sub-concepts of suspense, empathy, and
evaluation of the media offering. Comparably, Roth (2009), illustrated the entertainment building blocks in the context of interactive storytelling as curiosity, suspense, aesthetic pleasantness, self-enhancement and the feeling of flow. Similarly, in another study, 6 dimensions are provided to define the process of entertainment: psychological relaxation, fun, atmosphere, joy, change, and stimulation (Bosshart, 1998). The above studies point to a scholarly tendency to view entertainment in the context of positive emotions and reactions.
However, scholars started arguing that the traditional framework should be replaced by a newer extended two-factor model of entertainment (Vorderer, 2015). Scholars distinguish two different frameworks of entertainment motivations: eudaimonic and hedonic entertainment (Oliver, 2011). Eudaimonic motivations are related to exposure to sad, meaningful content, in pursuit of greater insight into the meaning of human existence (Wirth, 2012). This approach thus also aims to explain why people enjoy sad media content. Eudaimonic entertainment experiences are not further
examined in the current study, since empirically the ultimate outcome of entertainment remains to be that of enjoyment, the pursuit of pleasure and amusement. To this end, hedonic entertainment
emphasizes the positive valence of entertainment and is thought to accompany the vast majority of the typical forms of entertainment consumed by individuals on a day-to-day basis (Oliver, 2011). Bryant (2008) argues that entertainment offerings presented by virtually all mass media seem to be designed to provide immediate gratification of the diverse hedonic needs of modern media
consumers.
Most of the definitions provided by the before-mentioned scholars focus on positive emotions and enjoyment as reactions to some sort of stimuli. Based on previous literature, the following definition of entertainment experience is proposed and considered for this study: entertainment experience is a set of emotions triggered as appreciative, positive responses towards specific stimuli or content that audiences are being exposed to. The “set of emotions”, or the sub-constructs of
entertainment experience that are considered for this study are: hedonic entertainment (Oliver, 2011), evaluation of media offering, empathy and suspense (Vorderer, 2001; Vorderer, 2009). These sub-constructs are chosen specifically because they are consistent with previously mentioned studies describing entertainment as a scientific concept, but also because they are consistent with the various dimensions chosen by scholars for describing entertainment user experiences in the context of
Interactive storytelling and entertainment
Traditionally in cinematographic contexts, audiences are passive consumers of content, following linear narratives with unchangeable stories (Caires, 2007). That is all changing, more specifically it is interactive storytelling that has the potential to change the traditional way of watching movies. Scholars argue that in recent years, entertainment has heavily relied on the progress of interactive technologies (Hamana, 2011). Consequently, media in the cinematographic contexts is being reinvented and explores possible ways of renewals considering new interactive features (Caires, 2007). Interactive storytelling allows audiences to actively participate in the
narrative. Therefore, the viewers are not just a passive audience, they’re also narrators, players (Qin, 2009) or interactors (Caires, 2007). Interactive storytelling in this study refers to dynamically
generating a sequence of narrative events rather than following predefined branching points (de Lima, 2018). Interactive storytelling will also be referred to as interactive narratives in this study. The literature available on the subject is limited since interactivity in narrative medias such as movies is a relatively new, modern concept that recently appeared due to technological innovations (Roth, 2009). In the available studies, researchers hypothesized and qualitatively researched the possible concepts that can affect the entertainment experience (Vorderer, 2001). However, there are not many studies conducted that quantitatively tested the theories of possible audience evaluations or reported experiences as results of interactive storytelling (El-Nasr, 2013; Vorderer, 2001). Vorderer (2001) assumes that interactive storytelling can predict positive sentiments of the viewers and that it can enhance their entertainment experience, but it was not tested in the paper. Similarly, Roth (2009) assumes that interactive storytelling can facilitate user appreciation of media content, empathy, and suspense, which are concepts closely tied to entertainment experience (Knoller, 2009). In a pilot study focused on developing interactive features that change the narratives, scholars assume that the interactivity in movies has the potential to enhance audiences’ emotional reactions and experiences (Cohendet, 2017). In another study, the aim of which was to create a control system for interactive
narratives, scholars asked participants to evaluate the interactive content. As a result, 19 out of 20 respondents exposed to the interactive features thought it was fun and highly appreciated it (Hamana, 2011).
It is also relevant to examine previous studies about entertainment experience as a result of interactive narratives in video games since interactive storytelling relies on the same logic of interactive technological features. The most common form of interactive narratives in video games rely on the technique to dynamically generate the sequence of narrative events, following predefined branching points in dependence of the context (Lima, 2018), which is consistent with the definition of interactive storytelling. Qin (2010) argues that by participating in interactive mediums such as games, or in “the construction of experiences”, viewers have better experiences. Other scholars also suggest that interactivity or interactive features can “boost” entertainment or involvement (Bednall, 2012). Consistently to the argumentations of other scholars, Vorderer mentions that it is relevant to assume that viewers’ entertainment experiences are intensified by interactivity, basing his
observations on computer-game players, who “obviously do not simply enjoy a game by witnessing the development or unfolding of a story” (Vorderer, 2001). All these studies suggest that
entertainment can be increased and boosted by interactive features of a medium, or in other words interactive storytelling. Based on existing literature, the following is hypothesized:
H1: An interactive narrative leads to a higher entertainment experience (i.e., hedonic entertainment, evaluation of media offering, empathy and suspense), than a non-interactive narrative.
Various factors might explain why interactive storytelling leads to more entertainment, but in this study two factors are considered as being crucial in understanding the causal effects, namely immersion and curiosity. The following factors were chosen since they have been mentioned as important predictors of user experiences, entertainment or enjoyment by other scholars looking at the effects of interactive narratives (Green, 2017; Qin, 2009; Roth, 2009).
The mediating role of immersion
Immersion is particularly important in explaining the effects of interactive storytelling on entertainment since the concept is often linked to participatory mediums, such as video games that use interactive features for example (Qin, 2009). Some scholars argue that interactive narratives such as “games” or “entertainment” (in this context entertainment referring to visual media content such as movies) are the “perfect candidates” for predicting immersive experiences (Douglas, 2000). Several theories tend to provide an explanation for the feeling of immersion. For instance,
‘Transportation theory’ (Green, 2017) refers to the feeling that a media user can experience by being lost in the immersive world of a narrative. Transportation can occur when users interact with
communication channels, including text, audio, video, or a narrative account (Green, 2017). Similarly, the ‘Narrative comprehension’ theory (Buselle, 2009) is relevant to the context,
considering that it explains the process of the viewer locating himself within the mental model of the story.
Transportation and narrative comprehension focus primarily on the feeling of immersion (Green, 2004). Qin (2010) mentions definitions of immersion as “a feeling of being engaged deeply into a make-believe world” or “the mental processes involved in the game”. Many scholars have illustrated the effects of immersion, for instance, Buselle (2009) specifies that engaging deeply in narrative experiences results in greater enjoyment and greater effects on entertainment. Similarly, in another study the feeling of being transported into the narrative predicted the feeling of enjoyment (MacDorman, 2019). The above-mentioned studies suggest that immersion can have a direct effect on the feeling of entertainment and enjoyment.
On the contrary, other scholars argue that instead of providing a main causal effect, the feeling of immersion can amplify the effects of other significant concepts, like interactive narratives for instance. Particularly in one study, immersion was tested as a significant covariate and resulted in having a mediating effect on players’ evaluation of gaming experience (Hou, 2012). Comparably,
Vorderer (2001) observed the interactions of players with video-games and assumed that viewers’ entertainment experience can be intensified by interactivity added to traditional media (like movies) because media users become more involved in the narrative (Vorderer, 2001). As suggested by Green (2004), the feeling of being transported or immersed into a narrative may provide useful insights into understanding the enjoyment of participatory narratives, comparable to interactive storytelling in this case. These studies suggest a relationship between viewers’ immersion, interactive storytelling, and entertainment experience. Hence the following is hypothesized: H2: The effect of interactive storytelling on entertainment experience is mediated by
immersion, in that interactive storytelling leads to more immersion which in turn increases the entertainment experience.
The mediating role of curiosity
Curiosity is a common reaction for users of entertainment (Vorderer, 2009). Roth (2009) describes the process of curiosity as a feeling of uncertainty followed by increased psychological activation, which results in enjoyment and entertainment. Curiosity can occur in various conditions in the context of entertainment. In video-games for instance, users can be curious about trying different actions to explore the surroundings or to explore the storyline, or comparably to
cinematographic contexts, viewers can be curious about the narrative development. Similarly, Roth (2009) states that curiosity is important for interactive storytelling systems, specifically being curious about the storyline or the interactive features. Curious viewers of content ask themselves what will happen next, or what will a certain decision cause.
Various scholars described curiosity as a crucial part of the entertainment experience (Kohn, 1982; Schierman, 1985). For instance, Roth (2011) argues that curiosity is “one of the key viewers’ responses that reflect common patterns, which are likely to occur across different interactive
systems”. Wouters (2011) states that game elements such as interactive narratives evoke curiosity and result in more engagement and better experiences.
Comparably, scholars provide frameworks for explaining curiosity as a result of interactivity in games for instance (Malone, 1982). Other scholars similarly illustrate curiosity as a pleasant
concept, which firstly contributes to the media user’s overall appreciation, and secondly contributes to interactive storytelling systems (Roth, 2009). More specifically, Roth (2009) explains that
interactive features spark user’s curiosity in multiple dimensions: the story progress (“What will happen next?”), towards the interactive story progress (“What will happen if I decide this way?”), system response (“How will this agent respond if I start cursing?”) and the technological capacity of the system (“How will the system visualize my view into this tunnel?”). Consequently, Roth (2009) assumes that interactivity sparks the feeling of curiosity in users, which then results in greater enjoyment. Thus, it can be assumed that curiosity can play a mediating, explanatory role in the effect of interactive storytelling on entertainment.
Since the evidence shows that curiosity is closely tied to entertainment experience and interactive storytelling systems, the following hypothesis is proposed next to H1:
H3: The effect of interactive storytelling on entertainment experience is mediated by curiosity, in that interactive storytelling sparks more curiosity which in turn increases the entertainment experience.
The proposed mediators have a crucial and important role in explaining the causal relation of interactive storytelling on entertainment experience in the sub-constructs of hedonic entertainment, evaluation of media offering, empathy, and suspense. However, it would be relevant to consider concepts that can potentially enhance the relationship. Hence, an additional moderating concept is proposed for providing a deeper understanding of the nature of the relationship.
The moderation role of genre preference
In the case of video-games, narrative genres are often used as a way of defining the
conventions of the game world and to help players align their expectations with the logic of the world (Qin, 2009). Therefore, it ensures that users are entertained in the case that they enjoy the conventions, logics, and pace of that specific genre. Genre preference in this study refers to preferring specific genres, formats or specific items of content over others (Scharkow, 2015). Persons who prefer puzzles will have a better experience playing puzzles and logical games, compared to the situation when the same person will play an action video-game. In a study
conducted on ethnically diverse adolescents, preferences of storyline genre are argued to influence the state of entertainment of a video-game (Thompson, 2010). Comparably, in another study Christou (2014) demonstrated a strong relationship between player’s experience and liking or disliking the game genre, particularly respondents reported having a better experience when they played a game in the genre that they found appealing.
In the case of movie-related genres, scholars argue that genre-typical narratives are stylistic devices designed to elicit specific kinds of emotions (Bartsch, 2007). According to a television uses and gratifications study, viewers have conscious motivations to watch specific television programs based on their interactive needs, entertainment needs, and expectations (Rubin, 1983). Therefore, it can be assumed that viewers will have a better entertainment experience while watching the content of a genre that the person predominantly likes and fulfills his or her own needs and interests. These studies suggest that entertainment as a result of video-games and movies can be enhanced by genre preferences of the person watching.
Vorderer (2001) demonstrates that the degree to which respondents prefer suspenseful media offerings in general affects the relationship between interactivity and entertainment experience. More specifically, in the study it is stated that the genre preference plays a role in feeling empathy towards the protagonist, as well as for a positive evaluation of the movie as a result of interactivity.
Comparably, it was demonstrated in a qualitative study about interactive narratives that participants expressed not liking and not appreciating the interactive content due to “negative energy”, or because they didn’t like the genre of the content (El-Nasr, 2013). Since audiences can experience struggles and tension while watching tense and cruel content, this tension can be even more
enhanced in the context of participatory mediums with interactive features. Vorderer (2001) assumes the degree to which respondents enjoyed suspenseful genres is indicative of the entertainment
experience in the context of interactivity. Also, Vorderer (2001) states that interactive entertainment may, in fact, be more attractive than other entertainment if the “right audience” is addressed. In this case “right audience” can mean the audience with a predominant preference for the genre of the content on display.
The stimuli chosen for this study contains suspenseful, dramatic sequences of a drama/thriller movie with several dramatic scenes portraying violence, the main character struggling with mental problems and personal loss. In the experimental condition, the interactive medium encourages viewers to make decisions in difficult, dramatic moments. It is expected that viewers who prefer or don’t prefer drama as a media genre can have a different entertainment experience outcome from such interactive storytelling. Therefore, genre preference can positively or negatively enhance the relationship of interactivity on entertainment experience. Thus, the following hypothesis is
proposed:
H4: The effect of interactive storytelling on entertainment experience is moderated by genre preference. Interactive storytelling in movies will lead to a higher entertainment experience for viewers with a strong genre preference of the movie on display, and vice versa: interactive storytelling in movies will lead to a lower entertainment experience for viewers without a strong genre preference of the movie on display.
Conceptual Model
Based on literature, previous studies and the theoretical frameworks presented above, the following conceptual model is proposed:
Fig 1. Conceptual Model
Methods Design
In order to answer the research question, this study was designed as a quantitative study, specifically as a true experiment with a post-test design.
Participants
The sample of participants consists of a convenience sample. Friends, fellow master students, and colleagues were invited to take part in a study via social media direct messages, Instagram stories, emails, and face-to-face invitations. The recruitment process also happened via snowball sampling. Participants were informed that the experiment will take around 20 minutes to complete, that the study is about entertainment as a result of watching specific media content and participants were incentivized to participate with the possibility to win one of the three bol.com gift cards worth
20 euro. It was decided to focus on the sample of young adults of age 18-35 because young adults are heavy consumers of media products, and more likely to be early adopters of a new genre (Coyne, 2013).
In total 60 participants took part in the study. 60% reported themselves as females, 38.3% as males and 1.7% chose the ‘Other’ option. The age of participants varies in between 20 and 35 (M = 26.22, SD = 2.95). 30 participants were randomly assigned to the experimental condition and 30 participants were assigned to the control condition. Participants reported coming from 22 different countries, but predominantly they were from the Netherlands (n = 14), Moldova (n = 8), and Romania (n = 6). The highest education level achieved by respondents was reported to be Master’s degree in 46.7% of the cases (n = 28), followed by Bachelor’s degree in 38.3% of the cases (n = 23), High school diploma or equivalent in 11.7% of the cases (n = 7), and PhD or higher in 3.3% of the cases (n = 2).
Procedure
After accepting the invitation to participate in the study, respondents chose the date and location depending on their availability from either a meeting room in an office building or a classroom in a university campus. Each participant was randomly assigned to a condition using a number
randomizer (“List Randomizer”, 2019). After being assigned to one of the conditions, respondents received a brief introduction to the study. It was explained to the respondents that they will watch a movie sequence and they will answer questions in an online questionnaire about their experience. The time spent with each respondent varied between 15-25 minutes. After submitting the answers, all participants were debriefed about the real purpose of the study.
Stimuli
Interactive storytelling was manipulated by showing participants one of two different stimuli. The experimental condition stimulus was a sequence from the original interactive movie “Black Mirror: Bandersnatch” on Netflix. The sequence lasted from 7.52 to 10.20 minutes, depending on the
branch, and offered participants the chance to choose what the main character is going to do. See Figure 1 and Figure 2 in Appendix A for an overview of how the choices looked. In total,
participants had the opportunity to choose six to eight times and their decision led to 5 different branches. 56.67% of participants in the experimental group (n = 17) explored and ended up with the same branch, similar to the non-interactive condition stimulus.
The control condition stimulus was the same sequence from “Black Mirror: Bandersnatch” movie, but without any interactive features, therefore it was a traditional video where participants could not control the storyline and could not make any decisions. See Figure 3 and Figure 4 in Appendix A for the screenshots of the stimuli version, where the interactive storytelling feature is not available.
Measurements
For an overview of the scales used to measure the following variables check the questionnaire in Appendix B.
Independent variables.
Interactive storytelling. In this study, interactive storytelling was illustrated by two conditions: presence of interactivity in a movie sequence for the experimental condition, and lack of interactivity or in other words a traditional movie sequence for the control condition.
Dependent variables, sub-concepts of entertainment experience.
Hedonic entertainment: A 3-item scale proposed by Oliver et al (2011) is being used for
measuring hedonic entertainment, for the sake of providing deeper insight on the effect on enjoyment of the media piece (Oliver, 2011). Items included statements like ‘I felt well entertained watching the video’ and ‘It was fun watching the video’. Respondents rated their level of agreement or
disagreement to items on a 5-point Likert scale. An exploratory factor analysis indicated that the scale is unidimensional, explaining 64.04% of the variance. The scale demonstrated to be reliable (α=.86, M=3.12, SD=.88).
Evaluation of media offering. A 4-item ‘Evaluation of media offering’ scale is adapted from a game evaluation scale, relevant for this study because of its evaluation questions designed
specifically in the context of interactivity (Hou, 2012). Items include statements like ‘I enjoyed watching the movie’, or ‘I would recommend the movie to someone’. Respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement to the statements on a 5-point Likert Scale. An exploratory factor analysis demonstrated that the scale is unidimensional, explaining 51.60% of the variance. The scale proved to be reliable (α=.87, M=3.33, SD=.91).
Empathy. ‘Empathy’ is a 2-item scale, items of which were initially factors of a larger scale measuring immersion experience but loaded high in the factor analysis and formed the item of empathy (Jennett, 2008). Items include statements like ‘I felt that I empathized with the characters’. One item ‘I did not feel any emotional attachment to the movie’ was formulated negatively and therefore reverse coded for future analysis. Respondents had to rate their level of agreement to the statements on a 5-point Likert Scale. The mean score of the scale is 3.25 (M=3.25, SD=1.03).
Suspense. ‘Suspense’ is a 1-item scale proposed by Vorderer (Vorderer, 2001). In studies measuring suspense in the context of immersion, similar direct 1-item scales were used (Bryant, 1994). Respondents had to rate their level of agreement to the ‘Overall, the movie was suspenseful’ on a 5-point Likert Scale. The mean score of the scale is 4.15 (M=4.15, SD=.98).
Mediators.
Immersion. In the current study, ‘Immersion’ is measured by a 5-item scale, which were part of a larger 32-item construct (Jennett, 2008). The selection of the specific 5 items is justified by a shorter length of the study and applicability in the context of media offering being a movie. Two items ‘I found my mind wandering’ and ‘I felt consciously aware of my surroundings’ were reverse coded for further analyses. An exploratory factor analysis showed that the scale is unidimensional, explaining 50.18% of the variance. The scale demonstrated to be reliable (α=.78, M=3.16, SD=.78).
Curiosity. Originally a 6-item Curiosity factor in a study measuring player immersion in the computer game narrative, the items were adapted to the study to fit the context of watching a movie, rather than playing a game. For example, ‘Many events in the movie story are novel’ was adapted from ‘Many events in the game story are novel’. An item was excluded from the original scale, as it evaluated the curiosity in the context of interactivity and would not be relevant as a question for participants in the control condition. After performing an exploratory factor analysis, the scale proved to be not unidimensional. Following the exclusion of 2 items, which didn’t load on the scale, a new exploratory factor analysis was performed. The revised 3-item scale proved to be
unidimensional, explaining 79.81% of the variance. The scale also proved to be reliable (α=.82, M=3.50, SD=.91).
Moderator.
Drama genre preference. Respondents rated to what extent they like drama movies on a 5-point Likert scale for the 1-item scale ‘How much do you normally like drama movies? (Drama referring to the genre of narrative fiction intended to be more serious than humorous in tone)’. The mean score of the scale is 3.23 (M=3.23, SD=1.25).
Results Manipulation check
To demonstrate that respondents perceived the manipulation as planned, the following question was asked: ‘Were you offered to make choices of what happens with the main character in the movie?’. As a result, 93.3% of respondents (n=28) from the experimental condition group correctly perceived the manipulation. 6.5% of respondents (n=2) from the experimental condition answered ‘Not’. 96.7% of respondents (n=29) from the control condition answered ‘No’, and 1 respondent answered ‘Yes’. It was decided not to exclude the answers of the 3 persons from further analyses,
because of the limited sample size included in the study. This will further be discussed as a limitation of the study.
Randomization check
Several analyses were performed to demonstrate that respondents were equally distributed to the groups. A chi-square test was conducted in order to check whether the respondents’ gender was comparable over the two conditions. The analysis demonstrated that gender is equally distributed χ2
(2) = 1.04, p = .593. An ANOVA was conducted in order to test whether respondent’s age is comparable across groups. It can be concluded from the ANOVA that the age of the respondents doesn’t differ over the two groups F(1,58) = .22, p = .634. To check whether the educational level of respondents was comparable across conditions, a chi-square was conducted. Results showed that the educational level was comparable across groups χ2 (3) = 1.80, p = .615.
Interactive Storytelling and Entertainment Experience
Independent t-tests were performed in order to test the first hypothesis, which states that an interactive narrative leads to a higher entertainment experience than a non-interactive narrative. The interactive group vs. non-interactive group conditions were chosen as the independent variable, and the sub-constructs of entertainment experience (i.e. hedonic entertainment, evaluation of media offering, empathy and suspense) were chosen as dependent variables.
Results show that respondents from the interactive group reported experiencing higher hedonic entertainment (M = 3.70, SD = .60) than the respondents in the non-interactive group (M = 2.55, SD = .74). Levene’s test was insignificant, so equal variances were assumed for the groups F = 1.72, p = .194. The difference between the groups proved to be statistically significant at p < .001 (Mdiff= 1.14, SEdiff = .17), t(58) = 6.49, 95% CI[.79, 1.49].
It was demonstrated that respondents from the interactive group evaluated the media offering higher (M = 3.91, SD = .56) than the respondents from the non-interactive group (M = 2.71, SD =
.82). With a non-significant Levene’s test F = 1.54, p = .219, the t-test proved to be significant at p < .001 (Mdiff = 1.14, SEdiff = .17), t(58) = 6.41, 95% CI[.80, 1.53].
The analysis showed that respondents from the interactive group felt more empathic (M = 3.58, SD = 1.03) than respondents from the non-interactive group (M = 2.93, SD = .94). The Levene’s test was not significant F = .365, p = .548, and the t-test proved to be statistically significant at p = .014 (Mdiff = .65, SEdiff = .25), t(58) = 2.54, 95% CI[.13, 1.16].
Respondents from the interactive group also felt more suspense (M = 4.47, SD = .81) than respondents from the non-interactive group (M = 3.83, SD = 1.05). With the Levene’s test being not significant F = 2.05, p = .156, the t-test proved to be statistically significant at p = .012 (Mdiff = .63, SEdiff = .24), t(58) = 2.60, 95% CI[.14, 1.12].
Considering the outcomes of the four independent t-tests, Hypothesis 1 is fully retained, and it can be assumed that an interactive narrative leads to a higher entertainment experience than a non-interactive narrative.
The mediating role of immersion and curiosity
Four PROCESS mediation analyses were run with interactive storytelling vs. no interactive storytelling as independent variable, immersion and curiosity as mediators and sub-constructs of entertainment experience (hedonic entertainment, evaluation of media offering, empathy and suspense) as dependent variables.
Results indicated that interactivity was a significant predictor of immersion B = .93, SE = .16, t(58) = 5.74, p < .001, and that immersion was a significant predictor of hedonic entertainment B = .27, SE = .13, t(56) = 2.13, p = .038. Similarly, interactivity was a significant predictor of curiosity B = 1.08, SE = .16, t(58) = 6.78, p < .001 and curiosity was a significant predictor of hedonic
entertainment B = .42, SE = .13, t(56) = 3.21, p = .002. These results support the mediational hypothesis. Interactivity was no longer a significant predictor of hedonic entertainment after controlling for the mediators, immersion and curiosity, B = .44, SE = .23, t(56) = 1.89, p = .065,
consistent with full mediation. Approximately 56% of the variance in hedonic entertainment was accounted for by the predictors and the overall model proved to be statistically significant R2 = .56,
F(3,56) = 23.51, p < .001. The indirect effect of immersion is insignificant B = .25, SE = .17, 95% CI[-.04, .65], however the lower bound of the confidence interval is close to being significant. Due to the fact that immersion is significantly predicted by interactivity and has a significant effect on entertainment, immersion is still considered a mediator. Therefore, the indirect effect will still be considered significant. The indirect effect of curiosity is significant B = .45, SE = .18, 95% CI[.16, .85].
The next analysis indicated that interactivity was a significant predictor of immersion B = .93, SE = .16, t(58) = 5.74, p < .001, and that immersion was a significant predictor of evaluation of media offering B = .42, SE = .12, t(56) = 3.64, p = .001. Similarly, interactivity was a significant predictor of curiosity, B = 1.08, SE = .16, t(58) = 6.78, p < .001 and curiosity was a significant predictor of evaluation of media offering B = .55, SE = .12, t(56) = 4.65, p < .001. These results support the mediation model. Interactivity was no longer a significant predictor of evaluation of media offering after controlling for the mediators, immersion and curiosity, B = .19, SE = .21, t(56) = .90, p = .371, consistent with full mediation. Approximately 66% of the variance in evaluation of media offering was accounted for by the predictors and the overall model proved to be statistically significant R2 = .66, F(3,56) = 36.52, p < .001. The indirect effects of immersion B = .43, SE = .18,
95% CI[.11, .82] and curiosity B = .65, SE = .16, 95% CI[.36, .99] were significant.
Results of the following analysis with empathy as dependent variable proved that interactivity was a significant predictor of immersion B = .93, SE = .16, t(58) = 5.74, p < .001, and that immersion was a significant predictor of empathy B = .97, SE = .17, t(56) = 5.90, p < .001. Similarly,
interactivity was a significant predictor of curiosity B = 1.08, SE = .16, t(58) = 6.78, p < .001, but curiosity was not a significant predictor of empathy B = .08, SE = .17, t(56) = .50, p = .620. These results partly support the mediation model. Interactivity was no longer a significant predictor of
empathy after controlling for the mediators, immersion and curiosity, B = -.35, SE = .30, t(56) = 5.90, p = .246, consistent with full mediation. Approximately 46% of the variance in empathy was accounted for by the predictors and the overall model proved to be statistically significant R2 = .46,
F(3,56) = 15.71, p < .001. The indirect effect of immersion is significant B = .91, SE = .23, 95% CI[.51, 1.39]. The indirect effect of curiosity is non-significant B = .09, SE = .18, 95% CI[-.29, .45].
Results of the last PROCESS mediation analysis with suspense as dependent variable proved that interactivity was a significant predictor of immersion B = .93, SE = .16, t(58) = 5.74, p < .001, and that immersion was a significant predictor of suspense B = .74, SE = .17, t(56) = 4.25, p < .001. Similarly, interactivity was a significant predictor of curiosity B = 1.08, SE = .16, t(58) = 6.78, p < .001, but curiosity was not a significant predictor of suspense B = .12, SE = .18, t(56) = .59, p = .492. These results only partly support the mediational assumptions. Interactivity was no longer a
significant predictor of suspense after controlling for the mediators, immersion and curiosity, B = -.19, SE = .32, t(56) = -.60, p = .551. Approximately 34% of the variance in suspense was accounted for by the predictors and the overall model proved to be statistically significant R2 = .34, F(3,56) =
9.57, p < .001. The indirect effect of immersion is significant B = .69, SE = .24, 95% CI[.25, 1.20]. The indirect effect of curiosity is non-significant B = .13, SE = .20, 95% CI[-.22, .58].
From the following results, it is concluded that Hypothesis 2 can be fully retained, while Hypothesis 3 can be only partially retained.
The moderating role of genre preference
Hypothesis 4 stated that the effect of interactive storytelling on entertainment experience is moderated by genre preference, in the sense that interactive storytelling in movies leads to a higher entertainment experience for viewers with a strong genre preference of the movie on display, and vice versa. To test this hypothesis, four two-way ANOVAs were conducted with ‘interactive vs non-interactive group’ and ‘low vs. high genre preference’ as independent variables, and the
empathy and suspense) as dependent variables. For the scope of the analyses, genre preference was recoded into a dichotomous, nominal variable with a median split.
Levene’s test showed to be not significant, F(3,56) = 1.34, p = .270. Results showed that only the main effect of interactivity on hedonic experience proved to be statistically significant F (1, 59) = 41.62, p < .001, whereas the main effect of genre preference F (1, 59) = .87, p = .352, and the
interaction effect of interactivity and genre preference F (1, 59) = .11, p = .741 proved to be not significant.
Following with a similar two-way ANOVA, Levene’s test proved to be not significant, F(3,56) = 1.73, p = .171. Analysis showed that only the main effect of interactivity on evaluations of media offering proved to be statistically significant F (1, 59) = 41.91, p < .001, but the main effect of genre preference F (1, 59) = 1.43, p = .236, and the interaction effect of interactivity and genre preference F (1, 59) = .06, p = .802 proved to be not significant.
With a non-significant Levene’s test, F(3,56) = .42, p = .739, the two-way ANOVA showed that only the main effect of interactivity on empathy proved to be statistically significant F (1, 59) = 4.19, p = .45, but the main effect of genre preference F (1, 59) = 2.35, p = .131, and the interaction effect of interactivity and genre preference F (1, 59) = .06, p = .825 proved to be not significant.
In the last two-way ANOVA with suspense as the dependent variable, Levene’s test F(3,56) = 4.16, p = .006 proved to be significant. The results, therefore, need to be interpreted with caution. The two-way ANOVA showed that only the main effect of interactivity on suspense proved to be statistically significant F (1, 59) = 1.40, p = .40, but the main effect of genre preference F (1, 59) = 3.00, p = .089, and the interaction effect of interactivity and genre preference F (1, 59) = 1.56, p = .217 proved to be not significant.
The test of the between-subjects effect showed the statistical significance only for the main effects of interactive storytelling on entertainment experience sub-constructs, thus the null hypothesis H0 is retained and the alternative hypothesis H4 is rejected.
Discussion and Conclusion
The aim of the present study was to contribute to the existing knowledge about the effects of interactive storytelling on entertainment experience. It is potentially a very promising new genre, that can be more entertaining than the traditional cinematographic offerings. Hence, it is important to fill in the research gaps that concern the topic of interactive storytelling. Previously, scholars assumed that interactive narratives can expand the present boundaries of traditional films towards a more enjoyable form of digital entertainment (de Lima, 2018). This study attempted to provide an answer on how exactly interactive storytelling affects users’ entertainment experience.
This study has revealed a wide range of dimensions that interactive storytelling can facilitate. Firstly, viewers who watched the interactive sequence of the movie reported feeling significantly more entertained, evaluated the media offering higher, felt more suspense and empathy than the viewers who watched the traditional, non-interactive version of the same movie sequence. This supports the idea that interactive storytelling enhances the entertainment experience of watching a movie, in other words, makes the movie more entertaining. This is in line with various scholars’ assumptions that interactivity plays a potential role in enhancing entertainment (Vorderer, 2001; Bednall, 2012; Qin, 2010). These findings are particularly important because they prove that
interactive storytelling can play a role in the future of entertainment products, and definitely change the way we look at the traditional cinematographic media.
Another important finding is that immersion has a mediating effect on the direct relationship of interactive storytelling on entertainment experience. A viewer watching content that includes
interactive storytelling feels more immersed into the content and, as a result, reports feeling higher hedonic entertainment, gives a higher evaluation of the media offering, and feels more empathy and suspense. Earlier, immersion was demonstrated to explain the entertainment experience of playing video-games (Qin, 2009). However, specifically these results demonstrate that Vorderer (2001) and Green (2004) correctly suggested that immersion will provide useful insights into the relationship
between interactivity and entertainment (Vorderer, 2001; Green, 2004). The fact that immersion is a significant mediator is an interesting finding, since it points out to additional similarities besides interactive features between video-games and interactive storytelling in movies. It is therefore interesting to continue researching the topic and defining other similarities or differences between the two medias. With this kind of investigation, it would be possible to explore why would someone choose interactive storytelling in movies over video-games or vice versa.
In contrast to immersion, curiosity proved to only partially mediate the effect of interactive storytelling on the entertainment experience. More specifically, curiosity was increased as a result of interactive storytelling. Further analysis demonstrated that the result of feeling more curious after being exposed to interactive storytelling leads to viewers reporting higher hedonic entertainment and giving a higher evaluation of the media offering. However, viewers did not report feeling more empathy or suspense due to their curiosity. These results are in line with Roth’s (2009) assumption that interactivity sparks the feeling of curiosity and results in greater enjoyment, since it has been proven that higher curiosity did predict higher hedonic entertainment, which highly represents the feeling of enjoyment (Vorderer, 2004). There can be various explanations of why curiosity is a mediator for hedonic entertainment and evaluation of media offering, but not for empathy and suspense. For instance, some scholars suggest that empathy is a concept that could rather predict curiosity and not vice versa (Batson, 1991). On the contrary, other scholars define empathy as a “balanced curiosity leading to a deeper understanding of another human being”, which points out to a correlation between the concepts of empathy and curiosity instead of a causal relationship (Hardee, 2003). As of about suspense, it can be assumed that curiosity is a concept closely tied with the concept of suspense, since it is based on the same feeling of uncertainty about something.
Consequently, both are based on looking forward or being nervous about finding out more about an unclear subject. Therefore, it can be assumed that the two concepts would rather have a correlational than a causal relationship.
Lastly, the present study showed that that genre preference does not increase or decrease the effect of interactive storytelling on the sub-constructs of the entertainment experience. These results contradict Vorderer’s (2001) assumption that the degree to which respondents prefer suspenseful and dramatic genres is important for the entertainment experience in the context of interactivity.
However, it provides useful insights into the concept of interactive storytelling, since it can be assumed that it can play a crucial role on entertainment regardless of viewers’ dramatic genres preferences. Consequently, the dramatic media offerings with elements of interactivity can have a larger audience that will enjoy the content, since it will not increase the entertainment experience for only those with high genre preference.
The general conclusion might be drawn that interactive storytelling indeed enhances hedonic entertainment, evaluation of media offering, empathy and suspense through the feeling of being immersed into the narrative, and in some cases by sparking higher curiosity. These finding are helpful in the context of interpreting previous studies and assumptions about interactivity. In addition, the findings presented in the study are a crucial addition to the body of existing theory about interactive storytelling since it provides empirical evidence to the theories and assumptions that were presented, but not tested earlier by various scholars, like Roth’s (2009) assumption that interactive storytelling can facilitate user appreciation of media content or Vorderer’s (2001) assumption that interactive storytelling can enhance their entertainment experience. The emerging field of interactive storytelling offers the possibility of exploration of new formats for storytellers and content producers. The findings of this study provide a theoretical background for content producers, that could be useful in developing future works. For instance, the proved mediators provide important insights for content producers on what they should focus for making the
interactive media offerings even more entertaining, i.e. focusing on making the media content more “immersion-friendly” or introducing more “uncertainty” in the plot for sparking even higher
the entertainment experience, however it is not yet known if any specific genre can enhance the effect of interactive storytelling. Therefore, it would be interesting to investigate whether a specific movie genre would be a better match to fit interactive storytelling features than other genres. Limitations and Future Research
While this study contributes to our knowledge of interactivity and entertainment experience, it is important to mention several limitations that were encountered throughout the study. Firstly, it can be stated that the convenience sample used for this study has a negative effect on external validity, since it cannot be representative for a larger population of young adults. The results are limited to young adults who are highly educated and mostly based in the Netherlands.
Additionally, three respondents did not perceive the manipulation correctly, out of which two were in the experimental, interactive condition. It was decided not to exclude the participants from the analyses. Since results proved significant without the exclusion of these respondents, this may point out to the possibility that interactive storytelling may influence viewers subconsciously, without them directly recognizing the manipulation. Additional analyses were run with these participants excluded from the dataset, and the results proved to be similar to the final findings discussed above.
The recruitment process was targeted towards persons who did not see Black Mirror
Bandersnatch before, however nine respondents reported that they had previously seen the movie, but they didn’t remember the name. Future studies should investigate whether familiarity with interactive storytelling decreases the initial effects on entertainment, and whether interactive storytelling is only more entertaining when it is novel or experienced for the first time.
Additionally, it is important to continue investigating other concepts that can play a role in explaining the effects of interactivity. For instance, Vorderer (2009) assumed that an interactive storytelling genre can be successful in a limited audience with specific personality traits, interests and preferences. It would be interesting to examine which personality traits can make someone
prefer interactive storytelling: cognitive capacities (Vorderer, 2001), or other traits mentioned by Qin (2009) such as preference for challenge, interactive skills or liking the feeling of control. Exploring these personality traits and their link to having a higher entertainment experience as a result of interactive storytelling is important because more research is needed to investigate what makes interactive storytelling appealing for various kinds of audiences.
References
Abuhamdeh, S., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Jalal, B. (2015). Enjoying the possibility of defeat: Outcome uncertainty, suspense, and intrinsic motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 39(1), 1-10. Bartsch, A., Anderson, J. D., & Anderson, N. F. (2007). Meta-emotion and genre-preference. What
makes horror films and tear-jerkers enjoyable. Narration and spectatorship in moving images, 124-35.
Bartsch, A., & Viehoff, R. (2010). The use of media entertainment and emotional gratification. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 2247-2255.
Batson, C. D., Batson, J. G., Slingsby, J. K., Harrell, K. L., Peekna, H. M., & Todd, R. M. (1991). Empathic joy and the empathy-altruism hypothesis. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 61(3), 413.
Bednall, D., Valos, M., Adam, S., & Mcleod, C. (2012). Getting Generation Y to attend: Friends, interactivity and half-time entertainment. Sport Management Review, 15(1), 80–90.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2011.04.001
Bosshart, L., & Macconi, I. (1998). Media entertainment. Centre for the Study of Communication and Culture.
Bryant, J. (2008). Entertainment, Effects of.
on enjoyment of watching the game go “down to the wire. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 18(4), 326-339.
Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2009). Measuring narrative engagement. Media Psychology, 12(4), 321-347.
Cohendet, R., Da Silva, M. P., Gilet, A. L., & Le Callet, P. (2017). Emotional interactive movie: adjusting the scenario according to the emotional response of the viewer. EAI Endorsed Trans. Creative Technologies, 4(10), e1.
Coyne, S. M., Padilla-Walker, L. M., & Howard, E. (2013). Emerging in a digital world: A decade review of media use, effects, and gratifications in emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood, 1(2), 125-137.
de Lima, E. S., Feijó, B., & Furtado, A. L. (2018). Video-based interactive storytelling using real- time video compositing techniques. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 77(2), 2333-2357. Douglas, Y., & Hargadon, A. (2000, May). The pleasure principle: immersion, engagement, flow. In
Proceedings of the eleventh ACM on Hypertext and hypermedia (pp. 153-160). ACM. Dyer, R. (2005). Only entertainment. Routledge.
Green, M. C., Brock, T. C., & Kaufman, G. F. (2004). Understanding media enjoyment: The role of transportation into narrative worlds. Communication Theory, 14(4), 311-327.
Green, M. C., & Sestir, M. (2017). Transportation theory. The international encyclopedia of media effects, 1-14.
Grodal, T. (2000). Video games and the pleasures of control. Media entertainment: The psychology of its appeal, 197-213.
Hamana, K., Nakano, A., & Hoshino, J. (2011). Segmented episode control system for interactive narrative entertainment. Entertainment Computing, 2(4), 233–243.
Hou, J., Nam, Y., Peng, W., & Lee, K. M. (2012). Effects of screen size, viewing angle, and players’ immersion tendencies on game experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 617-623. Jennett, C., Cox, A. L., Cairns, P., Dhoparee, S., Epps, A., Tijs, T., & Walton, A. (2008). Measuring
and defining the experience of immersion in games. International journal of human-computer studies, 66(9), 641-661.
Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. The public opinion quarterly, 37(4), 509-523.
Kilic, N., & Christiansen, S. L. (2019). The Digitality of Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (Netflix 2018). Klimmt, C. (2008). Enjoyment/entertainment seeking. The international encyclopedia of
communication.
Knoller, N., & Arie, U. B. (2009, December). Turbulence–a user study of a hypernarrative
interactive movie. In Joint International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling (pp. 44-49). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Kohn, P., Hunt, R., & Hoffman, F. (1982). Aspects of experience seeking. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement, 14(1), 13–23. List Randomizer. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.random.org/lists/
MacDorman, K. F. (2019). In the uncanny valley, transportation predicts narrative enjoyment more than empathy, but only for the tragic hero. Computers in Human Behavior, 94, 140-153. Malone, T. W. (1982, March). Heuristics for designing enjoyable user interfaces: Lessons from
computer games. In Proceedings of the 1982 conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 63-68). ACM.
Murtagh, F., Ganz, A., & Reddington, J. (2011). New methods of analysis of narrative and semantics in support of interactivity. Entertainment Computing, 2(2), 115-121.
Oliver, M. B., & Raney, A. A. (2011). Entertainment as pleasurable and meaningful: Identifying hedonic and eudaimonic motivations for entertainment consumption. Journal of
Communication, 61(5), 984-1004.
Qin, H., Rau, P. L. P., & Salvendy, G. (2009). Effects of different scenarios of game difficulty on player immersion. Interacting with Computers, 22(3), 230-239.
Qin, H., Patrick Rau, P. L., & Salvendy, G. (2009). Measuring player immersion in the computer game narrative. Intl. Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 25(2), 107-133.
Roth, C., Klimmt, C., Vermeulen, I. E., & Vorderer, P. (2011, October). The experience of
interactive storytelling: comparing “Fahrenheit” with “Façade”. In International Conference on Entertainment Computing (pp. 13-21). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Roth, C., Vorderer, P., & Klimmt, C. (2009, December). The motivational appeal of interactive storytelling: Towards a dimensional model of the user experience. In Joint International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling (pp. 38-43). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Rubin, A. M. (1983). Television uses and gratifications: The interactions of viewing patterns and
motivations. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 27(1), 37-51.
Ryan, M. L. (2009). From narrative games to playable stories: Toward a poetics of interactive narrative. Storyworlds: A Journal of Narrative Studies, 1, 43-59.
Scharkow, M., Festl, R., Vogelgesang, J., & Quandt, T. (2015). Beyond the “core-gamer”: Genre preferences and gratifications in computer games. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 293-298. Schierman, M. J., & Rowland, G. L. (1985). Sensation-seeking and selection of entertainment.
Personality and Individual Differences, 6(5), 599-603.
Tan, E. S. H. (2008). Entertainment is emotion: The functional architecture of the entertainment experience. Media psychology, 11(1), 28-51.
videogame storyline and genre preferences related to game immersion among low-income ethnically diverse urban and rural adolescents. Internet Issues: Blogging, the Digital Divide and Digital Libraries. New York: Nova Science Publishers, 177-188.
Vorderer, P. (2000). Interactive entertainment and beyond.
Vorderer, P. (2001). It's all entertainment—sure. But what exactly is entertainment? Communication research, media psychology, and the explanation of entertainment experiences. Poetics, 29(4-5), 247-261.
Vorderer, P. A., & Hartmann, T. (2009). Entertainment and enjoyment as media effects. Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., & Ritterfeld, U. (2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media
entertainment. Communication Theory, 14, 388–408.
Vorderer, P., Knobloch, S., & Schramm, H. (2001). Does entertainment suffer from interactivity? The impact of watching an interactive TV movie on viewers' experience of entertainment. Media Psychology, 3(4), 343-363.
Vorderer, P., & Reinecke, L. (2015). From mood to meaning: The changing model of the user in entertainment research. Communication Theory, 25(4), 447-453.
Wirth, W., Hofer, M., & Schramm, H. (2012). Beyond pleasure: Exploring the eudaimonic entertainment experience. Human Communication Research, 38(4), 406-428.
Wouters, P., Van Oostendorp, H., Boonekamp, R., & Van der Spek, E. (2011). The role of Game Discourse Analysis and curiosity in creating engaging and effective serious games by
implementing a back story and foreshadowing. Interacting with Computers, 23(4), 329-336. Zillmann, D., Bryant, J. (1994). Entertainment as media effect. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Inc.
Zillmann, D., Vorderer, P. (Eds.). (2000). Media entertainment. The psychology of its appeal. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Appendix A: Stimuli
Figure 1: screenshot of Black Mirror, Bandersnatch; stimuli version with interactive storytelling
Figure 3: screenshot of Black Mirror, Bandersnatch; stimuli version without interactive storytelling
Figure 4: screenshot of Black Mirror, Bandersnatch; stimuli version without interactive storytelling
Appendix B: Questionnaire designed for the purpose of the study Please choose which group were you assigned to:
1. Group 1 2. Group 2
(Introduction)
You are about to participate in a research study to be conducted under the auspices of the Graduate School of Communication, a part of the University of Amsterdam. The study will measure entertainment experiences as consequences of media consumption. The study will take about 20 minutes. 3 winners will be selected at random from all participants, and each will win prizes valued at €20: a gift certificate for bol.com.
As this research is being carried out under the responsibility of the ASCoR, University of Amsterdam, we can guarantee that:
1) Your anonymity will be safeguarded, and that your personal information will not be passed on to third parties under any conditions unless you first give your express permission for this. 2) You can refuse to participate in the research or cut short your participation without having to give a reason for doing so. You also have up to 24 hours after participating to withdraw your permission to allow your answers or data to be used in the research.
3) Participating in the research will not entail your being subjected to any appreciable risk or discomfort, the researchers will not deliberately mislead you, and you will not be exposed to any explicitly offensive material.
4) No later than five months after the conclusion of the research, we will be able to provide you with a research report that explains the general results of the research.
For more information about the research and the invitation to participate, you are welcome to contact the project leader Ana Maria Sedletchi. Should you have any complaints or
comments about the course of the research and the procedures it involves as a consequence of your participation in this research, you can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing ASCoR, at the following address: ASCoR Secretariat, Ethics Committee, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15793, 1001 NG Amsterdam; 020-525 3680; ascor-secr-fmg@uva.nl. Any complaints or comments will be treated in the strictest
confidence. We hope that we have provided you with sufficient information. We would like to take this opportunity to thank you in advance for your assistance with this research, which we greatly appreciate.
Kind regards, Ana Maria Sedletchi
I hereby declare that I have been informed in a clear manner about the nature and method of the research, as described in the email invitation for this study.
I agree, fully and voluntarily, to participate in this research study. With this, I retain the right to withdraw my consent, without having to give a reason for doing so. I am aware that I may halt my participation in the experiment at any time.
If my research results are used in scientific publications or are made public in another way, this will be done such a way that my anonymity is completely safeguarded. My personal data will not be passed on to third parties without my express permission.
If I wish to receive more information about the research, either now or in future, I can contact anamariasedletchi@gmail.com. Should I have any complaints about this research, I can contact the designated member of the Ethics Committee representing the ASCoR, at the following address: ASCoR secretariat, Ethics Committee, University
Q1. Do you agree to proceed?
4. I understand the text presented above, and I agree to participate in the research study. 5. I disagree
Q2. Are you…? • Female • Male • Other
Q3. How old are you? (Please insert your age in years)
Q4. Which country are you from?
Q5. What is the highest level of school you have completed or the highest degree you have received?
• Less than high school degree • High school degree or equivalent • Vocational training
• Bachelor’s Degree • Master’s Degree • PhD or higher
You are about to watch a movie sequence for about 10 minutes. Please ask the student supervising the experiment to assist you in accessing the content. Remain on this screen until further instructions. Please note that the movie sequence you're about to see may contain violent scenes. If you feel uncomfortable watching the movie sequence, you may stop immediately.
Please indicate to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements: (Measuring hedonic entertainment)
Q6. I felt well entertained watching the video.
SD D N A SA
Q7. It was fun watching the video.
SD D N A SA
Q8. It was pleasurable watching the video.
SD D N A SA
Please indicate to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements: (Measuring evaluation of media offering)
Q9. I enjoyed watching the movie.
SD D N A SA
Q10. I enjoyed the graphics and the imagery of the movie.
SD D N A SA
Q11. I found the movie exciting.
Q12. I would recommend the movie to someone.
SD D N A SA
Please indicate to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements: (Measuring suspense)
Q13. Overall, the movie was suspenseful.
SD D N A SA
(Measuring empathy)
Q14. I did not feel any emotional attachment to the movie.
SD D N A SA
Q15. I felt that I empathised with the characters.
SD D N A SA
Please indicate to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding your experience of watching the movie:
(Measuring immersion)
Q16. I was mentally involved in the narrative.
SD D N A SA
Q17. I felt consciously aware of my surroundings.
Q18. I found my mind wandering.
SD D N A SA
Q19. I lost track of time.
SD D N A SA
Q20. I felt detached from the outside world.
SD D N A SA
Please indicate to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement: (Measuring genre Preference)
Q21. How much do you normally like drama movies? (Drama referring to the genre of narrative fiction intended to be more serious than humorous in tone).
Not at all Slightly Moderately Very A lot
Please indicate to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements: (Measuring curiosity)
Q22. I felt curious to see what will happen next in the movie.
SD D N A SA
Q23. I found myself thinking of ways the narrative could have turned out differently.
SD D N A SA
Q24. The story quickly grabs my attention at the beginning.
SD D N A SA
Q25. I want to know the rest of the storyline in the course of watching.
