Search

How do games influence prosociality? Based on the Social Interdependence Theory (SIT) three different gaming contexts (relations between gamers’ goals) can be deduced – cooperative, competitive and individual. According to SIT, cooperative contexts foster more prosociality towards co-players than competitive or individual ones, which is supported by game studies with children and adults (e.g. Anderson & Morrow, 1995; Bay-Hinitz, Peterson, & Quilitch, 1994; Ewoldsen et al., 2012; Garaigordobil, & Echebarria, 1995; Grineski, 1991; Orlick, 1981; Street, Hoppe, Kingsbury, & Ma, 2004). In previous research, gaming context is often confounded with other variables (e.g. content or outcome), which impedes an unambiguous interpretation of the results. Which part of the promoted prosociality can be ascribed to the gaming context? Another related issue is the scope of the game-induced prosocial behavior. Following recent studies with adults, cooperative games do not only promote prosociality towards co-players, but also towards unfamiliar persons (Greitemeyer & Cox, 2013; Jin & Li, 2017). To date, this question has not been investigated in children. How does the gaming context influence the prosociality of children towards unfamiliar persons? A newly developed game “KoKo” for one or two players which can be played cooperatively, competitively or individually is used for an experimental study. Dyads of 4- and 5-year-olds play KoKo in one of the three contexts. Hereafter a dictator game is used to measure sharing behavior. Inclusion of others is assessed by a ball tossing game, in which a new co-player joins the child’s group. Additionally, free play between the co-players is observed in regard to prosociality.

How do games influence prosociality? Based on the Social Interdependence Theory (SIT) three different gaming contexts (relations between gamers’ goals) can be deduced – cooperative, competitive and individual. According to SIT, cooperative contexts foster more prosociality towards co-players than competitive or individual ones, which is supported by game studies with children and adults (e.g. Anderson & Morrow, 1995; Bay-Hinitz, Peterson, & Quilitch, 1994; Ewoldsen et al., 2012; Garaigordobil, & Echebarria, 1995; Grineski, 1991; Orlick, 1981; Street, Hoppe, Kingsbury, & Ma, 2004). In previous research, gaming context is often confounded with other variables (e.g. content or outcome), which impedes an unambiguous interpretation of the results. Which part of the promoted prosociality can be ascribed to the gaming context? Another related issue is the scope of the game-induced prosocial behavior. Following recent studies with adults, cooperative games do not only promote prosociality towards co-players, but also towards unfamiliar persons (Greitemeyer & Cox, 2013; Jin & Li, 2017). To date, this question has not been investigated in children. How does the gaming context influence the prosociality of children towards unfamiliar persons? A newly developed game “KoKo” for one or two players which can be played cooperatively, competitively or individually is used for an experimental study. Dyads of 4- and 5-year-olds play KoKo in one of the three contexts. Hereafter a dictator game is used to measure sharing behavior. Inclusion of others is assessed by a ball tossing game, in which a new co-player joins the child’s group. Additionally, free play between the co-players is observed in regard to prosociality.

A great body of research examined children’s social exclusion behavior and reactions to social exclusion. Surprisingly, social inclusion has not been investigated to such degrees. So far it remains unclear how social inclusion of others develops in middle childhood. In addition, the paradigms used in this field often base on self-report or potential behavior in story vignettes. Action-based paradigms are needed to improve the investigation of social in- and exclusion behavior. We developed a novel task following the Cyberball paradigm to assess preschoolers’ social inclusion behavior and overcome existing methodological gaps of previous studies. We want to investigate the trajectory of social inclusion in preschool ages. Further we want to find out how this behavior is influenced by group membership.

Humans are sensitive for ostracism. Even observing the exclusion of a third-party elicits humans need for affiliation. This promoted “social hunger” can be observed from early development. After being primed with third-party ostracism, preschoolers drew more affiliative pictures (Song, Over, & Carpenter, 2015; 10.1037/a0039176) and showed more affiliative imitation (Over & Carpenter, 2009; 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00820.x). Here we want to investigate the specificity of the increased need for affiliation. It might be that the promoted social hunger is very broad and directed toward any new potential interaction partner (generality hypothesis). However, it is also possible that the need for affiliation is specifically directed toward ingroup members as compared to outgroup members since these offer more promising contacts for future directions (specificity hypothesis). We want to test this two hypotheses in diverse societies since cultural differences in responses to ostracism have been observed (Uskul & Over, 2017; 10.1177/0963721417699300). We will use an opportunity sampling strategy and additionally assess interdependence and independence via ethnographies and Hofstede-Insights (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/).