Search

Failure is an integral element of most games, and while some players may benefit from external support, such as cheat codes, to prompt self-soothing, most games lack supportive elements. We asked participants (N=88) to play Anno 1404 in single-player mode, and presented a money-generating cheat code in a challenging situation, also measuring the personality trait of action-state orientation, which explains differences in self-regulation ability (i.e., self-soothing) in response to threats of failure. Individuals higher in state orientation were more likely to take the offer, and used the cheat code more frequently. The cheat code also acted as an external support, as differences in experienced pressure between action- and state-oriented participants vanished when it was used. We found no negative consequences of using external support in intrinsic motivation, needs satisfaction, flow, or performance. We argue that external support mechanisms can help state-oriented players to self-regulate in gaming, when faced with failure.

Aims: This study aims to explore community perspectives on enhancer usage in competitive gaming and esports, focusing on the perception of fairness and concerns about various potential performance enhancers. Methods: We conducted both qualitative and quantitative surveys to understand the competitive gaming community's opinions on different types of performance enhancers and their potential impact on esports. A thematic analysis was performed to identify key themes in how players rationalize their opinions. Conclusions: The gaming community differentiates between potential performance enhancers based on how problematic they are for the esports scene, with the most concern surrounding hard drugs, pharmaceuticals, and brain stimulation interventions. Participants who are more invested in competitive gaming tend to be more sceptical of enhancers and express greater concerns. Four themes were identified in the thematic analysis: (1) risk, (2) morality, (3) enhancer effects, and (4) regulation. To increase acceptance and perceived legitimacy in decision-making, it is recommended that regulators engage a variety of stakeholders in transparent decision-making processes when forming tournament rules and regulations. This will help address the fragmented regulatory landscape and prevent potential differences in the perception of tournament winners based on the governing body supervising the competition.

Toxicity in multiplayer gaming is an ongoing problem that threatens the well-being of players, gaming communities, and game developers. Meanwhile, interventions that promote positive interactions and proactively create positive gaming spaces are still in their infancy; little is known about how players respond to positivity. In our study, 959 League of Legends players were presented with either 10 positive chat logs or 10 negative chat logs, and asked to reflect on the content and how representative such communication is of their own gaming experiences. We thematically coded participants' free-form answers (identifying the themes normalize, acknowledge, downplay, cope, blame, and make personal), and compared the positive and negative conditions in terms of theme prevalence. Our findings show that participants were more likely to normalize and acknowledge toxic negativity than positivity. Furthermore, the dominant response to positivity consisted of downplaying messages as not representative and rare, and even expressing suspicion that messages must have been fabricated or intended as sarcasm. Participants overwhelmingly cope by muting chat, protecting them from toxic interactions, but leaving them unexposed to positive communication and other beneficial social interactions within play.

The Dualistic Model of Passion (obsessive and harmonious passion) can explain motivations for videogame play along with associated outcomes, such as the development of social capital; however, existing research exploring passion and social capital in videogaming has been cross-sectional. In the current study we surveyed players of DotA 2 at three time points, over six months (T1 n=462, T2 n=182, T3 n=115), to explore the stability of passion for DotA 2 over time and how such passion may lead to the development or erosion of social capital. Our key findings include that passion for playing DotA 2 is relatively stable over time and that harmonious passion predicts future bridging social capital, while obsessive passion predicts future bonding social capital. Importantly, our findings suggest the absence of a "slippery slope"scenario in which players who have a healthy pattern of engagement development obsessive passion or problematic play. Equally, however, our findings also suggest that those who are obsessive are unlikely to naturally trend towards a more harmonious style of engagement over time. We consider the implications of our findings for health practitioners, players and videogame developers and identify the differences between our longitudinal findings and the existing cross-sectional research.

Digital gaming and playful environments are often viewed as entertainment computing technologies that aim to create fun, engaging, and positive experiences for children and adults alike. Yet, there is an increasing interest in research that protects players from the problematic side of gaming and playful environments, such as toxicity and harassment, dark patterns and deceptive design, problematic gaming and addiction, discrimination, incubation of extremism, and ethical considerations. However, behaviors that some consider negative or harmful may not be intended or even perceived as such by others. Therefore, this workshop aims to encourage researchers, industry practitioners, and game designers to bring in a wide variety of perspectives on how to articulate problematic play, what factors lead to the subjective nature of the problematic side of play, and approaches to combat harm across gaming and playful contexts while reinforcing potentially beneficial aspects of what can be ambiguously defined as problematic by others.

Online social spaces provide much needed connection and belonging - particularly in a context of continued lack of global mobility due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic and climate crisis. However, the norms of online social spaces can create environments in which toxic behaviour is normalized, tolerated or even celebrated. This can occur without consequence, leaving its members vulnerable to hate, harassment, and abuse. A vast majority of adults have experienced toxicity online and the harm is even more prevalent for members of marginalized and minoritized groups, who are more often the targets of online abuse. Although there is significant work on toxicity in the SIGCHI community, approaches and knowledge have typically been siloed by the domain of investigation (e.g., social media, multiplayer games, social VR). We argue that cross-disciplinary efforts will benefit not only the various communities and situations in which abuse occurs, but that bringing together researchers from different backgrounds and specialties will provide a robust and rich understanding of how to tackle online toxicity at scale.