Two Major Articles on Second Life

The dead tree media have been paying attention to SL for a while now, but last week brought major articles from arguably the two most important East Coast papers. The first was in The New York Times. Reporter Seth Kugel offered readers an inside look at SL, introducing the uninitiated to such things as avatars, virtual architecture, and Linden dollars.

The second article dealt with the more salacious aspects of SL. It was published in The Wall Street Journal, and focused on the sexual content available in this most popular of virtual worlds. I, along with others, have long maintained the main portion of SL is inappropriate for K-12 educational use due to the unregulated “anything goes” atmosphere. Author Alexandra Alter focused on a married man who engaged in an affair of the heart (and avatar) with another person in the virtual world. Edward Castronova over at U. Indiana, Bloomington, gets a prominent mention as does Nick Yee from Stanford.

Wrapping up the article, and summing up the virtual affair, Alter keys in on the RL wife:

Sitting alone in the living room in front of the television, Mrs. Hoogestraat says she worries it will be years before her husband realizes that he’s traded his real life for a pixilated fantasy existence, one that doesn’t include her.

“Basically, the other person is widowed,” she says. “This other life is so wonderful; it’s better than real life. Nobody gets fat, nobody gets gray. The person that’s left can’t compete with that.”

I sympathize with the SL widow, Mrs. Hoogestraat. But, I must say, nothing is better than RL. Hopefully her hubby will figure that out soon.

References

Kugel, S. (2007, August 9). A house that’s just unreal. The New York Times. [Online]. Available: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/09/garden/09second.html?_r=1&8dpc&oref=slogin

Alter, A. (2007, August 10). Is this man cheating on his wife? The Wall Street Journal, (pp. W1).

A Third of British Teachers Use Video Games in Class

Here’s an interesting survey from January of last year, reported by the BBC, indicating a third of British teachers use video games in the classroom, with most agreeing that video games are useful in education. Nesta Futurelab conducted the survey:

The survey of 1,000 teachers in England and Wales suggests a quarter also personally use them in their free time.

Over half of the 1000 teachers questioned by Nesta Futurelab said they would use them in future and believed they were a “good motivational tool”.

Read the complete report here. Check out Futurelab’s Teaching with Games site here.

Do Racecar Video Games Affect RL Driving?

Here’s an opportunity to download a free, full text PDF of a paper from one of the APA journals dealing with video games. In this instance, researchers looked at racecar-themed video games promoting a high level of risk taking, and researched whether playing them led to increased aggressiveness in real life driving.

The paper was by Peter Fischer over at Ludwig-Maximilians University, Jörg Kubitzki at the Allianz Center for Technology, Stephanie Guter and Dieter Frey, also at Ludwig-Maximilians University. All the institutions are in Germany. The paper is entitled “Virtual Driving and Risk Taking: Do Racing Games Increase Risk-Taking Cognitions, Affect, and Behaviors?” and appeared earlier this year in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied.

The paper reported on three related studies. The authors began by tying into the research on violence in video games, (“Several studies have revealed that the playing of aggressive games elicits aggressive cognitions, affect, and behavioral responses,”) and concluded their introduction by stating little research has been performed on racing games and other aggressive driving simulators.

The first study involved 198 participants who were queried regarding their video gaming and driving habits. These people, selected at random in public places, were asked to answer questions regarding their need to display competitive behavior while driving, their need to impress others while driving, reflect on their attitudes toward cautious driving, and quantify their number of tickets and accidents. The researchers subjected the answers to hierarchical regression analysis and concluded they had initial evidence of self reported aggressive driving linked to racecar video game play.

The second study involved subjects playing an aggressive racecar game. Eighty-six students at Ludwig-Maximilians University in Munich played one of six games on a Sony PlayStation 2. Three racing games were selected for the study: Burnout, Midnight Racer, and Need for Speed. Three non-racing games were selected for the control group: Crash Bandicoot, Tak, and Fifa 2005. (On a side note, I have to wonder how Crash Bandicoot always seems to wind up in so many of these studies.) Participants in the experimental and control groups were selected at random.

Basing their work on Anderson, Carnagey, and Eubanks (2003), the authors devised a system to measure aggressive cognition in participants. The participants were given ten words that could have dual meanings and asked to choose the definition that fit. Also, participants were asked to rate their feelings on a scale of 0 to 10 regarding certain adjectives such as “aroused,” “excited,” and “bored.” The researchers left the participants to play in seclusion. After playing the game they had been assigned to for 20 minutes, the researchers re-entered the room and administered the survey.

After performing ANOVA on their dataset, the researchers concluded subjects playing the racing games, “exhibited a higher accessibility of risk-promoting cognitions than did participants who played a neutral game.” They also indicated a stronger level of arousal/excitement through playing the racing games versus the neutral games.

Put simply, Study 2 showed that exciting video games generate more excitement than games that are less exciting. That’s not the way the researchers put it, but that about sums it up. They realized this, and sought to show a direct linkage from the racing games to RL situations. Thus their third study, in which participants again played a racing game or a neutral game. This time, after concluding play, participants took the Vienna Test System, which seeks to rate willingness to take risks while driving. It is a defensive driving simulator using video taped traffic situations. Participants respond to risky situations by pressing a button indicating when they would be willing to abandon a driving maneuver. It was sufficiently dissimilar to the video racing games that the researchers commented on it.

A total of 68 participants were in Study 3. The researchers swapped out Crash Bandicoot this time with Medal of Honor, in an attempt to see if an aggressive game that did not deal with simulated driving affected the results. They could find no statistical correlation to increase willingness to accept risk in driving with the participants who played Medal of Honor, although the sample size was small. However, again, those playing the three racing games were more willing to take on risks, this time directly related to driving, especially if they were male.

In conclusion, the researchers allow that a young male consistently playing racing video games in which risky driving is promoted through game play, could possibly extend their willingness to drive risky in real life situations. Of course, it’s not altogether as simple as that. A young man may drive in an irresponsible manner for any number of reasons, not just the video games he plays.

This paper is well worth a look. A final note of interest: the references include several German examples of research in this field that we in the English speaking world are not normally privy to, including such intriguing titles as this one …

Vorderer, P., & Klimmt, C. (2006). Zum Einfluss von Computerspielen mit Fahrzeugbezug auf das Fahrverhalten junger Fahrer: Abschlussbericht an die Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen [The influence of vehicle-related computer games on the driving behavior of young drivers: Final report to the Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt)]. Hannover, Germany: Hochschule für Musik und Theater.

References

Anderson, C. A., Carnagey, N. L., & Eubanks, J. (2003). Exposure to violent media: The effects of songs with violent lyrics on aggressive thoughts and feelings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 960–971.

Fischer, P., Kubitzki, J., Guter, S., & Frey, D. (2007). Virtual driving and risk taking: Do racing games increase risk-taking cognitions, affect, and behaviors? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 13(1). 22-31.

Controversy over "Borecraft"

Something of an argument is brewing over a recent article on Slate. Justin Peters wrote “World of Borecraft: Never Play a Game that’s Trying to Teach You Something.” His basic point is educational efforts generally tend to sap the fun out of games.

Ian Bogost, famed video game designer, professor, and author, took issue with some of the criticisms leveled by Peters. He outlined his stance in a nice discussion over at Raph Koster’s blog, then left a general summary on the comments section of the Slate article.

Bogost has some well-thought-out comments, particularly when addressing the “boring” aspect of serious games. It boils down to the fact that serious games serve functions besides just having fun. Comparing his games with multi-million dollar edutainment efforts such as the Civilization series is like comparing apples to oranges, Bogost maintains. Peters criticized serious games creators for making products more alluring to people who don’t like video games. Bogost counters, that’s the point.

Read the comments on Koster’s site to see what several prominent people in the field have to say about the whole issue. For a game to be educational, should it be fun, or more focused on the educational outcomes? Should a game be designed as educational from the ground up, or should educational outcomes merely reflect a side benefit from playing a fun game? These are interesting questions that practitioners are tackling.

References

Peters, J. World of Borecraft: Never play a game that’s trying to teach you something. [Online]. Available: http://www.slate.com/id/2169019/fr/rss/

The AMA, DSM-IV, and Video Games

Kudos to John Timmer over at Ars Technica for keeping up with legislative and activist efforts surrounding video games. Many bills seeking to restrict video game sales to minors have either failed at the federal level or have been overturned at the state level. The legislative efforts have usually centered on alleged links between violent behavior and violent video games, with little concern for any actual research backing up the link.

Perhaps the low concern for research is related to the fact the research is not clear-cut in displaying a link. There does appear to be a link between violent video games (if defined correctly) with “violent cognition,” though there is no strong data supporting a permanent link. For instance, children playing violent video games may feel more aggressive shortly after playing, but not carry aggressive attitudes toward others on a permanent basis due to their video game exposure. Similar thrills may occur shortly after watching stimulating action movies or TV shows.

I strongly suspect many attitudes toward research carried by journalists, legislators, parents, and other people are based on misunderstandings of how research is conducted as well as a lack of understanding as to what can actually be “proven” with research. (I have to laugh and admit I have no way to prove my suspicion, making me guilty of carrying an assumed tenet … just as I suspect others of carrying.)

Now, Timmer brings us news of a report from the American Medical Association’s (AMA) Council on Science and Public Health (CSPH). According to Timmer, the CSPH was charged with reviewing the published research on violence and video games in the 2006 AMA annual meeting, and reporting back at the 2007 meeting. This report has been released, and it will be of high interest to video game academics and others interested in the research.

The report provides a good review of the medical and psychological literature going as far back as 1985. The medical journals, especially, are often overlooked by gaming academics. I recognized some of the references, particularly Anderson and Bushman’s (2001) meta-analysis of studies on the effects of violent video games on behavior. Plenty of other references in the document should prove to be of high interest to those in the field of video game research.

The report addresses the topic of video game addiction. I discussed video game addiction in a prior post, which actually received a comment or two. Dr. Lemoyne Dunn over at the Texas Center for Educational Technology suggested a broader definition of addiction than I felt was justified when discussing video games. The CSPH report, presented by Mohamed K. Kahn who holds a Ph.D. as well as an MD, calls for a definition of addiction that includes not only video games but the Internet as well. The justification for this expanded definition is that the majority of those addicted to video games appear to be playing MMORPGs, and MMORPGs elicit higher opportunities for overuse.

The report further states the term “Internet addiction” was coined in the 1990s, and is not currently a DSM-IV classification. The authors initially shied away from calling video games addictive in nature, preferring the term overuse. Here is the pertinent paragraph (I’ve eliminated footnotes):

Although video game overuse can be associated with any type of video game, it is most commonly seen among MMORPG players, who represent approximately 9% of gamers. This is consistent with prior research on Internet addiction that suggests Internet use involving interactive, real-time applications has the most potential for overuse. MMORPGs are simultaneously competitive and highly social, and provide interactive real-time services. Researchers have attempted to examine the type of individual most likely to be susceptible to such games, and current data suggest these individuals are somewhat marginalized socially, perhaps experiencing high levels of emotional loneliness and/or difficulty with real life social interactions. Current theory is that these individuals achieve more control of their social relationships and more success in social relationships in the virtual reality realm than in real relationships.

Overall, the report states a lot more research is needed (a phrase oft repeated by researchers). One reason: no one really knows how many children may be affected negatively by overusing video games in general and MMORPGs in particular. The report states that “dependence-like behavior” may be evident in children, and may be related to over-using games rated high in violent characteristics. But here the logic fell down in linking video games with Internet addiction through MMORPGs, since most MMORPGs are rated T for Teen rather than the more violent M for Mature (with allowances that circumstances involving other players may change during gameplay (i.e., someone drops the f-bomb or makes some other comment inappropriate for children)). The authors call for the AMA to participate in revamping the ESRB game ratings at some point in the future. Anyway, the key summative sentence suggesting against video game addiction is as follows:

However, as with findings on long-term aggression, there is currently insufficient research to definitively conclude that video game overuse is an addiction.

That sentence will likely find its way into papers arguing against video game addiction, and literary efforts battling game censors. However, the report is careful to note broad characterizations of media, not just subsets of larger media. All such related media can be lumped together as “screen time,” and screen time should be limited for children, they opine. Since Internet addiction can encompass a variety of online activities that carried to an extreme can be detrimental to individuals, the authors end their report by recommending the AMA cooperate with other stakeholders to better define current game ratings, educate parents on potential harmful consequences of their children over-indulging in media, and, most intriguingly:

That our AMA strongly encourage the consideration and inclusion of “Internet/video game addiction” as a formal diagnostic disorder in the upcoming revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV.

It is interesting that after stating there is not enough research to say that video game overuse is an addiction, the council nonetheless seeks to lump video games with Internet addiction in general, and recommend it be added as a diagnostic disorder in a future revision of the DSM.

I should point out that just because something is added to the DSM, that does not necessarily make it a mental illness. It’s just what a group of doctors currently believe is a disorder. At one time, recall, homosexuality was listed as a disorder in the DSM. As times change, what is considered a mental disorder changes. So, it begs the question, Why should overuse of the Internet and computer games be listed in the DSM as a diagnostic disorder? If a person has an addictive tendency, they will find some way to express it, whether through electronic means or otherwise. To question further, Why not just say Internet overuse, rather than adding video games, is a diagnostic disorder if the only connection between the two is MMORPGs? Why besmirch video games, too?

This lumping of video game addiction with Internet addiction, under the justification that a small percentage of MMORPG players show signs of overuse, is based on flimsy reasoning. The slash between Internet and video game addiction should be eliminated, or at least replaced by “Internet/MMORPG addiction.” But in my (non-medical) opinion, I have to ask, Why should the Internet and MMORPGs receive special consideration anyway? What is it about a computer screen and an Internet connection that makes a disorder any more noteworthy than pre-electronic disorders? What about the person who frequents social spots, or bars, or night clubs and shows addictive social tendencies in real life? Electronic social interactions are not much different than face to face interactions, they are just performed using different communication tools. If a person has an addictive nature, that nature will find release in some way, even if the Internet were to stop working.

The authors state that the Internet has allowed socially retarded people opportunities to control their online lives to an extent not possible in real life, and this in turn causes some to overuse the new tool. But, I don’t buy it. If a person has a problem, the problem exists with or without the opportunity. I would say what AA says about alcoholism: once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic, even 20+ years since the last drink. But then, here we get into the argument of chemical addictions versus social addictions again.

On a more positive note, the council mentioned benefits of video games, particularly within the medical field. Statements like this in the conclusion displayed their medical bias:

As with most other forms of media, video games do have a potentially positive role, especially in the health care and health education sectors.

I would argue that the statement would have been more accurate if the education sector in general were included, rather than limiting it to the health education sector. Obviously, health education is a subset of education in general. To assert instructional video games are limited to being of service to only health education displays a bias toward the report’s audience. This is perhaps understandable, considering the source.

All told, a very interesting report, and well worth reading. I do like what the authors had to say delineating video game overuse as a more correct term than video game addiction, but I would indeed hate to see video game addiction, even couched within a broader context such as Internet addiction, added as a diagnostic disorder to the DSM.

References

Anderson C.A., & Bushman, B.J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science 12(5). 353-359.

Council on Science and Public Health (2007). CSAPH Report 12-A-07: Emotional and behavioral effects, including addictive potential, of video games. American Medical Association, Chicago. [Online]. Available:

http://ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/467/csaph12a07.doc

Learning in World of Warcraft

When Chris Dede came to University of North Texas as a keynote speaker in a conference my department held, he spoke about how he and other researchers at Harvard are learning about educational games through their efforts with River City.

One thing Dr. Dede said in his lecture stood out to me. He said that of course students are learning things in commercial video games. James Paul Gee had recently published his book What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy to widespread acclaim. However, Dr. Dede said, what kids are learning in commercial products is mostly junk.

The week before last, I presented at the Texas Computer Education Association annual conference, the biggest state ed tech convention. At the Technology Coordinators Special Interest Group (TEC-SIG) luncheon, with tech directors and superintendents from across the state, our guest speaker was David Warlick. Mr. Warlick spoke on millennial learners, and touched upon the many-faceted ways technology impacts the lives of young people in and out of classrooms. He made essentially the same comment, that we have known for some time kids are learning in commercial video games, but what they are learning is junk.

It boils down to, I suppose, what our definition of junk is: I presume Dede & Warlick define the learning derived in commercial games as junk because it is usually not academic learning, or learning that is needed for standardized tests taken in schools. This truly gets at the larger question of, not whether games can be used for learning (they can), but whether we can use them somehow for academic pursuits.

Or, perhaps, they are best suited for learning about life? I’ve notice a couple of “what I learned while playing World of Warcraft” posts, lately. These fall along the lines of the book, Everything I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten. Of the two, the more prominent one is by noted screenwriter and director John August. His post, Seven Things I Learned from World of Warcraft is an honest effort to tie life lessons through playing the largest online game.

Regardless of the questions raised, these comments and posts, papers and research serve to illustrate how intriguing is the field of educational video games. Trying to figure out what questions to ask, how to ask them, and then seeking the answers will occupy many people for years to come.