On a
recent hospital visit the nurse (a woman in her 50s) asked me what I do for a living.
I gave her my standard reply: "I am a psychologist specialising in cyberpsychology,
so how humans interact with technology and specifically video game play." She
gave me a fascinated look (it's the response I usually get) and replied: "I
love playing Temple Run – why do I find it so compelling?" I answered her:
"Because it makes you happy and getting high rewards compared to the effort
you’re putting in makes you want to play more."
Psychologists have used physiological measurements such as heart rate to measure engagement
This
conversation wasn’t a one off for me. When people find out what I do, they
often want to know more and are instinctively interested in why humans engage
in video game play. Personally, I think this speaks volumes about the power video
games as entertainment on a global scale.
Developers
are even more fascinated than gamers in the answer to that elusive question: “What
makes people so engaged in video game play?” While developers have many ways of gauging engagement, such as
churning data, sales, time spent playing, etc., as a psychologist, I am more
interested in scientific measurements as a result of research around gamer engagement,
which can complement and even challenge the measurements developers already use
to heighten the experience for the gamer.
A comprehensive
review on game play engagement is published
in Computers in Human Behaviour conducted in 2012 by Elizabeth Boyle,
Thomas Connolly, Thomas Hainey and James Boyle. It sheds some light on engagement
and highlights gaps in the research in this area. The study reviewed research
from a ten year period between 2001 and 2011 excluding educational and serious
games. All the papers reviewed were from research that was referenced in
academic journals and included a large number of research papers all looking at
different aspects of engagement.
The paper highlights the lack of
consensus about what engagement actually is, although lots of constructs have
been proposed: immersion, enjoyment, presence and flow, for example. Perhaps the
best known concept is flow, which is often characterised by complete optimal
experience and absorption in the task one is involved in to the exclusion of everything
else. Other researchers challenge this suggesting that actually immersion is a
better construct as it can be more varied in terms of the subjective experience
and does not, as flow does, concern itself solely with the optimal experience.
Outside
of the subjective experience, engagement may be measured objectively by
studying the time spent playing a game, although some researchers suggest this
is difficult to justify as a concrete measurement as factors like negative
motives for playing may hinder this measurement. Lab research around
physiological responses in gameplay are interesting, such as work around eye
movements and re-engagement post play as a useful objective measurement of
immersion, whilst other physiological measurements such as heart rate can
inform around emotional responses, these can be ambiguous when measured.
According to
psychologists enjoyment levels and motivation to play can predict engagement
Boyle's
review showed that surveys were the most popular method of studying motivation
and engagement, which is fine as long as they are scientifically designed to
have good validity and reliability. However, there is a lack of good qualitative
research which would further enhance our understanding of the subjective
experience of engagement, and this is an area that developers may consider
embarking upon in terms of research.
Players
want more and more out of the gaming experience and developers could utilise
scientific psychological measurements of engagement as objective robust
measurement tools that can be specific to genre, gamer profile, target market
as well as platform. The scope to get really close to the gamer using psychological
scientific measurements combined with more traditional developer measurements
can only be a good thing in terms of quality of the game experience for the
player.
So, if
you meet a cyberpsychologist in real life, please don't ask us what we do.
Reference
Boyle, E.A.,
Connolly, T.M., Hainey, T., Boyle, J.M. (2012). Engagement in digital entertainment games: A
systematic review. Computers
in Human Behaviour, 28(3), 771-780
No comments:
Post a Comment