MMOs Promote Sociability
It appears the experts have discovered something many of us have known for years: Massively Multiplayer Online Games are not necessarily socially destructive. According to University of Illinois researchers, online games appear to be well-suited for social bridging.
Those of you who have played an MMO for a relatively long period of time (3+ months) and/or have participated in a socially proficient guild can attest to these results. I know more people from more backgrounds because of my online play than I could ever meet in real life. The diversity of culture, social standing, ethnicity, and all the other “defining factors” that can be found in my group of E-Quaintances is really amazing.
While I have only formed a real social bond with a few people I’ve met first in an online game (or its community), the way has been opened through doors I never would have dared explore in the real world. Virtual worlds, to me, are partly an augmentation to my existing social life–they do not replace my desire to socialize in real life, but they do provide an alternative environment for me to meet people who share some of my interests.
And that’s what it all really comes down to. Everyone who plays online games, no matter who they are or where they’re from, shares an interest in playing games online. The foundation for most relationships is a common interest in something. When you meet someone playing the same online game as you and continue to virtually hang out with them, that social bridge can lead rather easily to a social bond.
The article indicates that MMOs may not be ideal to promote the formation of social bonds (and instead simply act as social bridges), but I beg to differ. If you have ever been to a Fan Faire or other large real life social gathering with fans of your game of choice, you will know what it’s like meeting those people you know from the game. There are real social bonds there, and people who like each other in the game tend to immediately like each other in real life.
I’d like to find the original article that this press release was based on. Perhaps a good place to start is the contact listed in it, eh? [Found via Slashdot]
Original Article Text:
Some online video games found to promote ‘sociability,’ researchers say
CHAMPAIGN, Ill. — Hang in there, parents. There is some hopeful news on the video-gaming front. Researchers have found that some of the large and hugely popular online video games ? although condemned by many as time-gobbling, people-isolating monsters ? actually have socially redeeming qualities.
In theory, anyway. After examining the form and function of what’s known in the trade as MMOs ? massively multiplayer online video games ? an interdisciplinary team of researchers concludes that some games “promote sociability and new worldviews.”
The researchers, Constance Steinkuehler and Dmitri Williams, claim that MMOs function not like solitary dungeon cells, but more like virtual coffee shops or pubs where something called “social bridging” takes place. They even liken playing such games as “Asheron’s Call” and “Lineage” to dropping in at “Cheers,” the fictional TV bar “where everybody knows your name.” “By providing places for social interaction and relationships beyond the workplace and home, MMOs have the capacity to function much like the hangouts of old,” they said. And they take it one step further by suggesting that the lack of real-world hangouts “is what is driving the MMO phenomenon” in the first place. The new conceptual study was published in early August in the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication under the title, “Where Everybody Knows Your (Screen) Name: Online Games as ‘Third Places.’ ”
Steinkuehler is a professor of education at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, and Williams is a professor of speech communication at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The term “third places” was coined in 1999 by sociologist Ray Oldenburg to describe the physical places outside the home and workplace that people use for informal social interaction. Steinkuehler and Williams argue that online spaces, such as those found in MMOs, should also count as third places for informal sociability, “albeit new and virtual places.” MMOs are graphical 2- or 3-D videogames that allow players, through their self-created digital characters or avatars, to interact with the gaming software and with other players, to build “relationships of status and solidarity.” While still in-game, players can hold multiple real-time conversations with fellow players through text or voice.
The games the researchers studied ? “Asheron’s Call I and II” and “Lineage I and II” ? represent “a fairly mainstream portion of the fantasy-based MMO market,” the authors wrote, where rewarding players for cooperation and the formation of long-term player groups or “guilds” is part of the game. Game play in MMOs is not a “single solitary interaction between an individual and a technology,” the researchers wrote, “but rather, is more akin to playing five-person poker in a neighborhood tavern that is accessible from your own living room.” Steinkuehler and Williams also found that participation in such virtual third places “appears particularly well suited to the formation of bridging social capital ? social relationships that, while not usually providing deep emotional support, typically function to expose the individual to a diversity of worldviews,” they wrote. “In other words,” Williams said, “spending time in these social games helps people meet others not like them, even if it doesn’t always lead to strong friendships. That kind of social horizon-broadening has been sorely lacking in American society for decades.”
Over the last few years, Williams has published a number of studies that have challenged the common and mostly negative beliefs about game playing. For his work on online games as third places, Williams drew on an earlier study of “Asheron’s Call,” for which he combined survey research and experimental design and focused on “issues of social capital and real-life community,” he said. He even played the game and conducted 30 random interviews, asking players about their motivations for playing, their in-game social networks and their life outside the game. “There were both positive and negative outcomes,” he said.
In her earlier study of cognition and learning in MMOs, Steinkuehler conducted a two-year ethnography of the “Lineage” games, her goal being to explore the kinds of social and intellectual activities in which gamers routinely participate, including individual and collaborative problem solving, identity construction, apprenticeship and literary practices. She conducted repeated interviews of 16 key informants throughout the study. Their overall conclusion in this newest study: “Virtual worlds appear to function best as bridging mechanisms, rather than as bonding ones, although they do not entirely preclude social ties of the latter type.”
While they continue to draw fire from many critics, MMOs attract more than 9 million subscribers worldwide, who spend on average 20 hours a week “in-game.”
“To argue that their MMO game play is isolated and passive media consumption that takes the place of informal social engagement is to ignore the nature of what participants actually do behind the computer screen,” the authors wrote. Still, they suggest that heavy game play might not be healthy in the short term for people who need strong connections, since it could take the place of strong offline relationships. “It’s really a question of what kind of balance the person has in their life,” Williams said. “For that reason, online spaces are not a one-size-fits-all phenomenon that can simply be labeled ‘good’ or ‘bad.’ ” The authors suggest that now may be a good time to reconsider how new media are affecting people. “Perhaps it is not that contemporary media use has led to a decline in civic and social engagement, as many have argued, but rather, that a decline in civic and social engagement has led to a ‘retribalization’ through contemporary media.”
Yeah.
No.
Yeah.
No.
I?m confused.
Let me start a beginnging that isn?t Genisis.
Massively Multiplayer Online Games are not necessarily socially destructive.
Not necessarily. But they are, addiction, habit, something the significant other doesn?t understand. Not necessarily implies some people (not you and I who make it a job/hobby).
Not necessarily.
But you?re talking social bond. I?ll give fact, my life. Offline I have three friends, and two dozen acquaintances / colleagues.
Online, I have maybe a dozen friends and over (all games I play included) eighty to near a hundred acquaintances / colleagues.
Online / offline are difference. Offline friend I?d drop work and go help, regardless of consequence (funeral, sickness). Online friend, I?d drop some task I?m doing in spare time and help (guild shit, corpse camp).
In either case, only a ?friend- will make me go the extra yard. Online I have more friends, but going that extra yard is easy. Offline, I have few friends, but going the extra yard for them could cost me days, money and actual concerns.
Never compare online to offline friends. Sure, there are some amazing and cute stories out there. But the social bond of a true friend off line can never equate to the social bond online. Offline, I?ll risk career and money to help. Online, well, online, what do I really risk?
I have more online friends then real life (I?m picky mind with the definition of friends). In game, my online friends could all be stand up and accomplish what I?d need. But offline, only three, possibly four people would follow me to hell and do so willingly, trying to help. Online mates might do so in game, but never when it matters.
Qualify the social bonds, but don?t compare them. Both are good, both are healthy, just don?t compare them. Online and offline lives often conflict, or merge, still, doesn?t mean the definition of online and offline friend should.
I prolly shouldn?t have so many offline drinks for an online topic, weeee.
MMOs Promote Sociability
The “real social bond” I’ve formed with a few people people I met online are people who I now know in real life and consider both on-and-offline friends. I have a lot of online friends who I more than acquiantances, but a few have actually crossed over from online to offline.
Online, offline, a friend is a friend. Ive been playing games for going on 9years with one guy. We dont stay in touch as much as we used to but you know what? I have offline friends that have moved away and Im not as close to anymore too. We still catch up from time to time and see what the other is doing, if the interests/time allows, we will get to gether and do somthing we both find enjoyable.
True, Im not going to skip work to go to my online friend’s parents funeral or anything like that, but I wouldnt skip work to go to my offline friend’s parents funeral if I had never met them either. Doesnt mean I cant offer my condolences.
If your friends with someone online first, then you meet up with them just at a neutral place or some event like fan faire, does that make you suddenly offline friends? I would still consider them an online friend, but why does that bond (dont read too much into that word) have to be any less than someone you have met through other activities in person?
For someone like me who plays online games more than I probably should, I find I have a lot more in common with several people online than I do with many of my offline friends. In the end, they are all friends and it really shouldnt matter where you met them or how you interact with them.
Now perhaps online friends end up disappearing or stabbing you in the back more often than offline friends do, but then you have to realize they were never really your friend in the first place. Mistakes like that happen both on and offline.
BTW, it’s highly unlikely that Constance and Dmitri “just discovered” this — they are longtime game researchers and fans of the games — Constance has acted as a high-end guild leader in fact. So it’s more likely that they did enough research to empirically demonstrate the phenomenon. Just adding the comment b/c the phrasing makes it sound like they are clueless.
[...] There’s been some derision at Joystiq and even a slight tone of “duh” from Nerfbat over the recently resleased results from a study showing that MMO games “promote sociability and new worldviews.” [...]
Well without seeing the “REAL” article it hard to evaluate what has been written about it. Also no insight is given into the methdology used and I assume that the actual article has some sort of footnotes.
I mean I would like a scientific explanation why those 2 games were selected. I would like to know on what basis did they select the individuals they interviewed? What were the exaact questions asked of the participants? Was there a control group? Was cultural background a selecting factor?
Nothing I have read has lead me to believe that this was in any sense of the word a “scientific” study. I think most of the conclusions reached would be those reached by any person playing MMO’s over time. The games that have been singled our in Congressional hearings as being “destructive” are normally “action” type games which contain graphic violence — I believe “Grand Theft Auto” is singled out and also I have read some comments about downloadables on the “net” that wouldn’t pass any rating system.
I don’t know about anyone else but I form more “deep bonds” with fellow gamers from the online space than I do with people I meet in the flesh, probably due to the shared interest in gaming but on the whole most of my “deep” social interaction is with fellow gamers these days, it may be via MSN messanger or /tell but it is real to me.
real world. Virtual worlds, to me, are partly an augmentation to my existing social life–they do not replace my desire to socialize in real life, but they do provide an alternative environment for me to meet people who share some of my interests. Link « Hide it
realy cool
