Abstract
In the discussion on what players learn from digital games, there are two major camps in clear opposition to each other. As one side picks up on negative elements found in games the other side focuses on positive aspects. While the agendas differ, the basic arguments still depart from a shared logic: that engagement in game-related activities fosters the development of behaviors that are transferred to situations beyond the game itself. With an approach informed by ethnomethodology, in this paper we probe the underlying logic connected to studies that argue for such general effects of games. By focusing on proficient gamers involved in the core game activity of boss encounters in a massively multiplayer online game, we examine the fundamentals that must be learnt and mastered for succeeding in an ordinary collaborative gaming practice where aggression is portrayed. On the basis of our empirical analysis we then address the contentious links between concrete instances of play and generic effects. As expected, the results point to “aggression” as well as “collaboration” as major components in the gaming experience, but our analysis also suggests that the practices associated with these notions are locally tied to the game. Based on these results, we propose that to reverse this relationship and claim that game environments foster collaboration or aggression in general first assumes strong theoretical claims about the nature of cognition and learning, and second, risks confusing the debate with hyperbole.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Notes
It is often claimed that the term mob originates from a research report by Richard Bartle in 1980 where he refers to moving objects as ‘mobiles’ in one of the early multi-user dungeons (MUDs, a text-based precursor to MMOGs) (Bartle 2004). In game worlds of today, the term mobs often refers to monsters while other ‘mobiles’ are referred to as non-player characters (NPCs, such as those who sell items or those with whom players can engage in pre-scripted dialogues).
In the studied material, the boss encounters were managed by teams with widely varying specializations. Furthermore, in the material, the death of whole teams (wipes) rarely occurred and wipes leading to breakdowns of groups (members quitting the team after an unsuccessful fight) occurred only once.
In LotRO, certain aggressive mobs do not automatically attack if the player is several levels higher, while other mobs (‘threatening’ mobs) instead provide the player with some seconds’ respite and reset aggro if the player moves out of aggro range within a time limit (while ‘passive’ mobs only attack the player if they are attacked).
Players can in various ways get input from the threat system and status displays of which member(s) are currently subjected to aggro. In LotRO, such status displays of which player is currently receiving aggro can be obtained by, for example, marking a particular mob with the mouse cursor or, if several mobs are present, to cycle through the mobs by pressing the “tab” button.
References
Anderson, C. A., Shibuya, A., Ihori, N., Swing, E. L., Bushman, B. J., Sakamoto, A., et al. (2010). Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 151–173.
Bailey, K., West, R., & Anderson, C. A. (2011). The influence of video games on social, cognitive, and affective information processing. In J. Decety & J. Cacioppo (Eds.), Handbook of social neuroscience (pp. 1001–1014). New York: Oxford University Press.
Bartle, R. (2004). Designing virtual worlds. Indianapolis: New Riders Publishing.
Beach, K. (1999). Consequential transitions: A sociocultural expedition beyond transfer in education. Review of Research in Education, 24(1), 101–139.
Bennerstedt, U., & Ivarsson, J. (2010). Knowing the way. Managing epistemic topologies in virtual game worlds. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW): An International Journal, 19(2), 201–230.
Bogost, I. (2008). The rhetoric of video games. In K. Salen (Ed.), The ecology of games: Connecting youth, games, and learning (pp. 117–140). Cambridge: MIT.
Buckingham, D., & Burn, A. (2007). Game literacy in theory and practice. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(3), 323–349.
Bushman, B., Rothstein, H., & Anderson, C. (2010). Much ado about something: Violent video game effects and a school of red herring: Reply to Ferguson and Kilburn (2010). Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 182–187.
Cairncross, S., & Mannion, M. (2001). Interactive multimedia and learning: Realizing the benefits. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(2), 156–164.
Calvert, S. L. (2005). Cognitive effects of video games. In J. Raessens & J. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of computer game studies (pp. 125–131). Cambridge: MIT.
Chen, M. (2009a). Communication, coordination, and camaraderie in World of Warcraft. Games and Culture, 4(1), 47–73.
Chen, M. (2009b). Visualization of expert chat development in a World of Warcraft player group. E-Learning, 6(1), 54–70.
Crabtree, A., Benford, S., Capra, M., Flintham, M., Drozd, A., Tandavanitj, N., et al. (2007). The cooperative work of gaming: Orchestrating a mobile SMS game. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW): An International Journal, 16(1/2), 167–198.
Delwiche, A. (2010). Media literacy 2.0: Unique characteristics of video games. In K. Tyner (Ed.), Media literacy: New agendas in communication. New York: Routledge.
Ferguson, C. J. (2007). The good, the bad and the ugly: A meta-analytic review of positive and negative effects on violent video games. Psychiatric Quarterly, 78(4), 309–316.
Ferguson, C. J., & Kilburn, J. (2010). Much ado about nothing: The misestimation and overinterpretation of violent video game effects in eastern and western nations: Comment on Anderson et al. (2010). Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 174–178.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Garfinkel, H. (2002). Ethnomethodology’s program: Working out Durkheim's aphorism. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gee, J. P. (2008). Learning and games. In K. Salen (Ed.), Ecology of games (pp. 21–40). Cambridge: MIT.
Goldstein, J. (2005). Violent video games. In J. Raessens & J. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of computer game studies (pp. 341–357). Cambridge: MIT.
Gredler, M. E. (1996). Educational games and simulations: A technology in search of a (research) paradigm. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology: A project of the association for educational communications and technology (pp. 521–540). New York: Macmillan.
Griffiths, M. (2005). The therapeutic value of video games. In J. Raessens & J. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of computer game studies (pp. 161–171). Cambridge: MIT.
Griffiths, M. (2010). Online video gaming: What should educational psychologists know? Educational Psychology in Practice, 26(1), 35–40.
Gunter, B. (2005). Psychological effects of video games. In J. Raessens & J. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of computer game studies (pp. 145–160). Cambridge: MIT.
Harel Caperton, I. (2010). Toward a theory of game-media literacy: Playing and building as reading and writing. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations, 2(1), 1–16.
Hsu, H.-Y., & Wang, S.-K. (2009). Using gaming literacies to cultivate new literacies. Simulation & Gaming, 41(3), 400–417.
Keating, E., & Sunakawa, C. (2010). Participation cues: Coordinating activity and collaboration in complex online gaming worlds. Language in Society, 39(3), 331–356.
Klimmt, C. (2009). Key dimensions of contemporary video game literacy: Towards a normative model of the competent digital gamer. Eludamos: Journal for Computer Game Culture, 3(1), 23–31.
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marton, F. (2007). Sameness and difference in transfer. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 499–535.
Mayer, R. E., & Wittrock, M. C. (1996). Problem-solving transfer. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 45–61). New York: Macmillan.
Mondada, L. (2011). Coordinating mobile action in real time: The timely organization of directives in video games. In P. Haddington, L. Mondada, & M. Nevile (Eds.), Mobility and interaction. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter (in press).
Moore, R. J., Duchenaut, N., & Nickell, E. (2007). Doing virtually nothing. Awareness and accountability in massively multiplayer online games. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW): An International Journal, 16(3), 265–305.
Moore, R. J., Hankinson-Gathman, C. E., Duchenaut, N., & Nickell, E. (2007). Coordinating joint activity in avatar-mediated interaction. In M. B. Rosson (Ed.), CHI '07 Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 21–30). New York: ACM.
Nardi, B., & Harris, J. (2010). Strangers and friends: Collaborative play in World of Warcraft. In J. Hunsinger, L. Klastrup, & M. Allen (Eds.), International handbook of internet research (pp. 395–410). London: Springer.
Packer, M. (2001). The problem of transfer, and the sociocultural critique of schooling. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(4), 493–514.
Partington, A. (2010). Game literacy, gaming cultures and media education. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 9(1), 73–86.
Pelletier, C. (2005). Studying games in school: Learning and teaching about game design, play and culture. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Digital Games Research Association (DiGRA) on Changing Views: Worlds in Play, June 16–20, 2005, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Reeves, S., Brown, B., & Laurier, E. (2009). Experts at play. Understanding skilled expertise. Games and Culture, 4(3), 205–227.
Salen, K. (2007). Gaming literacies: A game design study in action. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(3), 301–322.
Säljö, R. (2003). From transfer to boundary crossing. In T. Tuomi-Gröhn & Y. Engeström (Eds.), Between school and work. New perspectives on transfer and boundary crossing (pp. 311–321). Oxford: Pergamon.
Schrader, P. G., Lawless, K. A., & McCreery, M. (2009). Intertextuality in massively multiplayer online games. In R. E. Ferdig (Ed.), Handbook of research on effective electronic gaming in education: 3 (pp. 791–807). Hershey: Information Science Reference.
Shaffer, D. W. (2006). How computer games help children learn. New York: Palgrave.
Sjöblom, B. (2008). Gaming as a situated collaborative practice. Human IT, 9(3), 128–165.
Smedslund, J. (1953). The problem of “what is learned?”. Psychological Review, 60, 157–158.
Soares Palmer, D. (2010). Second language pragmatic socialization in World of Warcraft. Unpublished PhD Thesis: University of California, Santa Barbara.
Squire, K. D. (2008). Video-game literacy: A literacy of expertise. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 635–669). New York: Erlbaum.
Steinkuehler, C. (2006). Massively multiplayer online video gaming as participation in a discourse. Mind, culture, and activity, 13(1), 38–52.
Steinkuehler, C. (2007). Massively multiplayer online gaming as a constellation of literacy practices. E-Learning and Digital Media, 4(3), 297–318.
Steinkuehler, C. (2008). Massively multiplayer online games as an educational technology: An outline for research. Educational Technology, 48(1), 10–21.
Steinkuehler, C., & Duncan, S. (2008). Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 17(6), 530–543.
Steinkuehler, C., & Johnson, B. Z. (2009). Computational literacy in online games: The social life of a mod. The International Journal of Gaming and Computer Mediated Simulations, 1(1), 53–65.
Sudnow, D. (1983). Pilgrim in the microworld. New York: Warner.
Taylor, T. L. (2006). Play between worlds: Exploring online game culture. CambridgeMA: MIT.
Tuomi-Gröhn, T., & Engeström, Y. (2003). Conceptualizing transfer: From standard notions to developmental perspectives. In T. Tuomi-Gröhn & Y. Engeström (Eds.), Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary crossing (pp. 19–38). Amsterdam: Pergamon.
Walsh, C. (2010). Systems-based literacy practices: Digital games research, gameplay and design. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 33(1), 24–40.
Woodcock, B. (2008). An analysis of MMOG subscription growth. Version 23.0 Available from http://www.mmogchart.com
Zagal, J. P. (2010). Ludoliteracy: Defining, understanding, and supporting games education. Pittsburgh: ETC.
Zagal, J. P., & Bruckman, A. (2009). Novices, gamers, and scholars: Exploring the challenges of teaching about games. Game Studies, 8(2).
Zimmerman, E. (2009). Gaming literacy: Game design as a model for literacy in the twenty-first century. In B. Perron & M. J. P. Wolf (Eds.), The video game theory reader 2 (pp. 23–32). New York: Routledge.
Acknowledgements
The work reported was supported by the Linnaeus Centre for Research on Learning, Interaction, and Mediated Communication in Contemporary Society (LinCS). It has been financed by the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation, The Swedish Knowledge Foundation (project GRO) and the Swedish Research Council (project ‘Learning, interactive technologies and the development of narrative knowing and remembering’ (LINT). We wish to express our gratitude to the scholars in LINT for their continuous support and suggestions on previous materials but also to three anonymous reviewers and Thomas Hillman for their insightful comments. The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support and the productive collaboration.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bennerstedt, U., Ivarsson, J. & Linderoth, J. How gamers manage aggression: Situating skills in collaborative computer games. Computer Supported Learning 7, 43–61 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9136-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9136-6