Jaime Banks ~ @amperjayNicholas David Bowman ~ @bowmanspartanWest Virginia University, USA ~ @wvucommstudies #ixlab

You say data, I say dätaHarnessing the friction of competing epistemologies to better understand social phenomena

Prologue …

Nick … • Ontology - realism/objectivism • Epistemology – post-positivist/objectivist

• Knowledge can approximate any “real” object• Additive knowledge becomes increasingly objective• Descriptive > Prescriptive

• Methodology – scientific method, quantitative• experimental psychology• behavioral observation• (occasional) mass survey research

• Research focus• Media psychology• Interactivity and message processing

Jaime …• Ontology - Material-semiotic• Epistemology - Relational

• Constructivism• Situativity• Inter-subjectivity

• Methodologies – Interpretive, qualitative• Phenomenology• Grounded Theory• Actor-Networks

• Research focus• Identity, embodiment• Human-technology relationships

‘Inherited Epistemologies’

Player-avatar relationsAvatar = • User representations• Conduits of meaning/agency• Mediators of phenomenal

gameplay

Through a post-positivist lens …•Audiences have always responded to on-screen media characters as if they were “real”, impacting• Attention and modeling • Narrative involvement• Enjoyment

•Yet, we’ve never been able to interface with that on-screen persona

Your wish is my

command.

• Psychological Merging• Dimensions

• Identification • Suspension of Disbelief• Sense of Control• Sense of care/responsibility

• Associated with play motivations, pro/antisocial tendencies, enjoyment/appreciation

Character Attachment (CA)

Lewis, Weber, & Bowman (2008)

Relationship ≈ • valenced connection• between two people• where each influences the other

Avatar

Dyad

Socialgroups

Game environ.

Interface

Phys. Env.

Culture

Through a constructivist lens …

Player-Avatar Relationship(PAR)

Object Me Symbiote Other

But, but …• Theoretically divergent (psychological merging, psychological differentiation)

• Conceptual overlaps: agency, emotion• Predictive/associative value

• Narrative involvement• Prosocial/cooperative play• Appreciation

?

Intersection analysis 1: interpretive

Avatar as Object

Avatar as Me

Avatar as Symbiote

Avatar as Social Other

Identification Low High Mid Low

Suspension of disbelief Low Mid Mid High

Sense of Control High Mid Mid Low

Sense of care/responsibility Low Mid Mid High

Intersection analysis 2: quantitative

Para-social Social

PAR Sociality Scale …• Anthro-autonomy

• ~28% variance • α = .907

• Emotional investment• ~26% • α = .901

• Sense of companionship• ~16%• α = .888

~70% variance explained

Ludic + Narrative + Social

The Battle Royale …

Character Attachment

• Identification(pretending, being, affinity)

• Suspension of disbelief(error, plausibility)

• Control(‘obedience,’ frustration)

• Care/responsibility(wants, needs, interests)

PAR Sociality

• Anthro. autonomy(thoughts, feelings, life)

• Emotional investment(love, appreciation, loss)

• Companionship(friends, understanding, reciprocation)

EFA ~ The Beauty Pageant• Emotional Investment

• ~24% variance• α = .910

• Anthropomorphic autonomy (humanness)• ~20% • α = .891

• Suspension of disbelief• ~17% • α = .891

• Sense of control • ~12% • α = .796

~72% variance explained

CFA ~ The Talent ShowCMIN/df = 1.27, p = .076CFI = .989RMSEA = .036

Correlations shown are significant at the p < .001 level or greater.

.42

.44.32

-.45

Integrated model …• Emotional Investment (from PAR)

love, loss, appreciation• Suspension of Disbelief (from CA, adjusted)

error, plausibility• Player Control (from CA)

‘obedience,’ control• Avatar Autonomy

(life, feelings, thoughts)

Validations … • Human-like relatedness

F (4,385) = 64.49, p < .001, R2 = 401 (Adj. R2 = .395)

Durbin-Watson = 1.94

Validations … • Play motivations

• Social: F(4,485) = 12.54, p < .001, R2 = .094 (Adj. R2 = .086), DW = 1.93

• Completion: F(4,487) = 1.40, p < .235, R2 = .011 (Adj. R2 = .003), DW = 1.88

• Immersion: F(4,488) = 34.76, p < .001, R2 = .222 (Adj. R2 = .215), DW = 1.93

Validations … • PAR types

Avatar as Objectn = 267

Avatar as Me

n = 88

Avatar as Symbiote

n = 95

Avatar as Othern = 44

Emotional Investment

4.02a (1.57)

5.72b (1.12)

6.20c (.783)

5.45b (1.26)

Anthropo-morphism

1.36a (.745)

1.89b (1.32)

3.30c (1.67)

3.37c (1.64)

Suspension of Disbelief

3.33a 1.75)

4.53b (1.72)

5.06b (1.56)

4.54b (1.86)

Control 6.26b,c (.965)

6.44c (.825)

5.85a,b (1.27)

5.83a (1.20)

Problem solved: PAR ‘symbiotes’

Object Me Symbiote Other

Problem solved: CA ‘identification’• I sometimes forget my own feelings and take on

those of my character.• I enjoy pretending my character is a real person.• I consider my character a friend of mine. • I enjoy pretending I am my character. • I could see myself being attracted to my character.• I daydream about my character.

The payoff …• Generalizability + context• Breadth and depth• Improved explanatory power

The pains …• Learning other tool sets• Resolving philosophical

differences• Being open to breaking things

and being ‘wrong’

The practice …

@amperjay@bowmanspa

rtan

BONUS: Player-Avatar Relation Scale• Emotional Investment

• This avatar is very special to me.• I appreciate this avatar.• I would be heartbroken if I lost

this avatar.• I love this avatar.• (R) I don’t really care about this

avatar.• (R) I have no emotional

connection to this avatar.

• Player Control• This avatar does what I want.• I control this avatar.

• Avatar Autonomy• When I log out of the game, this

avatar has its own life.• This avatar has its own feelings.• This avatar has its own thoughts

and ideas.

• Suspension of Disbelief• I concentrate on inconsistencies

in this avatar's story and the game story.

• It is important to check for inconsistencies in this avatar's game.

• I pay attention to errors or contradictions in this avatar's world.