Moral positioning in video games and its relation with dispositional traits: The emergence of a social dimension
Introduction
Over the past 30 years, video games have become an important part of contemporary global entertainment and media. The increasing number of video gamers has lead researchers to focus their attention on video game effects on behavior. One relevant issue is related to the effects of violent video games on aggression.
Despite a great number of publications discussing this topic, it remains complex and characterized by substantial uncertainty. A recent article from The Guardian (Etchells, 2013) well summarized the current situation of the phenomenon. On the one hand, the media still identify video games as a possible contributory cause for real-life violent and criminal events (Anderson and Bushman, 2001, Bartholow et al., 2006, Bushman and Anderson, 2002, Hollingdale and Greitemeyer, 2013, Norris, 2004). On the other hand, the literature is filled more so with intense debates (Anderson et al., 2010, Bushman et al., 2010, Ferguson, 2015, Ferguson and Kilburn, 2010) and contradictory results (Ferguson et al., 2012, Markey et al., 2014, Willoughby et al., 2012).
Specifically, research has found that violent video games seem to increase aggressive behaviors in players, at least in the short-term (Bartholow et al., 2005, Greitemeyer and Mügge, 2014, Schutte and Malouff, 1988); promote aggressive representations of others, such as hostile attribution bias (Anderson and Dill, 2000, Bösche, 2010, Moller and Krahé, 2009); and generate negative emotions (anger) that can persist in the player after the game and influence his or her real life behaviors (Anderson and Dill, 2000, Carnagey et al., 2007). However, other studies have not found significant results for increases in aggression and anger (Unsworth, Devilly, & Ward, 2007), and some have shown that the effects disappear in the long-term, especially when one accounts for other personal or environmental causes for aggressive behaviors (Ferguson et al., 2012).
These inconsistent findings can be explained in several ways ranging from poor research design and invalid measurements to publication bias (Ferguson, 2007a, Ferguson, 2007b, Markey and Markey, 2010). For example, some researchers have suggested that different types of violence and aggression should be distinguished among video games content (Ferguson, 2010, Kontour, 2009), which suggests that certain violent representations are not necessarily linked to antisocial behaviors (e.g., there may be a difference between cartoon violence that takes place in a funny, unrealistic environment and a virtual representation of realistic criminal conduct). Similarly, situational factors, such as identity and proximity of the game opponent, influence aggressive tendencies (Williams & Clippinger, 2002).
It is also possible that these findings have been less than consistent because researchers have not always considered possible mediating factors (Matthews, 2015). In this sense, the video game player is not to be conceived as a machine that automatically repeats the behaviors it sees. On the contrary, the player actively enters the game with his or her own characteristics and elaborates the complex information received from the game. For example, researchers indicate that personality can guide media preferences (Kraaykamp & van Eijck, 2005), which suggests that people seek out entertainment that reflects and reinforces aspects of their personalities (Rentfrow, Goldberg, & Zilca, 2011). In this sense, dispositional aspects could led video gamers to choose violent video games or to protect themselves from the violent media exposure.
An important mediating factor, which has recently emerged in literature, is morality, conceived as the moral characterization of the avatar as it is expressed by the game narrative (Gabbiadini et al., 2013, Schulzke, 2010, Sicart, 2009, Weaver and Lewis, 2012). According to Funk, Buchman, Jenks, and Bechtoldt (2003), moral evaluation in video games is an automatic process that is triggered when the situation requires that certain normative beliefs guide behavioral choices. Dodge and Schwartz (1997) stated that the moral evaluation of the appropriateness of violent behaviors includes the social information processing stages. According to these stages, players must first selectively attend to and interpret the appropriate cues, then determine their goals for the situation and how to best attain those goals.
Indeed, video game players often reflect about moral content that is expressed in the games (Pohl, 2008), and they feel a real sense of guilt when they perform immoral actions in these virtual environments (Grizzard et al., 2014, Hartmann et al., 2010). Also, pro-social content in video games can promote abilities linked to moral behavior, such as empathy (Gentile et al., 2009, Greitemeyer and Mügge, 2014, Greitemeyer et al., 2010, Velez, 2015). Happ, Melzer, and Steffgen (2013) recently investigated the effect of the moral positioning of characters on players’ behaviors. Participants played the same game (Mortal Kombat vs. Dc Universe) using a violent evil character (Joker) or a violent good character (Superman). Not only did the Superman players not show effects in their aggressive tendencies, but also they outperformed the others in a pro-social task. Similarly, in an experiment by Gitter, Ewell, Guadagno, Stillman, and Baumeister (2013), players killed virtual zombies in a pro-social and morally justified context (protecting a friend) or in a morally ambiguous context (just kill as many zombies as possible). Participants in the first condition showed lower short-term aggression and higher levels of pro-social cognition.
In general, moral evaluation is influenced by the individual’s affective repertoire, including empathy (Hoffman, 2000). Empathy is a complex construct that includes both cognitive (perspective-taking) and affective responsiveness to the perceived emotional state of another. Empathy and attitudes toward violence are correlated components of moral evaluation where strong pro-violence attitudes are associated with low levels of empathy (Funk et al., 2003). Further, empathy is needed to transform moral standards into emotionally charged cognitions, which influence behavior, the product of moral evaluation. By investigating game preferences and empathy in the video game context, Barnett et al. (1997) found that adolescents who preferred violent games had lower empathy scores.
Attitude toward violence is another important component of moral evaluation. Among individuals who attribute hostile intent to another when a situation is ambiguous, positive attitudes toward violence may encourage them to act in an aggressive manner (Velicer, Huckel, & Hansen, 1989). Researchers have found that aggressive gamers appear more likely to appreciate violent video games, although violence did not improve their enjoyment during game play (Przybylski, Ryan, & Rigby, 2009). Additionally, impulsive and aggressive gaming styles or the preference for violent video games often results in low empathy, low agreeableness, and high aggression tendencies (Hartmann et al., 2010, Hollingdale and Greitemeyer, 2013, Sukeena et al., 2013, Van Schie and Wiegman, 1997).
Not only individual dispositions are associated with preference for violent video games, but also several researchers have suggested that the personality traits may mediate media violence effects (Ferguson et al., 2011, Ferguson et al., 2008). In particular, Markey and Markey (2010) suggested that a simultaneous combination of several Five-Factor Model traits, including high neuroticism (e.g., easily upset, angry, depressed, emotional, etc.), low agreeableness (e.g., little concern for others, indifferent to others feelings, cold, etc.), and low conscientiousness (e.g., break rules, do not keep promises, act without thinking, etc.) are more powerful mediators of violent video games.
Based on these statements, as first we assume that video gamers actually have preferences for morality positioning. That is, being moral in part relates to individual dispositions, so that video gamers do not choose to play as good or evil randomly. For this reason, we first considered that some players may have a preference for the evil characters or play, while others may have preferences for the good ones. We investigated morality positioning through four ad hoc questions and we analyzed the consistency in measuring a single construct.
Then, we expected to replicate the findings of previous research by carrying out a cross-sectional study. Specifically, the study aims to test the following hypotheses: Hp1 A stronger evil moral positioning in video games is associated with video gamers’ lower empathy. Hp2 A stronger evil moral positioning in video games is associated with higher aggressive attitudes. Hp3 A stronger evil moral positioning in video games is associated with personality dispositions of video gamers in terms of high neuroticism, low agreeableness, and low conscientiousness.
To date, no research attempts have explicitly investigated the relationships between personality correlates of players and their moral positioning in video game narratives. In recent years, moral choice has become an increasingly popular plot mechanism in video game play (Weaver & Lewis, 2012) and, according to our opinion, such an attempt is important; precisely, recent research has investigated the effects of evil/good playing experimental conditions on behavior (Happ et al., 2013); however, according to our knowledge no research investigated personal video gamers’ attitudes/preferences in terms of morality positioning in games. On the one hand, this study examined the relationship between dispositional variables and preferences for interpreting evil characters/making evil choices in video games. On the other hand, the study is one of very few to attribute an active role to players and to consider the importance of moral positioning as a potential mediator of media effects. Recent research has highlighted that evil or good playing in video games seems to generate opposite effects on behavior (Gitter et al., 2013, Happ et al., 2013), thus, we wanted to verify this aspect.
We then predicted that evil moral positioning in video games would be related to aggression tendencies and empathic abilities. Specifically, we hypothesize that: Hp4 The evil moral positioning in video games could partially predict positive aggression tendencies of the players. Hp5 The evil moral positioning in video games could partially predict negative empathic abilities of the players.
Section snippets
Materials and methods
The Internet provides considerable opportunities to expand the ways we conduct psychological research (Skitka & Sargis, 2006) and several studies have indicated that web-based data collection results in greater sample diversity, generalizes across presentation formats, and findings are consistent with data collected using more traditional means (Gosling, Vazire, Srivastava, & John, 2004). Therefore, an advertisement for research participation containing a hyperlink to a questionnaire on a
Associations between evil moral positioning and dispositional traits
To test our hypotheses about associations between evil moral positioning and dispositional traits, we performed several bivariate correlations. The results of all the correlations are shown in Table 2. According to the hypotheses, first we tested whether an association existed between the preference for evil moral positioning of video game players and lower empathy scores (Hp1) using morality ad hoc questions and the IRI subscales. Negative correlations are present for the evil positioning and
Discussion and conclusions
According to literature (Crick and Dodge, 1996, Dodge and Schwartz, 1997), moral choice depends on social information processing. Individuals have to first selectively attend to and interpret the appropriate social cues, then determine their goals for the situation and how to best attain those goals. More recent conceptions of morality (“Ethics of Care”) (Held, 2010, Noddings, 2008) state that concrete, specific situations of social life, which are characterized by relationships to be built and
Implications
Here we would like to provide insights that may be useful and interesting for future studies and applications. Maybe, research should consider video games as “moral laboratories” that players use to experiment with social behavior. In this sense, a moral video gaming monitored by educators and caregivers may also become a future resource for moral education. Say, since the present study showed that social abilities and personality traits related to social behavior (agreeableness, extraversion)
References (91)
- et al.
Chronic violent video game exposure and desensitization to violence: Behavioral and event-related brain potential data
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
(2006) - et al.
Big five or big two? Superordinate factors in the NEO Five factor inventory and the antisocial personality questionnaire
Personality and Individual Differences
(2004) - et al.
The interplay of traits and motives on volunteering: Agreeableness, extraversion and prosocial value motivation
Personality and Individual Differences
(2005) - et al.
The effect of video game violence on physiological desensitization to real-life violence
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
(2007) Needs met through computer game play among adolescents
Personality and Individual Differences
(2007)Evidence for publication bias in video game violence effects literature: A meta-analytic review
Aggression and Violent Behavior
(2007)- et al.
Personality and media influences on violence and depression in a cross-national sample of young adults: Data from Mexican–Americans, English and Croatians
Computers in Human Behavior
(2011) - et al.
A longitudinal test of video game violence influences on dating and aggression: A 3-year longitudinal study of adolescents
Journal of Psychiatric Research
(2012) - et al.
Playing violent video games, desensitization, and moral evaluation in children
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology
(2003) - et al.
A cognitive-behavioral model of problematic online gaming in adolescents aged 12–22 years
Computers in Human Behavior
(2013)
Do Big Five personality traits associated with self-control influence the regulation of anger and aggression?
Journal of Research in Personality
Personality, media preferences, and cultural participation
Personality and Individual Differences
Too good to care: The effect of skill on hostility and aggression following violent video game play
Computers in Human Behavior
Extending the theory of bounded generalized reciprocity: An explanation of the social benefits of cooperative video game play
Computers in Human Behavior
Aggression, competition and computer games: Computer and human opponents
Computers in Human Behavior
Contributo all’adattamento Italiano dell’Interpersonal Reactivity Index
Testing-Psicometria-Metodologia
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: A Journal of The American Psychological Society/APS
Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: A meta-analytic review
Psychological Bulletin
Aggression and moral development: Integrating social information processing and moral domain models
Child Development
Late adolescents’ experiences with and attitudes toward videogames
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
Correlates and consequences of exposure to video game violence: Hostile personality, empathy, and aggressive behavior
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Social intellicence–empathy = aggression?
Aggression and Violent Behavior
Violent video games prime both aggressive and positive cognitions
Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications
Violent video games and hostile expectations: A test of the general aggression model
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Much ado about something: Violent video game effects and a school of red herring: Reply to Ferguson and Kilburn (2010)
Psychological Bulletin
The aggression questionnaire
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Investigation of the relationship between social isolation, self-esteem, aggression and com- puter game play in Japanese adolescents
Asian Journal of Social Psychology
NEO-PI-R professional manual: Revised NEO personality and NEO Five- Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI)
Psychological Assessment
Social information-processing mechanisms in reactive and proactive aggression
Child Development
Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Social information processing mechanisms in aggressive behavior
What is the link between violent video games and aggression?
The Guardian
The good, the bad and the ugly: A meta-analytic review of positive and negative effects of violent video games
The Psychiatric Quarterly
Blazing angels or resident evil? Can violent video games be a force for good?
Review of General Psychology
Does movie or video game violence predict societal violence? It depends on what you look at and when
Journal of Communication
Personality, parental, and media influences on aggressive personality and violent crime in young adults
Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma
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
Adolescent aggression and social cognition in the context of personality: Impulsivity as a moderator of predictions from social information processing
Aggressive Behavior
Multigroup confirmatory component and factor analyses of the italian version of the aggression questionnaire
European Journal of Psychological Assessment
Interactive effect of moral disengagement and violent video games on self-control, cheating, and aggression
Social Psychological and Personality Science
The effects of prosocial video games on prosocial behaviors: International evidence from correlational, longitudinal, and experimental studies
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Mediators and moderators of long-term effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior: Practice, thinking, and action
JAMA Pediatrics
Virtually justifiable homicide: The effects of prosocial contexts on the link between violent video games, aggression, and prosocial and hostile cognition
Aggressive Behavior
Cited by (31)
To Kill or Not to Kill – An experimental test of moral Decision-Making in gaming
2022, Entertainment ComputingDoes a prosocial decision in video games lead to increased prosocial real-life behavior? The impact of reward and reasoning
2018, Computers in Human BehaviorCitation Excerpt :This bonus was included to increase the likelihood that participants considered this compensation as their own (Clark, 2002), and therefore render the act of donating more of a prosocial ‘sacrifice’ (Batson & Powell, 2003). As people's trait empathy may influence prosocial decision-making (e.g., Triberti et al., 2015), empathic concern was measured using the Empathic Concern subscale developed by Davis (1983). Before playing the game, participants rated seven statements (Cronbach's α = 0.71, e.g., “When I see someone being taken advantage of, I feel kind of protective toward them”) on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree).
Offline personality and avatar customisation. Discrepancy profiles and avatar identification in a sample of MMORPG players
2017, Computers in Human BehaviorCitation Excerpt :Few studies have investigated socially undesirable avatar characteristics (e.g., ‘evil’ avatars) and their effects on offline personality. Some of these studies showed that playing with avatars that glorify and reward immoral behaviour was negatively associated with extroversion, agreeableness and empathy (Triberti, Villani, & Riva, 2015), reduced self-control and increased cheating and aggression, especially in people who were high in moral disengagement (Gabbiadini, Riva, Andrighetto, Volpato, & Bushman, 2013). However, to date there has been no direct comparison between the social undesirable characteristics of avatars and the players.
Who are likely to experience disconfirmation? Impact of temperament and character on disconfirmation
2017, Computers in Human BehaviorITMI: The use of Immersive Technologies to promote Moral Intuitions
2024, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking