行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫 期中進度報告
數位遊戲特質與環境對學習歷程影響的整合研究--子計畫
一:以一日經驗重建法探討遊戲玩家與遊戲設計者的心流與
情緒(第 1 年)
期中進度報告(精簡版)
計 畫 類 別 ： 整合型 計 畫 編 號 ： NSC 96-2520-S-009-006-MY3 執 行 期 間 ： 96 年 08 月 01 日至 97 年 07 月 31 日 執 行 單 位 ： 國立交通大學教育研究所 計 畫 主 持 人 ： 林珊如 計畫參與人員： 教授-主持人(含共同主持人)：林珊如 專科-專任助理人員：林淑卿 其他-兼任助理人員：葉妤真 其他-兼任助理人員：鄭朝陽 其他-兼任助理人員：周宛頤 碩士-兼任助理人員：江羽慈 報 告 附 件 ： 出席國際會議研究心得報告及發表論文 處 理 方 式 ： 期中報告不提供公開查詢中 華 民 國 97 年 05 月 29 日
期
期
期
期 中
中
中
中 報
報
報
報 告
告
告
告
國科會
國科會
國科會
國科會 科學教育處
科學教育處
科學教育處 資訊教育學門
科學教育處
資訊教育學門
資訊教育學門
資訊教育學門
計畫名稱：以一日經驗重建法探討遊戲玩家與遊戲設計者的心流與情緒 計畫編號：96-2520-S-009-006-MY3 總計畫名稱：數位遊戲特質與環境對學習歷程影響的整合研究（本計畫為子計畫一） 研究主持人：林珊如 研究團隊：江羽慈、鄭朝陽、葉妤貞、周宛頤、林淑卿 中文論文題目：青少年從事網路遊戲的動機、玩興及其對活力與自尊的效果英文題目：Adolescent Motivation and Playfulness in Online Games: Effects on Vitality and Self-esteem
投稿狀態：已投稿到 CyberPsychology
Abstract
The authors report their results from two studies in which they used self-determination theory
(SDT) to investigate adolescent motivation and playfulness when playing online games and
the effects of those factors on vitality and self-esteem. In the first study, 105 grade 6
Taiwanese students were asked to complete a questionnaire of motivation and playfulness
levels while playing online games. The results of exploratory factory analysis suggest that
three factors accounted for the participants’ in-game (state variable) motivation: competency,
autonomy, and relatedness. A correlation was found between the students’ playfulness trait
and in-game playfulness state. Results from a regression analysis indicate that the students’
designed to measure their in-game motivation, playfulness, vitality, and self-esteem. Their
response also suggest that in-game motivation has positive effects on both in-game state of
playfulness and self-esteem, as well as a significant impact on subjective vitality as mediated
by in-game playfulness.
Keywords: Online games; motivation; playfulness; self-determination theory; vitality.
1. Introduction
Online games and online communities are among the fastest growing forms of human
recreation1, with annual revenues from video games worldwide surpassing those of the film
industry2,3. Online game playing now represents a significant and rapidly expanding segment
of daily media usage among children and adolescents4,5. Young adolescent boys are especially
active digital game players6, and are therefore attracting research attention on the topic of
playfulness and what Webster and Martocchio7 call “human-computer interaction.” Online
games per se have many features that encourage states of playfulness, such as providing rich
immediate feedbacks to player actions, ease-of-use, and adjustable game levels which is able
to meet individual users’ dynamic skill development. Some Researchers focus on the negative
effects on online games8, but many adolescents regard online games as relaxations and the
gateway to seek pleasure and satisfactions. Adults often pay attention to long term effects on
seek joys.
Players must have fun in playing online games so that they continuously participate in
this kind of activities. What causes the feeling of fun (playfulness) in playing online games?
For Chung and Tan9, they propose the most relevant antecedents of perceived playfulness are
users’ intrinsic motivation rather than features of the software. With respect to gaming,
researchers have explored a variety of individual motives, including social interaction
motive10; achievement, social, and immersion motive3; or competition, challenge, fantasy, and
interest in games11. Researchers have also identified various motivation categories based on
theory of Information and Management, such as WWW acceptance12. Nevertheless, little
attention has been given to understand intrinsic motivation in playing games. Among rare
attempts, only Hwang’s13 as well as Wan and Chou’s14 applied flow theory15 to investigate
the psychological motives of online gamers.
Jansz and Tanis10 argue that the decision of playing games, rather than doing home
works, watching TV or participating other activities, is a conscious determination. Media use,
such as selecting and playing game has long been conceptualized as an active, goal oriented
behavior. Following the same trend, Ryan, Rigby and Przybylski1 have applied
self-determination theory (SDT) to study the motivational “pull” of online games, and found
that personal needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, three factors of intrinsic
decide to play that game again when they have free will to play
In line with previous studies, the authors suggest that players have both free will and
self-determination. As part of this project we will examine antecedent motivation factors
based on SDT.
There continues to be debate among scholars about the potential negative effects of
playing computer games, including increased tendencies toward aggression8 and lower
psychological well-being5. The literature also contains evidence in support of the
psychological benefits that can be derived from game experiences, including perceived
self-efficacy (meaning the perception of power over one’s environment16) and enhanced
self-esteem1. The two studies described in this paper look at two potential benefits: enhanced
vitality and self-esteem. The research has three parts: (a) using Deci and Ryan’s17 SDT
(entailing autonomy, competence, and relatedness) to construct questionnaires for measuring
motivation and playfulness, subjective vitality, and self-esteem; (b) performing a regression
analysis using the three variables to determine the predictive strength of motivation; and (c)
using a structural equation model to examine our online game playfulness and motivation
model.
2. Related Studies
2.1 Playfulness
characteristic of game players. Based on data collected from preschool teachers, she identified
five components of playfulness: (a) physical spontaneity, referring to levels of coordination
and motor activity; (b) social spontaneity, meaning the quality of interactions among children
at play; (c) cognitive spontaneity, representing the quality of children’s imaginations when
playing and the degrees to which children assume character roles, create their own unique
games, or adopt unconventional objects while playing; (d) manifest joy, meaning the degree
to which children express enthusiasm, exuberance, enjoyment, lack of restraint, and
vocalization while playing; and (e) sense of humor, referring to the joking, teasing, and
clowning behaviors that are characteristic of children at play.
Researchers have identified two specific playfulness categories. The first, computer
playfulness19, refers to an individual’s tendency to interact spontaneously with a computer.
Hackbarth et al.19 created this concept based on suggestions from Webster and Martocchio7
and Woszczynski, Roth and Segars20 that playfulness in computer interactions should be
measured as both a state and a trait; the latter may be treated as a motivational characteristic.
The second, microcomputer playfulness7 (MCP) is a situation-specific characteristic
representing a type of intellectual or cognitive playfulness. MCP refers to an individual’s
tendency to interact with computers in a spontaneous, creative, imaginative, and of course,
playful way. Potosky21 and Woszczynski et al.20 have demonstrated that computer playfulness
The majority of research on playfulness as an interactive state is based on Csikszentmihalyi’s
15
flow theory, which describes a state frequently experienced by people who are completely
engaged in and/or by their favorite activities. In terms of human-computer interaction, the
flow experience occurs when users become so absorbed in a situation-specific activity that
they lose track of time20. Wan and Chiou14 indicate that flow state is negatively correlated
with addictive inclination and it was not a significant predictor for players’ subsequent
additive inclination.
Moon and Kim12 regard playfulness as a new factor that reflects the user’s intrinsic belief in
WWW acceptance. They have identified three dimensions of perceived playfulness:
concentration (the extent to which users perceive that their attention is focused), curiosity (the
extent to which users are inquisitive about an interaction), and enjoyment (the extent to which
users find an interaction fun or interesting). They use playfulness as an intrinsic motivation
factor to investigate user’s acceptance of www. The authors suggest that players’ motivation
is antecedent to their playfulness state. So the related studies of gaming motivation are
introduced in the following section.
2.2 Gaming motivation
Jansz and Tanis10 and Lucas and Sherry11 list players’ motivations as competition,
challenge, social interaction, fantasy, and interest in a game. Bartle22 identified four types of
defined in terms of two behavioral dimensions: (a) acting on versus interacting with game
elements, and (b) focusing on other players versus focusing on the virtual world. In his studies
of Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMOGs), Yee2,3 used a factor analysis to identify
three kinds of players: achievement players who focus on gaining power within a game
through mastery and competition, social players who are more interested in interacting with
others and developing in-game relationships, and immersion players who have a strong desire
to escape into virtual worlds by engaging in role-play and becoming part of a storyline.
From the perspective of human psychology, motivation represents the inner drive of an
individual and a force that compels individuals to act. Wan and Chiou14 have demonstrated
that the psychological needs of online gamers resemble a two-factor construct consisting of
satisfaction and dissatisfaction dimensions. They also used two-factor theory to examine
player flow states during online games. Self-determination theory17 addresses intrinsic and
extrinsic factors that either facilitate or undermine motivation. Intrinsic motivation represents
engagement in an activity for its own sake, while extrinsic motivation represents engagement
to obtain an outcome that is separate from the activity itself. Arguing that a true theory of
motivation should not focus on behavioral classifications that can be constrained by the
structures of particular games, Ryan et al.1 applied self-determination theory to players while
they made choices between gaming products as well as to players “in character” in specific
determined by an individual’s motives. Bartle22 takes the position that players typically play
games for one of two reasons: the games are intrinsically satisfying, or the players are seeking
“fun.” According to the intrinsic motivation component17 of self-determination theory, a
combination of contextual factors, events, and conditions enhance an individual’s sense of
autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Autonomy represents a sense of volition or
willingness when performing a task. Factors that enhance autonomy (and, in turn, intrinsic
motivation) include provisions for choice, the use of rewards as a mechanism for
informational feedback rather than behavior control, and non-controlling instructions. A
specific example is computing autonomy—a composite of confidence in controlling
computers and self-reliance when using them23. The large majority of gamers play according
to their own free will. The most popular online games provide multiple means of playing and
give immediate and continuous feedback in the form of game points or status promotion.
According to Deci and Ryan17, a sense of competence entails a need for challenge in
addition to feelings of what White24 called effectance motivation. Bandura16 used the term
perceived self-efficacy when discussing individual perceptions of having control over or being
able to perform certain tasks that require special abilities. More recently, Charlton23 has
developed measures of perceived control in the computing domain. Online games offer a
context for players to compete with others and to show their abilities by controlling character
money, items, and experience points, which in turn give players access to scenarios in which
they can further improve their skills and achieve new levels of proficiency.
Relatedness refers to a feeling of connection with others. Many online games are
specifically designed so that players join groups and interact with each other in order to
overcome team challenges (e.g., battles and sieges). Other players join bulletin boards or
other forms of online gathering places to discuss gaming issues. Many online relationships
correspond to real-world connections. When looking at this concept, Jansz and Tanis10 used a
regression analysis to show that the social interaction motive is one of the strongest predictors
of time spent gaming.
Ryan et al.1 utilized the intrinsic motivation component of SDT to study player
motivation and changes in well-being, and found that it is a strong predictor of player
motivation. However, they also observed that long exposures to gaming are either draining or
fatiguing—in other words, extended game play exerts negative effects on vitality. Therefore,
we will adopt SDT to study the connection between intrinsic motivation and playfulness of
online gamers.
2.3 Vitality
Ryan and Frederick25 believe that experiences of vitality specifically refer to energy that
emanates from the self, and regard it as both subjective and a reflection of physical and
other words, having energy available to the self. Ryan and Deci26 consider vitality to be a
major factor in what it means to be fully functioning and psychologically healthy. Ryan and
Frederick25 developed their own scale to assess an individual’s state of subjective vitality. The
concept is assumed to have a negative relationship with physical pain and a positive
relationship with the amount of autonomous support found in a particular situation. We
adopted their scale for the present research.
2.4 Self-esteem
The term self-esteem refers to a stable sense of personal worth or worthiness that is
measurable via self-report testing27. The concept is problematic in that it is sometimes
difficult to distinguish self-esteem from other constructs such as narcissism or bragging.
Regarding online gaming research, Ferng28 has found direct and negative relationships
between strength of electronic game addiction and health, self-esteem, and interpersonal
relationships. Tung29 also gives evidence indicating that players who are addicted to online
games are at greater risk of having low self-esteem and negative emotions. Although some
scholars argue that extensive online gaming can lead to negative results such as addiction,
reduced levels of psychological well-being, lower self-esteem, and impoverished personal
relationships8,28,29, we will investigate the potential for positive benefits such as increased
psychological well-being and increased physical vitality.
3.1 Research Questions
3.1.1 Do players’ in-game motivation successfully predict in-game playfulness? What factors
of players’ in-game motivation can successfully predict in-game playfulness?
3.1.2 Do players’ in-game motivation and playfulness successfully predict vitality once stop
playing an online game?
3.1.3 Do players’ in-game motivation and playfulness successfully predict self-esteem after
online gaming? What factors of players’ in-game motivation and playfulness
successfully predict self-esteem after online gaming?
3.2. Method
We developed a questionnaires consisting of items designed to collect demographic
information, online game playing habits, and playfulness both as state12 and trait7. The
instruments contained scales associated with in-game intrinsic motivation, in-game
playfulness (state), a game playfulness trait, subjective vitality, and self-esteem. The in-game
intrinsic motivation scale consisted of three subscales: in-game competence, in-game
autonomy, and in-game relatedness. Responses to all items were given along a 5-point Likert
scale (1 = “strongly disagree,” 5 = “strongly agree”). Specific descriptions of each scale
follow.
designed to measure in-game competence—that is, a study participant’s perception of whether
the game being played provided a challenging but not overwhelmingly difficult experience1.
Example items are “I feel very capable during the game” and “the game is challenging but not
overwhelming.”
The second subscale consisted of five items designed to measure in-game autonomy,
meaning the degree to which participants felt free play a game according to their own wishes
and perceived opportunities to take part in activities that interested them1. Examples include
“I play online games because they interest me” and “I feel controlled and pressured when
playing online games” (reverse scored).
The third subscale consisted of six items designed to measure in-game relatedness,
meaning a sense of feeling connected to other players of the same game. Examples include “I
find that the relationships I form in the context of a game are fulfilling,” and “Because of
playing with the group, I feel the game become funny.”
In-Game Playfulness (state). To create this scale we relied on research conducted by
Moon and Kim12 on three characteristics of perceived playfulness: concentration, curiosity,
and enjoyment. The 8 items were modified from Ahn, Ryu & Han’s 30 “web users’
playfulness scale” to fit the online gaming context. Sample items include “Once I start
playing the game, I am often unaware of outside noise” and “Online games always capture
Game Playfulness Trait. This scale, consisting of 22 items and a 7-point
microcomputer playfulness adjective checklist, was originally developed by Webster and
Martocchio7. We modified their work to fit the online game. Participants were asked to select
adjectives to describe subjective feelings for the game they were playing or characteristics of
that game.
Subjective Vitality. The items were modified from Ryan and Frederick’s25 scale
“Subjective Vitality State” to assess the participants’ perceived experiences of energy and
aliveness after their stop playing the online games. An example of the 6 items is “I feel
energized right now.”
Self-Esteem. For this part of our instrument we adopted Rosenberg’s31 10-item
Self-Esteem Scale, which was originally constructed to measure global feelings of self-worth
or self-acceptance among adolescents. Our primary modification was to change the original
four-point response scale to a five-point scale to maintain consistency with the other sections
of the instrument. A sample item is “I am able to do things as well as most other people.”
3.3 Participants and Procedure
Our participant sample consisted of 132 6th graders approaching graduation time in a
northern Taiwan primary school were recruited as subjects. The all subjects had experience
playing Kart Rider, the most popular online game among students in that age range according
divided into three categories: speed, item, and flag. Players can compete as individuals or as
teams consisting of two or more players.
For data collection, the participants’ teachers gave them permission to play Kart Rider
for 20 minutes,and then instructed them to spend the subsequent 15 minutes completing the
Web-based study questionnaire. A total of 132 questionnaires were collected.
27questionnaires were deemed unusable for reasons such as leaving too many items to answer.
According to the 105 usable questionnaires, 51 of the respondents were male, 54 female. Just
under half (52, or 49.5%) had 1 month of experience playing Kart Rider, 44 (41.9%) had
between 2 and 6 months of experience, and 9 (8.6%) students had between 7 and 12 months
of experience. The majority (56, 53.3%) reported spending less than 7 hours per week playing
online games, 30 (28.6%) spent between 8-16 hours, and 19 (18.1%) more than 16 hours.
3.4 Exploratory Factor Analysis and Reliability Coefficients
In-game intrinsic motivation. As with all of the scales used in this research, the 16
items for this specific scale were validated by factor analysis using principal axis and varimax
rotation methods. One item was deleted due to its low factor loading. Our results indicate that
the 3 subscale factors (relatedness, autonomy, and competence) explained 49.91% of total
variances. The reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s alpha) were .82, .85 and .80 for the three
factors, respectively, and .83 the entire scale.
factor loading. Our results indicate that the single playfulness state factor explained 57.14%
of total variance (Cronbach’s alpha = .90 for entire scale).
Game playfulness trait. Of the 22 original items, 4 were deleted due to low factor
loading. According to our results, the scale’s 4 factors of game design, cognitive spontaneity,
manifest joy, and sense of humor explained 49.91% of total variance. Three of the four factors:
cognitive spontaneity, manifest joy, and sense of humor were named based on Lieberman’s18
work. Cronbach’s alpha for the above-mentioned factors were .86, .81, .69 and .83,
respectively, and .85 for the entire scale.
Subjective vitality. Of the 8 original items, 2 were deleted due to their low factor loading.
Our results indicate that the scale’s single factor (subjective vitality) explained 42.75% of
total variance (Cronbach’s alpha = .71 for the entire scale.
Self-esteem. None of the 10 original items were deleted. The scale’s dual factors (positive
and negative self-esteem) explained 42.68% of total variance. Cronbach’s alpha for the two
factors were .76 and .76, respectively, and .74 for the entire scale.
3.4 Criterion-Related Validity
The item “how much time do you spend playing Kart Rider per week?” was used to
examine criterion-related validity for the in-game intrinsic motivation. The game playfulness
trait scale7 served as the criterion for examining the criterion-related validity of the in-game
hours playing Kart Rider per week and in-game intrinsic motivation (r=.204, p<.05) and
between playful state and playful trait (r=.255, p<.01) (Table 1). The relationship between
playful trait and number of hours playing Kart Rider per week was not statistically significant.
Significant relationships were also noted between motivation and both playful state (r=.607,
p<.01) and playful trait (r=.409, p<.01). The results indicated that the playful state could
account for online games playfulness better than the playful trait in this study.
--Insert Table 1 about here--
3.5 Regression Analyses
As shown in Table2, results from a regression analysis indicate that in-game intrinsic
motivation is a predictor of in-game playfulness, since it explained 36.2% of the total variance
(F=60.03, p<.001).
--Insert Table 2 about here--
The three motivation factors were added to the regression using the stepwise method, with
relatedness entering the regression before autonomy (Table 3); competence did not enter at all.
These results concur with those reported by Jansz and Tanis10, who found that motivation for
social interaction was the strongest predictor of the amount of time spent gaming. Combined,
relatedness and autonomy explained 38.8% of the total variance in predicting playfulness
--Insert Table 3 about here--
After inputting the motivation and playfulness scores, we found that both had predictive
power for vitality, with motivation entering the model first (Table 4). Combined, the two
factors accounted for 42.7% of the total variance (F=39.781, p<.001).
--Insert Table 4 about here--
Results from inputting playfulness and motivation into the regression show that
playfulness is capable of predicting self-esteem but motivation is not (Table 5). Playfulness
can predict playfulness, explaining 10% of the total variance (F=12.509, p<.01).
--Insert Table 5 about here--
Finally, results from inputting three motivation variables and the playfulness variable
into the regression model show that only playfulness and competence motivation could be
considered predictors of that characteristic(Table 6), explaining 12.5% of the total
variance (F=8.406, p<.001) This finding agrees with Ryan et al.’s 1 data showing that
in-game motivation by itself is an insufficient predictor of self-esteem. Furthermore, while
our data show that the playfulness and competence can serve as predictors of self-esteem,
together they explain only 10% of the total variance for that characteristic (F=12.509, p<.01).
In other words, evidence showing that online games decrease player self-esteem is weak.
The overall results from the regression analyses suggest that in-game motivation has
predictive power for playfulness, vitality, and self-esteem. Building on Ryan et al.’s1 assertion
that motivation as a component of self-determination theory (SDT) can account for
motivation among online players’, our results suggest that SDT can be applied to player
4. Study 2
Study 1 results were incorporated into the design of the second study design. The two
primary goals were: confirming the validity of the research instrument and identifying
relationships among the variables. Our Study 1 results regarding playfulness factors did not
agree with those reported by the original scale authors, Ahn et al.30. In addition, the study
participants were limited in terms of game choice, and those restrictions may have affected
their sense of autonomy as a motivating factor. We therefore recruited more participants for
the second study to confirm the results of our factor analysis, and did not restrict their choice
of online game. Also, even though our Study 1 regression analyses suggest that in-game
intrinsic motivation is a predictor of both playfulness and vitality, the small number of
participants (105) may have been insufficient for testing relationships among a relatively
large number of complex factors. We therefore used a structural modeling approach to
analyze relationships among all factors in Study 2, meaning that the variables could be
depicted as a causally related network 32.
Results from the regression analysis in Study 1 were also used to establish the following
hypotheses for Study 2 (Fig. 1):
H1. In-game motivation has a positive effect on in-game playfulness.
H2. In-game motivation has a positive effect on self-esteem.
in-game playfulness.
H4. In-game motivation has a positive effect on self-esteem as mediated by in-game
playfulness and subjective vitality.
H5. In-game playfulness has a positive effect on subjective vitality.
H6. In-game playfulness has a positive effect on self-esteem as mediated by subjective
vitality.
The hypothesis model is presented as Figure 1 --Insert Figure 1 about here--
4.1 Participants and Procedures
The Study 1 participant sample consisted of 100 6th graders from a primary school and
290 junior high school students in Taiwan. The final sample consisted of 363 students (217
male, 146 female) who handed in usable questionnaires. Of those, 59 (16.3%) stated that they
had been playing online games for 1 month or less, 129 (35.5%) for between 2 and 6 months,
47 (12.9%) for between 7 and 12 months, and 128 (35.3%) for 1 year or more. In terms of
hours spent playing per week, 150 (41.3%) reported 7 hours or less, 89 (24.5%) between 8
and 16 hours, 56 (15.4%) between 16 and 24 hours, and 58 (15.9%) 25 hours or more. A
statistically significant difference in weekly playing time was noted between boys and girls
support Gentile and Walsh’s6 finding that early adolescent boys are especially active digital
games players.
4.2 Questionnaires
In line with our goal of giving greater autonomy to the participants, the first item of the
Study 2 questionnaire was “Write the name of the online game that you usually play every
day. All of the following questions will be about that game and playing habits.” Items for
collecting background or demographic information and the scales for in-game intrinsic
motivation, in-game playfulness (state), subjective vitality, and self-esteem were the same as
in the Study 1 instrument, as was the five-point Likert response range. The Playfulness Trait
adjective checklist scale was deleted. Scale score statistics are presented in Table 7. They
indicated a statistically significant difference between male and female participants in the
category of in-game playfulness: curiosity (T=0.16, p<.001), with males reported higher
scores.
--Insert Table 7 about here--
LISREL software was used to estimate model parameters, standard errors, and overall fit
indices33. Three types of fit indices were used to assess the model’s overall fit: chi-square
statistic, comparative fit index (CFI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA).
The chi-square statistic provides an asymptotically valid significance test of model fit. The
model fit. Finally, the RMSEA is an index that takes the model complexity into account. The
RMSEA for the Study 2 instrument was below the critical value of .08 for describing a
modestly fitting model34.
4.3 Structural Equation Modeling
Structural equation modeling was used to examine our online game playfulness model.
Latent variables were in-game motivation (Motive), in-game playfulness (Playful), and
subjective vitality (Vitality). Observed variables were in-game competence (Compe),
in-game autonomy (Auto), in-game relatedness (Relate), concentration (Conce), enjoyment
(Enjoy), curiosity (Couri), vitality1 (Vit1), vitality2 (Vit2), self-esteem1 (Est1), and
self-esteem2 (Est2). We also examined estimated coefficients for causal relationships
between constructs that validated the hypothesized effects. A covariance matrix of the
variables is presented in Table 8.
--Insert Table 8 about here--
LISREL software was used to estimate model parameters, standard errors, and overall fit
indices33. Estimated coefficients and their significance in the structural model are shown in
Figure 2. The chi-square statistic for the overall fit model was 19.34 (df=31, p=.000,
RMSEA=0.068 < 0.08), and values for the other fit indices were within acceptable rangers
(CFI=.97, NFI=.95, NNFI=.96). Standardized estimates of path coefficients for all three
magnitudes of causal relationships take into account the direct and indirect (mediated) effects
of latent variables on one another. Interpretations of absolute values are: < 0.1, small effects;
≈ 0.30, medium effects; > 0.5, large effects35.
The data indicate that in-game motivation had significant direct effects on both in-game
playfulness (thereby supporting H1) and self-esteem (thereby supporting H2); the
magnitudes of each impact were 0.88 and 0.69. In-game motivation had a significant effect
on subjective vitality as mediated by in-game playfulness (thus supporting H3); impact
magnitude was 0.55. In-Game Motivation was not found to have a positive effect self-esteem
on mediated by In-Game Playfulness and Subjective Vitality (Hypothesis 4). No positive
effect was found for in-game motivation on self-esteem as mediated by in-game playfulness
and subjective vitality, therefore H4 is rejected. However, a positive effect was found for
in-game playfulness on subjective vitality, meaning H5 is supported (magnitude = 0.62). No
positive effect was found for in-game playfulness on self-esteem as mediated by subjective
vitality, meaning H6 is rejected.
The measure’s composite reliability being 0.6 or higher, calculated as
Composite variables were identified as motivation (0.62), playfulness (=0.68), subjective
vitality (=0.82), and self-esteem (= 0.69)—all above the 0.6 minimum.
5. Discussion and Conclusion
According to the study 1 results, three factors account for online gamer motivation:
competence, autonomy, and relatedness. This finding agrees with the conclusion reported by
Ryan et al.1. The microcomputer playfulness7 was related to the in-game playful
questionnaire and illustrates the criterion related validity. The relation index from our
application of a “time spent playing Kart Rider per week” factor to examine criterion-related
validity with intrinsic motivation was found to be statistically significant (r=.204, p<.01). Our
results also indicate a statistically significant relationship between online game playfulness
(trait) and in-game playfulness (state) (r=.255, p<.01), but no significant relationship between
in-game playfulness (trait) and number of hours spent playing per week. Furthermore,
statistical significance was noted between motivation and playfulness state (r=.607, p<.001)
as well as between motivation and playfulness trait (r=.409, p<.001), suggesting that
playfulness state exerted a stronger influence on online game playfulness.
According to the results of our regression analyses, in-game motivation was a valid
predictor of in-game playfulness (r2=.362, p<.001). In addition, of the three motivation
factors that were tested, both relatedness and autonomy could be used to predict playfulness
(r2=.388, p<.001). This supports Jansz and Tanis’s10 finding that social interaction motivation
combination of playfulness and competence motivation could be used to predict self-esteem
(explaining 12.5% of total variance; F=8.406, p<.001) (Table 7). These results support our
contention that self-determination theory can be viewed as accounting for a large part of
online players’ motivation, playfulness, vitality, and self-esteem—that is, they support the
findings of Ryan et al.1.
As part of our second study, we utilized a structural equation model to examine
correlations among motivation, playfulness, and vitality. Similar to Study 1 results, in-game
motivation had significant direct effects on in-game playfulness and self-esteem. Motivation
has been defined as the inner drive of an individual and a force that compels people to act.
Among adolescents, intrinsic motivation to play online games is strongly connected to
perceived needs for autonomy, to display competence, and to feel connected to others. Their
motivation would have positive effects on adolescence players’ in-game playfulness and
self-esteem. In contrast, the sense if in-game playfulness (consisting of concentration, enjoy,
and curiosity) among adolescent players was not found to have any effect on self-esteem in
Study 2. One possible explanation is that adolescent players’ in-game playfulness is possibly
hard to enhance adolescence players’ personal worth and self-esteem.
Among the adolescent players in the second study, in-game playfulness had a
significant effect on subjective vitality (0.62 magnitude) and in-game motivation had a
suggest that when adolescent players have a strong sense of in-game playfulness, they either
simply lose track of their fatigue or feel energized. Ryan et al.1 concluded that prolonged
exposure to online games may determine player vitality. Our data suggests that in-game
playfulness may help reduce fatigue and enhances player perceptions of subjective vitality. In
terms of spent playing per week, our 150 participants (41.3%) reported 7 hours or less, 89
(24.5%) between 8 and 16 hours 150 (41.3%) reported 7 hours or less, 89 (24.5%) between 8
and 16 hours, 56 (15.4%) between 16 and 24 hours, and 58 (15.9%) 25 hours or more. Most
of them were not prolonged exposure to online games, and they simply lose track of their
fatigue.
Previous researchers have gathered evidence showing that online games exert negative
effects on individual players’ self-esteem 28,29 and vitality1. In contrast, our data indicate that
the in-game intrinsic motivation of adolescent gamers exert positive effects on in-game
playfulness, subjective vitality, and self-esteem. A possible explanation it tied to Ryan et
al.’s1 suggestion that the motivation component of self-determination theory accounts a great
deal for online players’ motivation. Our two findings suggest self-determination theory (SDT)
could be applied to investigate the positive influence on adolescence players’.
Regarding the use of SDT to investigate online game players’ motivation, playfulness,
vitality, and self-esteem, Bartle22 and Yee2 postulated that players can be categorized into
true motivation theory should not focus on behavioral classifications constrained by the
structures of specific games, but instead focus on (a) factors associated with enjoyment and
persistence across players and genres, and (b) how games that differ in controllability,
structure, and content appeal to human motivation tendencies and psychological needs. Our
findings support the idea that SDT can account for a significant amount of player motivation,
and that player motivation has a direct effect on playfulness and self-esteem.
Similarities exist between playfulness and Csikszentmihalyi’s15 flow theory, which has
been used to explain intrinsic motivation and sense of involvement in many activities. A
number of researchers are using flow theory to examine recreation and game playing. For
example, Hwang13 and Wan and Chiou14 applied flow state to investigate the psychological
motives of online games, and found the contradistinction between flow and addiction. We
also expect to apply flow theory to investigate online game playfulness and motivation in
future studies. Other potential topics for further research include a meta-analysis of evidence
on how publication bias in terms of online game violence effect the literature36. Accordingly,
there needs to be a stronger research focus on the positive effects of online gaming. Finally,
more effort is needed to conduct longitudinal studies to provide insights into gamers’
References
1. Ryan RM, Rigby CS, Przybylski A. The Motivational Pull of Video Games: A Self Determination Theory Approach. Motivational Emotion 2006; 30:347–363.
2. Yee N. (2005). A model of player motivations. Available at: http://www.nickyee.com/ daedalus/archives/001298.php?page=1
3. Yee, N. Motivations for Play in Online Games. CyberPsychology & Behavior 2006; 9(6): 772-775.
4. Roberts DF. Media and youth: access, exposure and privatization. Journal of Adolescent and Health 2000; 27(1):8–14.
5. Wallenius M, Punamaki RL, Rimpela A. Digital Game Playing and Direct and Indirect Aggression in Early Adolescence: The Roles of Age, Social Intelligence, and Parent-Child Communication. Journal of Youth Adolescence 2007; 36:325–336.
6. Gentile DA, Walsh DA. A normative study of family media habits. Journal of Applied Development Psychology 2002; 23, 157–178.
7. Webster J, Martocchio J. Microcomputer playfulness: development of a measure with workplace implications. MIS Quarterly 1992; June: 201–226.
8. Anderson CA, Bushman B. 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 2001; 12:353–359. 9. Chung J, Tan FB. Antecedents of perceived playfulness: An exploratory study on user acceptance of general information-searching websites. Information & Management 2004; 41:869-881.
11. Lucas, K., & Sherry, J. L. (2004). Sex differences in video game play: A communication-based explanation. Communication Research, 31, 499–523.
12. Moon J, Kim YG. Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information & Management 2001; 38:217–230.
13. Hwang CH. (2000). Internet usage of Taiwan’s college students: the flow theory perspective [Master’s thesis]. Taiwan: National Chiao Tung University.
14. Wan CS, Chiou WB. Psychological Motives and Online Games Addiction: A Test of Flow Theory and Humanistic Needs Theory for Taiwanese Adolescents. CyberPsychology & Behavior 2006; 9(3):317-324.
15. Csikszentmihalyi M. (1990) Flow, the psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row.
16. Bandura A. (1997) Self-efficacy. New York: Freeman.
17. Deci EL, Ryan RM. (1985) Intrinsic motivation and self determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum.
18. Lieberman JN. Playfulness and divergent thinking: An investigation of their relationship at the kindergarten level. Journal of Genetic Psychology 1965; 107:29–224.
19. Hackbarth G, Grover V, Yi MY. Computer playfulness and anxiety: positive and negative, mediators of the system experience effect on perceived ease of use. Information & Management 2003; 40:221–232.
20. Woszczynski AB, Roth PL, Segars AH. Exploring the theoretical foundations of playfulness in computer interactions. Computers in Human Behavior 2002; 18:369–388. 21. Potosky D. A field study of computer efficacy beliefs as an outcome of training: the role
of computer playfulness, computer knowledge, and performance during training. Computers in Human Behavior 2002; 18:241-255.
22. Bartle RA. (2004) Designing virtual worlds. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
23. Charlton JP. Measuring perceptual and motivational facets of computer control: The development and validation of the computing control scale. Computers in Human Behavior 2005; 21:791-815.
24. White RW. Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review 1959; 66 (5):297-331.
25. Ryan RM, Frederick CM. On energy, personality and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality 1997; 65:529-565.
26. Ryan RM, Deci EL. To be happy or to be self-fulfilled: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. In S. Fiske (Ed.), Annual Review of Psychology 2001; 52:141-166 Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, Inc.
27. Rosenberg M. (1979) Conceiving the self. NY: Basic Books.
28. Ferng, JY. (2003) The Relationships between Electric-Game use and health status of junior high school students. [Master’s thesis] Taiwan: National Taiwan Normal University.
29. Tung CJ. (2002) An Exploratory Study on the Interrelationship of Internet Addiction, Internet Usage Motivation, Internet Usage Behavior and User Characteristics for Taiwan High School Students. [Master’s thesis] Taiwan: National Sun Yat-sen University.
30. Ahn T, Ryu S, Han I.. The impact of Web quality and playfulness on user acceptance of online retailing. Information & Management 2007; 44:263–275.
31. Rosenberg M. (1965) Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
33. Joreskog KG, Sorbom D. (1993) LISREL8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Browne MW, Mels G. (1990) RAMONA user’s guide. Columbus: Department of Psychology, Ohio State University.
35. Kline-Rex B. (1998) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
36. Ferguson CJ. The good, the bad and the ugly: A meta-analytic review of positive and negative effects of violent video games. Psychiatric Quarterly 2007; 78(4):309-316.
Table 1. Zero order correlations among play hours, motivation, play trait, and playful state.
Number of Play Hours/Week
Motivation Play State Play Trait
Number of Play Hours/Week - Motivation .204* - Play State .269** .607** - - Play Trait .109 .409** .255** .255** *p <.05 ; **p <.01
Table 2. Regression for in-game playfulness.
Factor R △R2 F β t
In-Game Intrinsic Motivation .67 .362 60.03* .607 7.748* *p <.001
Table 3. Regression for in-game playfulness.
Factor R △R2 F β t
Step 1: Relatedness .607 .363 60.182*** .445 4.262*** Step 2: Autonomy .632 .388 33.997*** .240 2.302* *p<.05; *** p<.001.
Table 4. Regression for subjective vitality.
Factor R △R2 F β t
Step 1: Motivation .621 .379 64.585* .445 4.770* Step 2: Playfulness .662 .427 39.781* .289 3.097** *, p<.001; **, p<.05
Table 5. Regression for self-esteem.
*p <.01; ** p<.001.
Factor R △R2 F β t
Table 6. Regression for the self-esteem.
*p <.001; **p <.01; ***p<.05.
Factor R △R2 F β t
Step 1: Playfulness .329 .100 12.509** .329 3.537** Step 2: Competence .376 .125 8.406* -.183 -1.987***
Table 7 Score statistics for Study 2 scales.
Scales M SD Cronbach’s Alpha
In-Game Intrinsic Motivation1 (Ryan et al., 2006) In-Game Competence In-Game Autonomy In-Game Relatedness 3.79 3.75 3.81 3.81 0.56 0.70 0.71 0.81 0.66 0.52 0.71 entire scale 0.74 In-Game Playfulness (Ahn et al.30)
Concentration Enjoyment Curiosity 3.69 3.46 4.02 3.70 0.69 0.88 0.80 0.85 0.54 0.54 0.63 entire scale 0.74 Player Vitality25 (Ryan & Frederick, 1997)
Vitality 1 Vitality 2 3.46 3.46 3.42 0.87 0.95 1.06 0.55 0.84 entire scale 0.82 Self-Esteem31 (Rosenberg) Self-Esteem 1 Self-Esteem 2 3.68 3.64 3.62 0.60 0.91 0.71 0.77 0.75 entire scale 0.76
Table 8. Covariance matrix for the study variables. Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Playfulness 1. concentration (0.81) 2. Enjoyment 0.25 (0.65) 3. Curiosity 0.30 0.33 (0.72) 4. Vitality 1 0.26 0.29 0.26 (0.90) 5. Vitality 2 0.21 0.33 0.34 0.70 (1.13) 6. Self-esteem1 -0.13 0.18 0.04 0.08 0.11 (0.82) 7. Self-esteem 2 0.17 0.25 0.21 0.21 0.28 0.15 (0.05) Motivation 8. Competence 0.26 0.19 0.24 0.22 0.26 0.07 0.26 (0.48) 9. Autonomy 0.13 0.19 0.23 0.17 0.18 0.09 0.13 0.14 (0.51) 10. Relatedness 0.23 0.28 0.31 0.17 0.20 0.08 0.23 0.20 0.21 (0.66)
數位遊戲特質與環境對學習歷程影響的整合研究
數位遊戲特質與環境對學習歷程影響的整合研究
數位遊戲特質與環境對學習歷程影響的整合研究
數位遊戲特質與環境對學習歷程影響的整合研究-子計畫一
子計畫一
子計畫一
子計畫一:
以一日經驗重建法探討遊戲玩家與遊戲設計者的心流與情緒
以一日經驗重建法探討遊戲玩家與遊戲設計者的心流與情緒
以一日經驗重建法探討遊戲玩家與遊戲設計者的心流與情緒
以一日經驗重建法探討遊戲玩家與遊戲設計者的心流與情緒
Using day reconstruction method to study flow experience, emotion, and behaviors of game designers and players
APA Convention 2007 出國心得報告
出國心得報告
出國心得報告
出國心得報告
2007/08/17-2007/08/20
主持人：林珊如 交通大學教育研究所 博士生：江羽慈 碩士生：葉妤貞、鄭朝陽、周婉頤 專任助理：林淑卿 壹 壹 壹壹、、、、主辦單位主辦單位主辦單位主辦單位: American Psychological Association 貳
貳 貳
貳、、、、參與會議流程參與會議流程參與會議流程參與會議流程
1. Creativity Issues in Adolescents and Young Adults Session Type: Paper Session
Division(s) 10, 7, 42, 47, 50, APA Committee on Early Career Psychologists, Psi Beta
Building: Boston Convention and Exhibition Center: Room Description: Meeting Room 155
Room Location: Meeting Level 1 Date: 08/17/2008
Time: 11:00AM - 11:50AM
2. Advances in Motivation Research Session Type: Paper Session
Division(s) 15, 16, 17, 42, 50, APA Committee on Early Career Psychologists, Psi Beta
Building: Boston Convention and Exhibition Center: Room Description: Meeting Room 259B
3. Time: 10:00AM - 10:50AM
3.Who Is the Self in Self-Determination? Session Type: Symposium
Division(s) 33, 10, 42
Building: Boston Convention and Exhibition Center: Room Description: Meeting Room 253B
Room Location: Meeting Level 2 Date: 08/17/2008
Time: 10:00AM - 10:50AM
4. Game Theory---Lost in New York Session Type: Film Program
Division(s) FILM
Building: Boston Convention and Exhibition Center: Room Description: Meeting Room 210C
Room Location: Meeting Level 2 Date: 08/17/2008
Time: 8:55AM - 9:35AM
5. Address given by Robert J. Sternberg Session Type: Invited Address
Division(s) 15
Building: Boston Convention and Exhibition Center: Room Description: Meeting Room 104C
Room Location: Meeting Level 1 Date: 08/16/2008
Time: 1:00PM - 1:50PM
6. What Do Children Learn When Playing Video Games? Session Type: Symposium
Division(s) 46, 32
Building: Boston Convention and Exhibition Center: Room Description: Meeting Room 207
Room Location: Meeting Level 2 Date: 08/17/2008
Time: 9:00AM - 10:50AM
7. Influences on Cognition and Creativity Session Type: Paper Session
Division(s) 10, 3, 6, 42, 47, 50, Psi Beta
Building: Boston Convention and Exhibition Center: Room Description: Meeting Room 155
Room Location: Meeting Level 1 Date: 08/17/2008 Time: 1:00PM - 1:50PM 叁 叁 叁 叁、、、、報告論文報告論文報告論文報告論文 Poster Session
Session Type: Poster Session Division(s) 2
Building: Moscone Center: Room Description: Halls ABC
Room Location: Exhibit Level-South Building Date: 08/18/2007
Time: 2:00PM - 2:50PM
Title: The relations of creative organizational climate of school, teachers ’ intrinsic/extrinsic motivation and creative teaching : An investigation study in Taiwan 肆 肆 肆 肆、、、、會議內容與心得報告會議內容與心得報告會議內容與心得報告會議內容與心得報告 此次赴美舊金山參加 2007 年年會，目的有二:發表論文與參與各項演講與展 覽，參與的 division 包括動機、自我決定理論、創造力、電玩與遊戲之理論。與 會學者中有幾位研究者研究數位遊戲玩家之遊戲動機，本人與學生與之交換心得 討論之後發現，以往研究者之關注電玩之負面效果，目前研究轉變為研究線上遊 戲帶給玩家之最佳經驗—心流狀態，而如何將電玩之遊戲心流經驗，帶入教學與 學習中，亦為研究之潮流趨勢。另一方面，研究者與學生報告「創意教學」論文， 有許多研究者參與討論，頗受好評。 伍 伍 伍 伍、、、、相相相相片剪影片剪影片剪影片剪影 向與會來賓介紹論文 研討會標誌前合影 研討會報告海報前合影
