Self-Determination Theory in the State of Game Studies – Motivations for Video Game Play and Political Decision-Making: Evidence from Four Countries

This week I read over several papers on motivation design and encouraging participation among students. You see, games require motivated participants involved in an objective voluntarily. That’s a hell of a triumph!

One of the articles that stands out hails from a multinational survey on decision-making and player motivation -> Game Studies – Motivations for Video Game Play And Political Decision-Making: Evidence from Four Countries.

• The authors and their research interests: The document is written by six communication scholars from different countries, who have expertise in topics such as digital media, civic engagement, health communication, public opinion, and media psychology.
• The research topic and purpose: The document reports a cross-national survey of college students in Australia, the Philippines, South Korea and the U.S., which examined how different motivations for playing video games are related to political efficacy, skepticism and apathy.
• The theoretical framework: The document draws on two theoretical lines: self-determination theory, which explains how motives drive individuals’ choices and behaviors, and the spillover effect, which suggests that attitudes and behaviors developed in one domain can transfer to other domains.
• The research questions and hypotheses: The document proposes two hypotheses and two research questions, which explore the associations between the three main components of video game motivations (social, achievement and immersion) and the three political decision-making variables (efficacy, skepticism and apathy).

Self-determination theory is a macro theory of human motivation and personality that concerns people’s innate growth tendencies and innate psychological needs. It pertains to the motivation behind people’s choices in the absence of external influences and distractions ¹. The theory focuses on the degree to which human behavior is self-motivated and self-determined ¹. It has six mini-theories that explore different aspects of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, such as autonomy, competence, relatedness, and causality ¹. The theory was developed by psychologists Richard Ryan and Edward Deci and grew out of research on intrinsic motivation, or the internal desire to do something for its own sake, not for an external reward ².

¹: Wikipedia ²: ThoughtCo

Three Innate Psychological Needs

According to self-determination theory, humans have three innate psychological needs: competence, autonomy, and relatedness ¹²³⁴. Competence refers to the need to feel effective in one’s actions and to experience growth and mastery ². Autonomy refers to the need to feel in control of one’s own life and to act in accordance with one’s own values and interests ¹². Relatedness refers to the need to feel connected to others and to experience a sense of belongingness and intimacy ¹². These three needs are universal and essential for human growth, motivation, and well-being ¹²³⁴.

¹: Verywell Mind ²: Psychology Today ³: ThoughtCo ⁴: APA PsycNet

How did they measure the motivations for playing video games?

They measured the motivations for playing video games by using a survey based on Yee’s (2006) original 40-item scale that included 10 subcomponents of game play motivations¹. However, they excluded items that were not relevant to all types of games and performed a factor analysis that resulted in five factors. These factors were achievement factor 1 (advancement/mechanics), achievement factor 2 (competition), social, immersion factor 1 (discovery/role-playing/customization) and immersion factor 2 (escapism)². They used 28 items to measure these factors on a 7-point Likert-type scale. You can see the details of the items and the factor loadings on Table 1 in the Appendix section of the document.

The Spillover Effect

The spillover effect is an economic term that refers to the impact that seemingly unrelated events in one nation or region can have on the economies of other nations or regions. For example, a natural disaster, a political crisis, or a pandemic in one country can affect the trade, tourism, investment, or consumer confidence of its trading partners or neighbors. The spillover effect can be positive or negative, depending on the nature and magnitude of the event and the interdependence of the economies involved¹

Some examples of the spillover effect are:

• The 2008 global financial crisis, which originated from the subprime mortgage market in the U.S., had a negative spillover effect on the rest of the world, causing a recession, a credit crunch, and a decline in international trade and investment²
• The 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, which resulted from a massive earthquake and tsunami in Japan, had a negative spillover effect on the global nuclear industry, leading to a drop in demand, a rise in safety concerns, and a shift to alternative energy sources³
• The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, which started from China and spread to the rest of the world, had a negative spillover effect on the global economy, health, and society, causing lockdowns, travel bans, supply chain disruptions, unemployment, and social unrest⁴
• The 2021 Suez Canal blockage, which occurred when a giant container ship got stuck in the canal, had a negative spillover effect on the global trade and shipping, causing delays, congestion, and higher costs for goods and services⁵

¹: Spillover Effect: Definition – Investopedia ²: Spillover (economics) – Wikipedia ³: [Fukushima nuclear disaster: did the evacuation raise the death toll? | World news | The Guardian] ⁴: [Coronavirus: The world in lockdown in maps and charts – BBC News] ⁵: [Suez Canal blockage is delaying an estimated $400 million an hour in goods – CNN]

So What?

Moving on let’s consider how we can benefit from these findings.:

The most valuable takeaway I gleaned from reading this article is how we shall proceed in the discussion of the civic potential of video games and how different motivations for playing games are related to political efficacy, skepticism and apathy¹². For those interested in pursuing similar or related research the authors suggest some implications for further research on this topic, such as:

• Exploring the effects of specific types of games or hours played. The authors note that their study did not examine whether these factors may influence the political outcomes they measured. They recommend that future studies include these variables and test how they may relate to online and offline political participation and decision-making³.
• Using experimental designs to confirm causal claims⁴. The authors acknowledge that their cross-sectional data limits their ability to establish causality between motivations for game play and political efficacy, skepticism and apathy⁵. They suggest that future studies employ experimental methods to test whether playing games with certain motivations can cause changes in these political variables.
• Incorporating other variables that predict political participation. The authors point out that their study did not include other factors that are known to enhance political engagement, such as external efficacy, cynicism and political trust⁶. They propose that future studies examine how motivations for game play may be linked with these other variables.