research-article

Open access

Seek What You Need: Affiliation and Power Motives Drive Need Satisfaction, Intrinsic Motivation, and Flow in League of Legends

Authors:

Susanne Poeller,

Nicola Baumann,

Regan L. MandrykAuthors Info & Claims

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 5, Issue CHI PLAY

Article No.: 288, Pages 1 - 23

https://doi.org/10.1145/3474715

Published: 06 October 2021 Publication History

Abstract

In Motive Disposition Theory, the affiliation motive describes our need to form mutually satisfying bonds, whereas the power motive is the wish to influence others. To understand how these social motives shape play experience, we explore their relationship to Self-Determination Theory and Flow Theory in League of Legends. We find that: higher intimacy motivation is associated with greater relatedness satisfaction, autonomy satisfaction, enjoyment, and the flow dimension of absorption; higher prosocial motivation with more effort invested and the flow dimension fluency of performance; and higher dominance motivation with lower relatedness satisfaction but higher competence satisfaction and increased flow in both dimensions. We demonstrate that in addition to being driven to satisfy universal needs, players also possess individualized needs that explain our underlying motives and ultimately shape our gaming preferences and experiences. Our results suggest that people do not merely gravitate towards need-supportive situations, but actively seek, change, and create situations based on their individualized motives.

References

[1]

Philipp Alsleben. 2008. Das Bedürfnis nach Freiheit. Selbstintegration als viertes Basismotiv. [The Need for Autonomy. Self-integration as a Fourth Basic Motive]. VDM-Verlag, Saarbrücken.

[2]

Philipp Alsleben and Julius Kuhl. 2011. Touching a person's essence: Using implicit motives as personal resources in counseling. In Handbook of motivational counseling: Motivating People for Change (2nd ed.), W. Miles Cox and Eric Klinger (eds.). Wiley, Chichester, UK, 109--131.

[3]

Richard Bartle. 1996. Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs. Journal of MUD Research, 1(1). Retrieved August 17, 2017 from http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm

[4]

Chris Bateman, Rebecca Lowenhaupt, and Lennart E. Nacke. 2011. Player Typology in Theory and Practice. Proceedings of DiGRA 2011 Conference: Think Design Play: 1--24.

[5]

Ingrid R. Baum and Nicola Baumann. 2021. Arousing autonomy: A valid assessment of the implicit autonomy motive. Personality and Individual Differences 168: 110362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110362

[6]

Nicola Baumann, Reiner Kaschel, and Julius Kuhl. 2005. Striving for Unwanted Goals: Stress-Dependent Discrepancies Between Explicit and Implicit Achievement Motives Reduce Subjective Well-Being and Increase Psychosomatic Symptoms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89, 5: 781--799. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022--3514.89.5.781

[7]

Nicola Baumann and Julius Kuhl. 2020. Nurturing your self: measuring and changing how people strive for what they need. The Journal of Positive Psychology: 1--12. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2020.1805503

[8]

Anthony Bean and Gary Groth-Marnat. 2016. Video gamers and personality: A five-factor model to understand game playing style. Psychology of Popular Media Culture 5, 1: 27--38. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000025

[9]

Joël Billieux, Martial Van Der Linden, Sophia Achab, Yasser Khazaal, Laura Paraskevopoulos, Daniele Zullino, and Gabriel Thorens. 2013. Why do you play World of Warcraft? An in-depth exploration of self-reported motivations to play online and in-game behaviours in the virtual world of Azeroth. Computers in Human Behavior 29, 1: 103--109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.021

Digital Library

[10]

Max V. Birk, Maximilian A. Friehs, and Regan L. Mandryk. 2017. Age-Based Preferences and Player Experience. In Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play, 157--170. https://doi.org/10.1145/3116595.3116608

Digital Library

[11]

Max V. Birk, Dereck Toker, Regan L. Mandryk, and Cristina Conati. 2015. Modeling motivation in a social network game using player-centric traits and personality traits. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization, 18--30. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--319--20267--9_2

[12]

Richard E. Boyatzis. 1973. Affiliation Motivation. In Human motivation: A book of readings, David C. McClelland and Robert S. Steele (eds.). General Learning Corporation, Morristown, N.J., 252--276.

[13]

Veronika Brandstätter, Julia Schüler, Rosa M. Puca, and Ljubica Lozo. 2013. Motivation und Emotion [Motivation and Emotion]. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

[14]

Florian Brühlmann, Philipp Baumgartner, Günter Wallner, Simone Kriglstein, and Elisa D. Mekler. 2020. Motivational Profiling of League of Legends Players. Frontiers in Psychology 1 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01307

[15]

Holger Busch and Jan Hofer. 2012. Self-regulation and milestones of adult development: Intimacy and generativity. Developmental Psychology 48, 1: 282--293. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025521

[16]

Paul T. Costa and Robert R. McCrae. 1992. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five Factor Inventory. Professional Manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa, Fl.

[17]

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 1975. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco. https://doi.org/10.2307/2065805

[18]

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 1990. Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row, New York.

[19]

Lee Davis. 2020. How Riot Games Used Behavior Science to Curb League of Legends Toxicity. March 19.

[20]

Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan. 2000. The "What" and "Why" of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry 11, 4: 37--41. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104

[21]

Stefan Engeser and Thomas Langens. 2010. Mapping explicit social motives of achievement, power, and affiliation onto the five-factor model of personality. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 51, 4: 309--318. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467--9450.2009.00773.x

[22]

Entertainment Software Association. 2019. Essential Facts about the computer and video game industry.

[23]

Lindsay T. Graham, Samuel D. Gosling, Gustavo F. Tondello, Rina R. Wehbe, Lisa Diamond, Marc Busch, Andrzej Marczewski, and Lennart E. Nacke. 2013. Personality Profiles Associated with Different Motivations for Playing World of Warcraft. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 16, 3: 189--193. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0090

[24]

Frederik De Grove, Verolien Cauberghe, and Jan Van Looy. 2014. Development and Validation of an Instrument for Measuring Individual Motives for Playing Digital Games. Media Psychology 3269, December: 1--25. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2014.902318

[25]

Juho Hamari and Janne Tuunanen. 2014. Player types: a meta-synthesis. Transactions of the Digital Games Research Association 1, 2: 29--53.

[26]

Kathrin Heser, Rainer Banse, and Roland Imhoff. 2015. Affiliation or power: What motivates behavior on social networking sites? Swiss Journal of Psychology 74, 1: 37--47. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185/a000144

[27]

Jan Hofer, Holger Busch, Michael Harris Bond, Domingo Campos, Ming Li, and Ruby Law. 2010. The implicit power motive and sociosexuality in men and women: Pancultural effects of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 99, 2: 380--394. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020053

[28]

Jill Hollembeak and Anthony J. Amorose. 2005. Perceived Coaching Behaviors and College Athletes' Intrinsic Motivation: A Test of Self-Determination Theory. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 17, 1: 20--36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200590907540

[29]

Douglas N. Jackson. 1984. Personality Research Form. Sigma Assessment Systems, Port Huron, MI.

[30]

Shih-Ping Jeng and Ching-I Teng. 2008. Personality and Motivations for Playing Online Games. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal 36, 8: 1053--1060. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2008.36.8.1053

[31]

Daniel Johnson, John Gardner, and Penelope Sweetser. 2016. Motivations for videogame play: Predictors of time spent playing. Computers in Human Behavior 63: 805--812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.028

Digital Library

[32]

Daniel Johnson, M. John Gardner, and Ryan Perry. 2018. Validation of two game experience scales: The Player Experience of Need Satisfaction (PENS) and Game Experience Questionnaire (GEQ). International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 118: 38--46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.05.003

[33]

Daniel Johnson, Lennart E. Nacke, and Peta Wyeth. 2015. All about that Base. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '15, 2265--2274. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702447

Digital Library

[34]

Adam S. Kahn, Cuihua Shen, Li Lu, Rabindra A. Ratan, Sean Coary, Jinghui Hou, Jingbo Meng, Joseph Osborn, and Dmitri Williams. 2015. The Trojan Player Typology: A cross-genre, cross-cultural, behaviorally validated scale of video game play motivations. Computers in Human Behavior 49: 354--361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.018

Digital Library

[35]

John Kowal and Michelle S. Fortier. 1999. Motivational Determinants of Flow: Contributions from Self-Determination Theory. The Journal of Social Psychology 139, 3: 355--36 https://doi.org/10.1080/00224549909598391

[36]

Rachel Kowert. 2020. Dark Participation in Games. Frontiers in Psychology 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.598947

[37]

Julius Kuhl. 1999. Der Motiv-Umsetzungs-Test (MUT) [The motive-enactment-test (MET)]. Unpublished questionnaire. University of Osnabrück, Osnabru?ck, Germany.

[38]

Elizabeth Wyner Mark and Thelma G. Alper. 1980. Sex Differences In Intimacy Motivation. Psychology of Women Quarterly 5, 2: 164--169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471--6402.1980.tb00952.x

[39]

Marcus Martens, Siqi Shen, Alexandru Iosup, and Fernando Kuipers. 2015. Toxicity detection in multiplayer online games. In 2015 International Workshop on Network and Systems Support for Games (NetGames), 1--6. https://doi.org/10.1109/NetGames.2015.7382991

[40]

Dan P. McAdams. 1980. A thematic coding system for the intimacy motive. Journal of Research in Personality 14, 4: 413--432. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092--6566(80)90001-X

[41]

Dan P. McAdams. 1992. The intimacy motive. In Motivation and Personality: Handbook of Thematic Content Analysis, Charles P. Smith (ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 224--2 https://doi.org/

[42]

Dan P. McAdams, Sheila Healy, and Steven Krause. 1984. Social motives and patterns of friendship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 47, 4: 828--838. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022--3514.47.4.828

[43]

Dan P. McAdams and Joseph Powers. 1981. Themes of intimacy in behavior and thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40, 3: 573--587. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022--3514.40.3.573

[44]

Edward McAuley, Terry Duncan, and Vance V. Tammen. 1989. Psychometric Properties of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory in a Competitive Sport Setting: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 60, 1: 48--58. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1989.10607413

[45]

David C. McClelland. 1985. How motives, skills, and values determine what people do. American Psychologist 40, 7: 812--825. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.40.7.812

[46]

David C. McClelland. 1987. Human motivation. Cambridge University Press, New York.

[47]

David C McClelland. 1973. The two faces of power. Human Motivation: A Book of Readings 24, 1: 300--316.

[48]

David C. McClelland, John W. Atkinson, Russell A. Clark, and Edgar L. Lowell. 1953. The achievement motive. Appleton-Century-Crofts, East Norwalk, CT. https://doi.org/10.1037/11144-000

[49]

David C. McClelland, Richard Koestner, and Joel Weinberger. 1989. How do self-attributed and implicit motives differ? Psychological Review 96, 4: 690--702. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033--295X.96.4.690

[50]

Robert R. McCrae and Paul T. Costa. 1987. Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52, 1: 81--90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022--3514.52.1.81

[51]

Lennart E. Nacke, Chris Bateman, and Regan L. Mandryk. 2014. BrainHex: A neurobiological gamer typology survey. Entertainment Computing 5, 1: 55--62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2013.06.002

[52]

Johan Y.Y. Ng, Chris Lonsdale, and Ken Hodge. 2011. The Basic Needs Satisfaction in Sport Scale (BNSSS): Instrument development and initial validity evidence. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 12, 3: 257--264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.10.006

[53]

Tyler Pace, Shaowen Bardzell, and Jeffrey Bardzell. 2010. The rogue in the lovely black dress: Intimacy in world of warcraft. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings 1: 233--242. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753361

Digital Library

[54]

Susanne Poeller, Nicola Baumann, and Regan L. Mandryk. 2020. Power Play?: How the Need to Empower or Overpower Other Players Predicts Preferences in League of Legends. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI'20: 1--13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376193

Digital Library

[55]

Susanne Poeller, Max V Birk, Nicola Baumann, and Regan L Mandryk. 2018. Let Me Be Implicit: Using Motive Disposition Theory to Predict and Explain Behaviour in Digital Games. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI'18: 1--15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173764

Digital Library

[56]

Susanne Poeller, Karla Waldenmeier, Nicola Baumann, and Regan L. Mandryk. 2021. Prepare for Trouble and Make It Double: The Power Motive Predicts Pokémon Choices Based on Apparent Strength. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI'21: 1-- https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445084

Digital Library

[57]

Rabindra A. Ratan, Nicholas Taylor, Jameson Hogan, Tracy Kennedy, and Dmitri Williams. 2015. Stand by Your Man: An Examination of Gender Disparity in League of Legends. Games and Culture 10, 5: 438--462. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412014567228

[58]

Falko Rheinberg, Regina Vollmeyer, and Stefan Engeser. FKS. Flow- Kurzskala [Flow Short Scale; Verfahrensdokumentation aus PSYNDEX Tests-Nr. 9004690, Fragebogen und Normtabelle]. In Leibniz-Zentrum für Psychologische Information und Dokumentation (ZPID). ZPID Testarchiv, Trier. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.2667

[59]

Falko Rheinberg, Regina Vollmeyer, and Stefan Engeser. 2003. Die Erfassung des Flow-Erlebens [The measurement of flow experience]. In Diagnostik von Motivation und Selbstkonzept [Diagnostics of motivation and self-concept], Joachim Stiensmeier-Pelster and Falko Rheinberg (eds.). Hogrefe, Göttingen, 261--279.

[60]

Riot Games. 2009. League of Legends.

[61]

Richard M. Ryan, C. Scott Rigby, and Andrew Przybylski. 2006. The motivational pull of video games: A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion 30, 4: 347--363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006--9051--8

[62]

Anja Schiepe-Tiska and Stefan Engeser. 2012. Flow in nonachievement situations. In Advances in flow research, Stefan Engeser (ed.). Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, 87--107.

[63]

Felix D. Schönbrodt and Friederike X. R. Gerstenberg. 2012. An IRT analysis of motive questionnaires: The Unified Motive Scales. Journal of Research in Personality 46, 6: 725--74 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.08.010

[64]

Julia Schüler, Nicola Baumann, Athanasios Chasiotis, Michael Bender, and Ingrid Baum. 2019. Implicit Motives and Basic Psychological Needs. Journal of Personality 87: 37--55.

[65]

Julia Schüler and Veronika Brandstätter. 2013. How basic need satisfaction and dispositional motives interact in predicting flow experience in sport. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 43, 4: 687--705. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559--1816.2013.01045.x

[66]

Julia Schüler, Veronika Brandstätter, and Kennon M. Sheldon. 2013. Do implicit motives and basic psychological needs interact to predict well-being and flow? Testing a universal hypothesis and a matching hypothesis. Motivation and Emotion 37, 3: 480--495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-012--9317--2

[67]

Julia Schüler, Veronika Brandstätter, Mirko Wegner, and Nicola Baumann. 2015. Testing the convergent and discriminant validity of three implicit motive measures: PSE, OMT, and MMG. Motivation and Emotion 39, 6: 839--857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-015--9502--1

[68]

Julia Schüler, Kennon M. Sheldon, and Stephanie M. Fröhlich. 2010. Implicit need for achievement moderates the relationship between competence need satisfaction and subsequent motivation. Journal of Research in Personality 44, 1: 1--12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.09.002

[69]

Julia Schüler, Kennon M. Sheldon, Mike Prentice, and Marc Halusic. 2016. Do Some People Need Autonomy More Than Others? Implicit Dispositions Toward Autonomy Moderate the Effects of Felt Autonomy on Well-Being. Journal of Personality 84, 1: 5--20. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12133

[70]

Julia Schüler, Mirko Wegner, and Beat Knechtle. 2014. Implicit Motives and Basic Need Satisfaction in Extreme Endurance Sports. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 36, 3: 293--30 https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2013-0191

[71]

Sezan Sezgin. 2020. Digital Player Typologies in Gamification and Game-Based Learning: A Meta-Synthesis. Bart?n University Journal of Faculty of Education 9, 1: 49--68. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.610524

[72]

Kennon M. Sheldon and Julia Schüler. 2011. Wanting, having, and needing: Integrating motive disposition theory and self-determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 101, 5: 1106--1123. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024952

[73]

Cuihua Shen, Qiusi Sun, Taeyoung Kim, Grace Wolff, Rabindra Ratan, and Dmitri Williams. 2020. Viral vitriol: Predictors and contagion of online toxicity in World of Tanks. Computers in Human Behavior 108: 106343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106343

[74]

Nektarios A. Stavrou. 2008. Intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation and amotivation: Examining self-determination theory from flow theory perspective. In New developments in the psychology of motivation, Filip M. Qlsson (ed.). Nova Science, 1--24.

[75]

Felix Suessenbach, Steve Loughnan, Felix D. Schönbrodt, and Adam B. Moore. 2019. The Dominance, Prestige, and Leadership Account of Social Power Motives. European Journal of Personality 33, 1: 7--33. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2184

[76]

Gustavo F. Tondello, Rina R. Wehbe, Lisa Diamond, Marc Busch, Andrzej Marczewski, and Lennart E. Nacke. 2016. The Gamification User Types Hexad Scale. Proceedings of the 2016 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play - CHI PLAY '16: 229--243. https://doi.org/10.1145/2967934.2968082

Digital Library

[77]

Selen Türkay, Jessica Formosa, Sonam Adinolf, Robert Cuthbert, and Roger Altizer. 2020. See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil: How Collegiate Players Define, Experience and Cope with Toxicity. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-- https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376191

Digital Library

[78]

April Tyack and Elisa Mekler. 2020. Self-Determination Theory in HCI Games Research: Current Uses and Open Questions. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376723

Digital Library

[79]

Jason VandenBerghe. 2014. Keynote: Engines of Play. In CHI Play'14. Retrieved from https://chiplay.acm.org/2014/chiplay2014/keynotes/

[80]

Joseph Veroff and Sheila Feld. 1970. Marriage and work in America: A study of motives and roles. Van Nostrand-Rineholt, NY.

[81]

David G. Winter. 1973. The power motive. Free Press, New York.

[82]

Maria M. Wong and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 1991. Affiliation motivation and daily experience: Some issues on gender differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60, 1: 154--16 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022--3514.60.1.154

[83]

Nick Yee. 2006. Motivations of Play in MMORPGs - Results from a Factor Analytic Approach. CyberPsychology & Behavior 9, 6: 772--775. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.772

[84]

Nick Yee. 2015. Quantic Foundry. Retrieved September 12, 2017 from http://quanticfoundry.com/#motivation-model

[85]

Ling Zhao, Yaobin Lu, Bin Wang, and Wayne Huang. 2011. What makes them happy and curious online? An empirical study on high school students' Internet use from a self-determination theory perspective. Computers & Education 56, 2: 346--356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.006

Digital Library

[86]

Lara Ziegler. 2019. Top 10 Most Played MOBA Games (2019 Edition). Feb 14.

Cited By

Poeller SRobinson R(2024)Mute, Block, Punish, Reward? A Call to Shift the Research Focus From Concealing Toxicity in Games to Promoting Genuine Positive BehaviorCompanion Proceedings of the 2024 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play10.1145/3665463.3678863(282-284)Online publication date: 14-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3665463.3678863
Wijkstra M(2024)Fighting Toxicity Through Positive and Preventative InterventionCompanion Proceedings of the 2024 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play10.1145/3665463.3678857(450-453)Online publication date: 14-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3665463.3678857
Poeller SBaumann NMandryk R(2024)Intimidating or Friendly? How Players Represent Themselves With Character Appearances That Reflect Their Social MotivationsProceedings of the 19th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games10.1145/3649921.3650007(1-16)Online publication date: 21-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649921.3650007
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Power Play: How the Need to Empower or Overpower Other Players Predicts Preferences in League of Legends
CHI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

The power motive describes our need to have an impact on others. Relevant in contexts such as sports, politics, and business, the power motive could help explain experiences and behaviours in digital games. We present four studies connecting the power ...
Prepare for Trouble and Make It Double: The Power Motive Predicts Pokémon Choices Based on Apparent Strength
CHI '21: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Two social motives are distinguished by Motive Disposition Theory: affiliation and power. Motives orient, select and energize our behaviour, suggesting that the choices of power-motivated individuals should be guided by power cues, such as the ...
Let Me Be Implicit: Using Motive Disposition Theory to Predict and Explain Behaviour in Digital Games
CHI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

We introduce explicit and implicit motives (i.e., achievement, affiliation, power, autonomy) into player experience research and situate them in existing theories of player motivation, personality, playstyle, and experience. Additionally, we conducted ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction Volume 5, Issue CHI PLAY

CHI PLAY

September 2021

1535 pages

EISSN:2573-0142

DOI:10.1145/3490463

Editors:
Kathrin Gerling
KU Leuven
,
Elisa Mekler
Aalto University
,
Regan Mandryk
University of Saskatchewan

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2021 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 06 October 2021

Published in PACMHCI Volume 5, Issue CHI PLAY

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

9
Total Citations
View Citations
2,149
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)764
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)42

Reflects downloads up to 25 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Poeller SRobinson R(2024)Mute, Block, Punish, Reward? A Call to Shift the Research Focus From Concealing Toxicity in Games to Promoting Genuine Positive BehaviorCompanion Proceedings of the 2024 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play10.1145/3665463.3678863(282-284)Online publication date: 14-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3665463.3678863
Wijkstra M(2024)Fighting Toxicity Through Positive and Preventative InterventionCompanion Proceedings of the 2024 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play10.1145/3665463.3678857(450-453)Online publication date: 14-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3665463.3678857
Poeller SBaumann NMandryk R(2024)Intimidating or Friendly? How Players Represent Themselves With Character Appearances That Reflect Their Social MotivationsProceedings of the 19th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games10.1145/3649921.3650007(1-16)Online publication date: 21-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649921.3650007
Mandryk RMirza-Babaei PDenisova AFreeman GJohnson D(2024)Games and Play SIG: Connecting Games Research to the Broader HCI ContextExtended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3643986(1-6)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3643986
Waldenmeier KPoeller SDechant MBaumann NMandryk R(2024)Cheat Codes as External Support for Players Navigating Fear of Failure and Self-Regulation Challenges In Digital GamesProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642603(1-13)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642603
Arukgoda ALakshika EBarlow MGunawardana K(2024)Effective Motive Profile Compositions for Cooperative Ad-Hoc TeamsIEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems10.1109/TCDS.2023.332192416:3(1027-1040)Online publication date: Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/TCDS.2023.3321924
Poeller SDechant MKlarkowski MMandryk R(2023)Suspecting Sarcasm: How League of Legends Players Dismiss Positive Communication in Toxic EnvironmentsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36110207:CHI PLAY(1-26)Online publication date: 4-Oct-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3611020
Yu T(2023)Another Recipe App: A Design Case with Motive Disposition TheoryExtended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544549.3585591(1-7)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3544549.3585591
Nurliza N(2022)The Psychological Determinants toward The Value of Healthy Food among Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus ConsumersMedia Gizi Indonesia10.20473/mgi.v17i2.122-13517:2(122-135)Online publication date: 30-May-2022
https://doi.org/10.20473/mgi.v17i2.122-135

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents