JOB OFFER: Full-time postdoc position in media psychology/communication/media studies at Masaryk University

How Does Interactivity in a Video Game Render People Susceptible? A Mediating Role of Concrete-level Action Identity in Immersive Media

Abstract

Action identification theory (Vallacher & Wegner, 2012) posits that individuals become open to new meanings of actions when the actions are represented in their minds as concrete details (i.e., understanding actions as concrete identities), rather than abstract meanings (i.e., understanding actions as abstract identities). Based on this, we predicted that video game interactivity renders players susceptible to new ideas of actions performed in a video game, by causing them to conceive the actions as concrete details. In a 2 (medium type: interactive vs. non-interactive) x 2 (meaning of hunting: beneficial vs. harmful) between-subjects experiment (N = 111), participants played or watched a hunting simulation game, then expressed their agreement on a news article reporting either the benefit or harm of hunting. The interactivity group, compared to the non-interactivity group, described their game experience as concrete actions, indicating that they construed actions as concrete identities. Further, these concrete identities led to greater agreement with the news article regardless whether benefit or harm of hunting was reported. These results suggest an indirect effect of interactivity on participants’ susceptibility to a new idea. Implications for using the mental representation approach in media-effect studies were discussed.

Bibliographic citation

Sah, Y., & Peng, W. (2019). How Does Interactivity in a Video Game Render People Susceptible? A Mediating Role of Concrete-level Action Identity in Immersive Media. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 13(4), article 4. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5817/CP2019-4-4

Keywords

Interactivity; susceptibility; action-identity; mental representation video game

Full Text:

HTML

References

Show references Hide references

Aarts, H., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Hassin, R. R. (2004). Goal contagion: Perceiving is for pursuing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 23-37. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.1.23

Anderson, C. A. (2004). An update on the effects of playing violent video games. Journal of Adolescence, 27, 113-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2003.10.009

Avalanche Studios. (2000). The Hunter [Video game]. Available from: http://www.thehunter.com/

Bailenson, J. N., Patel, K., Nielsen, A., Bajscy, R., Jung, S.-H., & Kurillo, G. (2008). The effect of interactivity on learning physical actions in virtual reality. Media Psychology, 11, 354-376. http://doi.org/10.1080/15213260802285214

Banaji, M. R., Lemm, K. M., & Carpenter, S. J. (2001). The social unconscious. In A. Tesser & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intraindividual processes (pp. 134-158). Malden, MA, US: Blackwell Publishers Inc.

Bargh, J. A., & Chartrand, T. L. (2000). The mind in the middle: A practical guide to priming and automaticity research. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 253-285). New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.

Bartholow, B. D., Sestir, M. A., & Davis, E. B. (2005). Correlates and consequences of exposure to video game violence: Hostile personality, empathy, and aggressive behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1573-1586. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205277205

Blakemore, S.-J., & Frith, C. (2003). Self-awareness and action. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 13, 219-224. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4388(03)00043-6

Burgoon, E. M., Henderson, M. D., & Markman, A. B. (2013). There are many ways to see the forest for the trees: A tour guide for abstraction. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 501-520. http://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613497964

Carlston, D. E., & Smith, E. R. (1996). Principles of mental representation. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 184-210). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.

Costabile, K. A., & Klein, S. B. (2008). Understanding and predicting social events: The effects of narrative construction on inference generation. Social Cognition, 26, 420-437. http://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2008.26.4.420

Ewell, P. J., Hamilton, J. C., & Guadagno, R. E. (2018). How do videogame players identify their actions? Integrating Action Identification Theory and videogame play via the Behavior Identification Form-Gamer. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 189-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.019

Fazio, R. H., & Olson, M. A. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 297-327. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145225

Förster, J., & Liberman, N. (2007). Knowledge activation. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 201–231). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.

Green, M. C., Brock, T. C., & Kaufman, G. F. (2004). Understanding media enjoyment: The role of transportation into narrative worlds. Communication Theory, 14, 311-327. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00317.x

Guadagno, R. E., Blascovich, J., Bailenson, J. N., & McCall, C. (2007). Virtual humans and persuasion: The effects of agency and behavioral realism. Media Psychology, 10, 1-22. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15213260701300865

Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76, 408-420. http://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360

Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944). An experimental study of apparent behavior. American Journal of Psychology, 57, 243-259. http://doi.org/10.2307/1416950

Klimmt, C., Hefner, D., & Vorderer, P. (2009). The video game experience as “true” identification: A theory of enjoyable alterations of players’ self-perception. Communication Theory, 19, 351-373. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2009.01347.x

Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174. http://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

Ledgerwood, A., Trope, Y., & Chaiken, S. (2010). Flexibility now, consistency later: Psychological distance and construal shape evaluative responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 32-51. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0019843

Lin, J.-H. (2013). Identification matters: A moderated mediation model of media interactivity, character identification, and video game violence on aggression. Journal of Communication, 63, 682-702. http://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12044

Matthews, N. L. (2015). Too good to care: The effect of skill on hostility and aggression following violent video game play. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 219-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.059

Oh, J., & Sundar, S. S. (2015). How does interactivity persuade? An experimental test of interactivity on cognitive absorption, elaboration, and attitudes. Journal of Communication, 65, 213-236. http://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12147

Peng, W. (2008). The mediational role of identification in the relationship between experience mode and self-efficacy: Enactive role-playing versus passive observation. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11, 649-652. http://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.0229

Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2012). The elaboration likelihood model. In P. A. M. van Lange, A. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins, Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 224-245). London, UK: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n12

Rafaeli, S., & Ariel, Y. (2007). Assessing interactivity in computer-mediated research. In A. N. Joinson, K. Y. A. McKenna, T. Postmes, & U.-D. Reips (Eds.), Oxford handbook of Internet psychology (pp. 71-88). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R., Roskos-Ewoldsen, B., & Carpentier, F. D. (2009). Media priming: An updated synthesis. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 74-93). New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.

Sanchez-Vives, M. V., & Slater, M. (2005). From presence to consciousness through virtual reality. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6, 332-339. http://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1651

Schultheis, M. T., & Rizzo, A. A. (2001). The application of virtual reality technology in rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 46, 296-311. http://doi.org/10.1037/0090-5550.46.3.296

Semin, G. R. (2008). Language puzzles: A prospective retrospective on the linguistic category model. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27, 197-209. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X07313664

Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1988). The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: Social cognition and language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 558-568. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.558

Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1989). Relocating attributional phenomena within a language-cognition interface: The case of actors’ and observers’ perspectives. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19, 491–508. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420190602

Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1991). The linguistic category model, its bases, applications and range. European Review of Social Psychology, 2, 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779143000006

Shrum, L. J. (2009). Media consumption and perceptions of social reality: Effects and underlying processes. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 50–73). New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.

Skalski, P., & Tamborini, R. (2007). The role of social presence in interactive agent-based persuasion. Media Psychology, 10, 385-413. http://doi.org/10.1080/15213260701533102

Slater, M. D., Rouner, D., & Long, M. (2006). Television dramas and support for controversial public policies: Effects and mechanisms. Journal of Communication, 56, 235-252. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00017.x

Stephan, E., Sedikides, C., & Wildschut, T. (2012). Mental travel into the past: Differentiating recollections of nostalgic, ordinary, and positive events. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 290–298. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1865

Steuer, J. (1992). Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73-93. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.tb00812.x

Strack, F., Schwarz, N., & Gschneidinger, E. (1985). Happiness and reminiscing: The role of time perspective, affect, and mode of thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1460-1469. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.6.1460

Sundar, S. S. (2004). Theorizing interactivity’s effects. The Information Society, 20, 385-389. http://doi.org/10.1080/01972240490508072

Tingley, D., Yamamoto, T., Hirose, K., Keele, L., & Imai, K. (2014). mediation: R package for causal mediation analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 59(5). http://dx.doi.org/10.18637/jss.v059.i05

Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117, 440-463. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0018963

Uleman, J. S., Newman, L. S., & Moskowitz, G. B. (1996). People as flexible interpreters: Evidence and issues from spontaneous trait inference. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 28, pp. 211-279). San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press.

Vallacher, R. R., & Wegner, D. M. (1989). Levels of personal agency: Individual variation in action identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 660-671. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.4.660

Vallacher, R. R., & Wegner, D. M. (2012). Action identification theory. In P. A. M. van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories in social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 327-348). London, UK: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n17

van der Weiden, A., Aarts, H., & Ruys, K. (2013). On the nature of experiencing self-agency: The role of goals and primes in inferring oneself as the cause of behavior. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 888-904. http://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12075

Wasserman, E. A. (2018). Yoked control procedure. In N. Salkind (Ed.), Encyclopedia of research design (Vol. 3). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412961288

Wegner, D. M., Vallacher, R. R., Macomber, G., Wood, R., & Arps, K. (1984). The emergence of action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 269-279. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.2.269

Westerman, D., Spence, P. R., & Lin, X. (2015). Telepresence and exemplification in health messages: The relationships among spatial and social presence and exemplars and exemplification effects. Communication Reports, 28, 92-102. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2014.971838

Wu, G. (2005). The mediating role of perceived interactivity in the effect of actual interactivity on attitude toward the website. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 5(2), 29-39. http://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2005.10722099

Zillmann, D. (2006). Exemplification effects in the promotion of safety and health. Journal of Communication, 56(Suppl. 1), S221–S237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00291.x

Zillmann, D., Gibson, R., Sundar, S. S., & Perkins, J. W. Jr. (1996). Effects of exemplification in news reports on the perception of social issues. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73, 427-444. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909607300213

https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2019-4-4