GENDER DIFFERENCES AMONG MOG PLAYERS IN THEIR SOCIALISATION PROCESSES

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.131332

Keywords:

socialising, gender, MOG, videogames, discourse analysis

Abstract

The increasing popularity of multiplayer online video games has given rise to the creation of linguistic communities with specific forms of communication and rules. Among the several features of those digital communities, some differences among men’s and women’s communication behaviours seem to be real when they play video games. Thus, the objective of this research is to analyse gender differences in the socialisation process among MOG Players (Multiplayer Online Game). To this aim, this research introduces an experiment with 201 MOG players (males: 147; females: 54) who responded to a survey concerning the use of 20 social communicative acts (based on Guntermann and June, 1982, p. 26) in three different contexts: the participant knew in advance the other player from a) the real world, b) the virtual world, or c) they had never met before. The results obtained from this analysis have shown some differences between both male and female MOG participants in their socialisation process when interacting with other players by determining the frequency and the per cent variation on the use of the selected communicative acts. In conclusion, it seems that there are some similarities and differences between men and women when interacting with MOG players that may interfere in the way they play videogames and behave towards other players.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Ricardo Casañ-Pitarch, Universitat Politècnica de València

Ricardo Casañ Pitarch is a PhD assistant professor and researcher at Universitat Politècnica de València. His main research interest is in applied linguistics, more concretely in discourse analysis and foreign language teaching and ICT. His latest publications and communications focus on genre analyses of specific discourse forms and the use of videogames in foreign language teaching.

References

  1. Childress, M. D., & Braswell, R. (2006). Using massively multiplayer online role‐playing games for online learning. Distance Education, 27 (2), 187-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910600789522.
    |
  2. Cunningham, C.M. (2016). She designs therefore she is? Evolving understandings of video game design. In K.D. Valentin and L.J Jensen (Eds.), Examining the Evolution of Gaming and Its Impact on Social, Cultural, and Political Perspectives (pp. 147-169). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0261-6.ch007.
  3. Dale, G., & Green, C. S. (2017). The Changing Face of Video Games and Video Gamers: Future Directions in the Scientific Study of Video Game Play and Cognitive Performance. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement, 1 (3), 280-294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-017-0015-6.
  4. Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (2003). Language and gender. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791147.
  5. Ensslin, A. (2011). The language of gaming. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  6. Ensslin, A. (2015). Discourse of games. In Cornelia Ilie & Karen Tracy (eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction (pp. 1-6). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Online. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi154
  7. Fox, J., & Tang, W. Y. (2014). Sexism in online video games: The role of conformity to masculine norms and social dominance orientation. Computers in Human Behavior, 33 (1), 314-320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.014
  8. Gee, J.P. (2015). Discourse analysis of games. In R. H. Jones, A. Chik, & C.A. Hafner (Eds.), Discourse and digital practices: doing discourse analysis in the digital age (pp. 18-27). New York, NY: Routledge.
  9. Guntermann, G. and June K.P. (1982). Functional-Notional Concepts: adapting the FL textbook. Washington, D.C: Center for Applied Linguistics. ISBN: 0-87281-301-0.
  10. Harwell, D. (2014). More women play video games than boys, and other surprising facts lost in the mess of Gamergate. Washington Post. Retrieved on May 5, 2018 from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/10/17/more-women-play-video-games-than-boys-and-other-surprising-facts-lost-in-the-mess-of-gamergate/?utm_term=.0d229fc03907
  11. Hartmann, T., & Klimmt, C. (2006). Gender and computer games: Exploring females’ dislikes. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 11 (4), 910-931. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00301.x.
  12. Internet World Stats (2017). Usage and population statistics. Retrieved on May14, 2018 from http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
  13. Ivory, J. D. (2006). Still a man's game: Gender representation in online reviews of video games. Mass Communication & Society, 9 (1), 103-114. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327825mcs0901_6
  14. Lakoff, R. (1973). Language and Woman’s Place. New York, NY: Harper & Row. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500000051.
  15. Olson, C., Kutner, L., & Warner, D. (2008). The Role of Violent Video Game Content in Adolescent Development. Journal of Adolescent Research, 23 (1), 55-75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558407310713.
    |
  16. Nieborg, D.B., de Kloet J. (2016). A Patchwork of Potential: A Survey of the European Game Industry. In A. Fung (ed.), Global Game Industries and Cultural Policy, pp. 201-226. Palgrave Macmillam: London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40760-9_10
  17. Paraskeva, F., Mysirlaki, S., & Papagianni, A. (2010). Multiplayer online games as educational tools: Facing new challenges in learning. Computers & Education, 54 (2), 498-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.001.
    |
  18. Paul, C. A. (2012). Wordplay and the discourse of video games: Analyzing words, design, and play. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203124031.
  19. Pérez Latorre, O. (2015). The social discourse of video games analysis model and case study: GTA IV. Games and Culture, 10 (5), 415-437. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412014565639.
  20. Pease, A., & Pease, B. (2016). Why Men Don't Listen & Women Can't Read Maps: How to spot the differences in the way men & women think. London: Hachette UK. ISBN: 9780767907637.
  21. Siwek, S. (2017). Video Game in the 21st Century: The 2017 Report. Washington, DC: Entertainment Software Association. Retrieved on May 5, 2018 from http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ESA_EconomicImpactReport_Design_V3.pdf.
  22. Stamenković, D., Jaćević, M., & Wildfeuer, J. (2017). The persuasive aims of Metal Gear Solid: A discourse theoretical approach to the study of argumentation in video games. Discourse, Context & Media, 15 (1), 11-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2016.12.002.
  23. Steinkuehler, C. A., & Williams, D. (2006). Where everybody knows your (screen) name: Online games as “third places”. Journal of computer-mediated communication, 11 (4), 885-909. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00300.x
  24. Tannen, D. (2013).You Just Don’t Understand: Women & Men in Conversation. New York: Harper Collins.
  25. Williams, D., Martins, N., Consalvo, M., & Ivory, J. D. (2009). The virtual census: Representations of gender, race and age in video games. New Media & Society, 11 (5), 815–834. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809105354.
  26. Winn, J., & Heeter, C. (2009). Gaming, gender, and time: Who makes time to play? Sex roles, 61 (1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9595-7.
  27. Yee, N. (2006). The demographics, motivations and derived experiences of users of massively-multiuser online graphical environments. PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 15 (1), 309–329. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.15.3.309

Downloads

Published

2018-06-16

How to Cite

Casañ-Pitarch, R. (2018). GENDER DIFFERENCES AMONG MOG PLAYERS IN THEIR SOCIALISATION PROCESSES. Advanced Education, 5, 206–212. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.131332

Issue

2018: Issue 9

Section

Linguistics

License

Copyright (c) 2018 Ricardo Casañ-Pitarch

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).