Psychological master form of computer games

The article presented the rationale and description of a universal classification model of computer games. The basis of its development was the principle of systematic and psychosemiotic approach that afforded considering both semantic and syntactic (formal) features of a game as factors mediating its effect on gamers. A computer game came under consideration as a system entity whose classification profile took shape following unique combination of thirty-four components that were interconnected in the manner of mutual cooperation. They combined into seven levels, two of which were: the game-play and setting — attributed to the fundamentals inherent to any game, while five were variable: the narrative, semantic, personal, communicative and ethic. Criteria to determine intensity of manifestation of the described components in a game that served as the basis for its expert evaluation, were presented. The results of investigation of «The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt» computer game were quoted. The study involved ten experts (8 men and 2 women) with a higher education and a great interactive gaming experience. The participants were made familiar with the classification algorithm of video games assessment and, in the process of complete ‘play-through’ of a game under consideration, categorized it into thirty-four components. Statistical processing of the data demonstrated high degree of consistency of the estimates: the value of α-Kronbach index amounted to 0.971. That afforded grounds to infer that the Master Form presented may serve as a reliable basis to analyze games and propose hypotheses about the nature of their effect on gamers.

1. Bazyma B.A. Psikhologiya tsveta: Teoriya i praktika [Color Psychology: Theory and Practice]. Moscow: Rech’, 2005. 147 p.
2. Bratus’ B.S. Lichnostnye smysly po A.N. Leont’evu i problema vertikali soznaniya [Personal meanings by A.N. Leontyev and the problem of vertical of consciousness]. In Voiskunsky A.E., Zhdan A.N., Tikhomirov O.K. (ed.) Traditsii i perspektivy deyatel’nostnogo podkhoda v psikhologii. Shkola A.N. Leont’eva [Traditions and prospects of the activity approach in psychology. School of A.N. Leontiev]. Moscow: Smysl, 1999, рр. 284—298.
3. Ivanov M.S. Osobennosti samorealizacii lichnosti v komp’juternoj igrovoj dejatel’nosti: diss. … kand. psihol. nauk. [Features of personal self-realization in computer gaming. PhD Sci. (Psychology) diss]. Kemerovo, 2005. 152 p.
4. Kyshtymova I.M. Psihosemiotika kreativnosti [Psychosemiotics creativity]. Irkutsk: IGU, 2008. 579 p.
5. Popov O.A. Novaya klassifikatsiya komp’yuternykh igr [Elektronnyi resurs] [New classification of computer games]. Elektronnyi zhurnal Statistika v psikhologii i pedagogike [Electronic Journal Statistics in Psychology and Pedagogy]. 2009. URL: http://psystat. at.ua/publ/4-1-0-30 (data obrashcheniya Accessed 09.01.18)
6. Pronina E.E. Psikhologicheskaya ekspertiza reklamy. Teoriya i metodika psikhotekhnicheskogo analiza reklamy [Psychological examination of advertising. Theory and methods of psychotechnical analysis of advertising]. Moscow: RIP-kholding, 2000. 96 p.
7. Smirnova E.O., Radeva R.E. Psikhologicheskie osobennosti komp’yuternykh igr: novyi kontekst detskoi subkul’tury [Psychological features of computer games: a new context of children’s subculture]. In Sobkin V.S. (ed.). Obrazovanie i informatsionnaya kul’tura. Sotsiologicheskie aspekty. Trudy po sotsiologii obrazovaniya [Education and informational culture. Sociological aspects. Works on the sociology of education]. In Sobkin V.S. (ed.) Vol. 7. Moscow: Tsentr sotsiologii obrazovaniya RAO, 2000,. pp. 330—369.
8. Timofeev S.B. Psikhologicheskie klassifikatsii komp’yuternykh igr [Psychological classifications of computer games]. Materialy mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii «Psikhologo-sotsial’naya rabota v sovremennom obshchestve: problemy i resheniya» (g. Sankt-Peterburg, 19—20 aprelya 2018 g.) [Proceedings of the international scientific-practical conference “Psychological and social work in modern society: problems and solutions”]. Sankt-Peterburg: SPbGIPSR, 2018. pp. 274—277.
9. Shmelev A.G. Mir popravimykh oshibok [The world of reparable errors]. Vychislitel’naya tekhnika i ee primenenie [Computing technology and its application], 1988, no. 3, pp. 16—84.
10. Adams E. Fundamentals of game design. New Riders, 2010. 576 p.
11. Anderson C.A., Bushman B.J. Human aggression. Annual Review of psychology. 2002. Vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 27—51.
12. Bartle R. Designing Virtual Worlds. Indianapolis: New Riders Publishing. 2003. 741 p.
13. Boesche W. Violent content enhances video game performance. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications. 2009. Vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 145 —150. doi: 10.1027/1864-1105.21.4.145
14. Carnegey N.L., Anderson C.A., Bushman B.J. The effect of video game violenc on psychological desensitization to real-life violence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,. 2007. Vol. 43, n. No. 3,. pp. 489—496. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.003
15. Colwell J., Kato M. Investigation of the relationship between social isolation, self esteem, aggression and computer game play in Japanese adolescents. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,. 2003. Vol. 6,. no. 2,. pp. 149—158. doi: 10.1111/1467-839X.t01-1-00017
16. Gentile D.A., Anderson C.A. Violent Video Games: The Effects on Youth, and Public Policy Implications. In N. Dowd, D. G. Singer, R. F. Wilson (ed.). Handbook of children, culture, and violence. / N. Dowd, D. G. Singer, R. F. Wilson (eds.). Thousand oaks, california: Sage, 2006,. pp. 225—-246. dDoi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195309836.001.0001
17. Griffiths M. Violent video games and aggression: a review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 1999. Vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 203—212. doi: 10.1016/S1359-1789(97)00055-4
18. Kirriemur J., McFarlane A. Literature review in games and learning [Elektronnyi resurs]. TeLearn archive-ouvertes. Bristol, Nesta Futurelabs, 2004. URL: https://telearn. archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190453/document (Accessed 05.07.2019)
19. Kutner L., Olson C. Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games and What Parents Can Do. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2008. 272 p.
20. Lucas K., Sherry J.L. Sex differences in video game play: a communication-based explanation. Communication Research. 2004. Vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 499—523. doi: 10.1177/0093650204267930
21. Manero B., Torrente J., Freire M., Fernandez-Manjon B. An instrument to build a gamer clustering framework according to gaming preferences and habits. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016. Vol. 62, pp. 353—363. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.085
22. Newzoo’s 2018 Report: Insights into the $108.9 Billion Global Games Mark. [Elektronnyi resurs]. Newzoo. Games, Esports & Mobile Market Intelligence. 2018. URL: https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/newzoos-2018-report-insights-into-the-137-9- billion-global-games-market/ (Accessed 31.03.2019)
23. Peng W., Liu M., Mou Y. Do aggressive people play violent computer games in a more aggressive way? Individual difference and idiosyncratic game-playing experience. CyberPsycholgy & Behavior, 2008. Vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 157—161. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0026
24. Przybylski A.N., Weinstein, N. Violent video game engagement is not associated with adolescents’ aggressive behaviour: evidence from a registered report [Elektronnyi resurs]. Royal Society Open Science, 2019. Vol. 6, no. 2. URL: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/ doi/10.1098/rsos.171474 (Accessed 05.07.2019) doi: 10.1098/rsos.171474
25. Rollings A., Adams E. Andrew Rollings and Ernest Adams on game design. Indianapolis: New Riders. 2003. 621 p.
26. Williams D., Skoric M. Internet Fantasy Violence: A Test of Aggression in an Online Game. Communication Monographs, 2005. Vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 217—233. doi: 10.1080/03637750500111781
27. Yee N. Motivations for play in online games. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 2006. Vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 772—775. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9.772