Suspecting Sarcasm: How League of Legends Players Dismiss Positive Communication in Toxic Environments

Q1 Social Sciences
Susanne Poeller, Martin Johannes Dechant, Madison Klarkowski, Regan L. Mandryk
{"title":"Suspecting Sarcasm: How League of Legends Players Dismiss Positive Communication in Toxic Environments","authors":"Susanne Poeller, Martin Johannes Dechant, Madison Klarkowski, Regan L. Mandryk","doi":"10.1145/3611020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Toxicity in multiplayer gaming is an ongoing problem that threatens the well-being of players, gaming communities, and game developers. Meanwhile, interventions that promote positive interactions and proactively create positive gaming spaces are still in their infancy; little is known about how players respond to positivity. In our study, 959 League of Legends players were presented with either 10 positive chat logs or 10 negative chat logs, and asked to reflect on the content and how representative such communication is of their own gaming experiences. We thematically coded participants' free-form answers (identifying the themes normalize, acknowledge, downplay, cope, blame, and make personal), and compared the positive and negative conditions in terms of theme prevalence. Our findings show that participants were more likely to normalize and acknowledge toxic negativity than positivity. Furthermore, the dominant response to positivity consisted of downplaying messages as not representative and rare, and even expressing suspicion that messages must have been fabricated or intended as sarcasm. Participants overwhelmingly cope by muting chat, protecting them from toxic interactions, but leaving them unexposed to positive communication and other beneficial social interactions within play.","PeriodicalId":36902,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3611020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Toxicity in multiplayer gaming is an ongoing problem that threatens the well-being of players, gaming communities, and game developers. Meanwhile, interventions that promote positive interactions and proactively create positive gaming spaces are still in their infancy; little is known about how players respond to positivity. In our study, 959 League of Legends players were presented with either 10 positive chat logs or 10 negative chat logs, and asked to reflect on the content and how representative such communication is of their own gaming experiences. We thematically coded participants' free-form answers (identifying the themes normalize, acknowledge, downplay, cope, blame, and make personal), and compared the positive and negative conditions in terms of theme prevalence. Our findings show that participants were more likely to normalize and acknowledge toxic negativity than positivity. Furthermore, the dominant response to positivity consisted of downplaying messages as not representative and rare, and even expressing suspicion that messages must have been fabricated or intended as sarcasm. Participants overwhelmingly cope by muting chat, protecting them from toxic interactions, but leaving them unexposed to positive communication and other beneficial social interactions within play.
怀疑讽刺:《英雄联盟》玩家如何在有害的环境中忽视积极的沟通
多人游戏中的毒性是一个持续存在的问题,它威胁着玩家、游戏社区和游戏开发者的福祉。与此同时,促进积极互动和主动创造积极游戏空间的干预措施仍处于起步阶段;我们对玩家如何回应积极情绪知之甚少。在我们的研究中,我们向959名《英雄联盟》玩家展示了10个积极的聊天记录或10个消极的聊天记录,并要求他们对内容进行反思,以及这些交流对他们自己的游戏体验有多大的代表性。我们对参与者的自由形式答案进行主题编码(确定主题正常化、承认、淡化、应对、指责和个人化),并根据主题流行程度比较积极和消极情况。我们的研究结果表明,参与者更有可能正常化并承认有害的消极情绪,而不是积极情绪。此外,对积极的主要反应包括淡化信息的不代表性和罕见,甚至表示怀疑信息一定是捏造的或有意讽刺。绝大多数参与者都通过屏蔽聊天来应对,保护他们免受有害互动的影响,但让他们无法接触到积极的交流和其他有益的社交互动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
257
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信