公平竞争:从社区角度看电竞成绩提升的公平性

M. A. Friehs, Madison Klarkowski, Julian Frommel, Cody J. Phillips, R. Mandryk
{"title":"公平竞争:从社区角度看电竞成绩提升的公平性","authors":"M. A. Friehs, Madison Klarkowski, Julian Frommel, Cody J. Phillips, R. Mandryk","doi":"10.3389/fspor.2024.1330755","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to explore community perspectives on enhancer usage in competitive gaming and esports, focusing on the perception of fairness and concerns about various potential performance enhancers.We conducted both qualitative and quantitative surveys to understand the competitive gaming community's opinions on different types of performance enhancers and their potential impact on esports. A thematic analysis was performed to identify key themes in how players rationalize their opinions.The gaming community differentiates between potential performance enhancers based on how problematic they are for the esports scene, with the most concern surrounding hard drugs, pharmaceuticals, and brain stimulation interventions. Participants who are more invested in competitive gaming tend to be more sceptical of enhancers and express greater concerns. Four themes were identified in the thematic analysis: (1) risk, (2) morality, (3) enhancer effects, and (4) regulation. To increase acceptance and perceived legitimacy in decision-making, it is recommended that regulators engage a variety of stakeholders in transparent decision-making processes when forming tournament rules and regulations. This will help address the fragmented regulatory landscape and prevent potential differences in the perception of tournament winners based on the governing body supervising the competition.","PeriodicalId":509602,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fighting fair: community perspectives on the fairness of performance enhancement in esports\",\"authors\":\"M. A. Friehs, Madison Klarkowski, Julian Frommel, Cody J. Phillips, R. Mandryk\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fspor.2024.1330755\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aims to explore community perspectives on enhancer usage in competitive gaming and esports, focusing on the perception of fairness and concerns about various potential performance enhancers.We conducted both qualitative and quantitative surveys to understand the competitive gaming community's opinions on different types of performance enhancers and their potential impact on esports. A thematic analysis was performed to identify key themes in how players rationalize their opinions.The gaming community differentiates between potential performance enhancers based on how problematic they are for the esports scene, with the most concern surrounding hard drugs, pharmaceuticals, and brain stimulation interventions. Participants who are more invested in competitive gaming tend to be more sceptical of enhancers and express greater concerns. Four themes were identified in the thematic analysis: (1) risk, (2) morality, (3) enhancer effects, and (4) regulation. To increase acceptance and perceived legitimacy in decision-making, it is recommended that regulators engage a variety of stakeholders in transparent decision-making processes when forming tournament rules and regulations. This will help address the fragmented regulatory landscape and prevent potential differences in the perception of tournament winners based on the governing body supervising the competition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":509602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2024.1330755\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2024.1330755","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在探讨竞技游戏和电子竞技中增强剂使用的社区观点,重点关注公平性认知和对各种潜在性能增强剂的担忧。我们进行了定性和定量调查,以了解竞技游戏社区对不同类型性能增强剂的看法及其对电子竞技的潜在影响。我们进行了主题分析,以确定玩家如何合理解释其观点的关键主题。电竞社区根据潜在的成绩提升剂对电竞的影响程度对其进行了区分,其中最受关注的是硬性药物、药品和脑刺激干预措施。对竞技游戏投入更多的参与者往往对增强剂持怀疑态度,并表示出更大的担忧。主题分析确定了四个主题:(1) 风险,(2) 道德,(3) 增强剂的影响,(4) 监管。为提高决策的可接受性和可感知的合法性,建议监管机构在制定赛事规则和条例时,让各利益相关方参与透明的决策过程。这将有助于解决监管格局分散的问题,并防止因监管比赛的管理机构不同而对比赛获胜者的看法可能存在差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fighting fair: community perspectives on the fairness of performance enhancement in esports
This study aims to explore community perspectives on enhancer usage in competitive gaming and esports, focusing on the perception of fairness and concerns about various potential performance enhancers.We conducted both qualitative and quantitative surveys to understand the competitive gaming community's opinions on different types of performance enhancers and their potential impact on esports. A thematic analysis was performed to identify key themes in how players rationalize their opinions.The gaming community differentiates between potential performance enhancers based on how problematic they are for the esports scene, with the most concern surrounding hard drugs, pharmaceuticals, and brain stimulation interventions. Participants who are more invested in competitive gaming tend to be more sceptical of enhancers and express greater concerns. Four themes were identified in the thematic analysis: (1) risk, (2) morality, (3) enhancer effects, and (4) regulation. To increase acceptance and perceived legitimacy in decision-making, it is recommended that regulators engage a variety of stakeholders in transparent decision-making processes when forming tournament rules and regulations. This will help address the fragmented regulatory landscape and prevent potential differences in the perception of tournament winners based on the governing body supervising the competition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信