|
On December 20 2011 04:21 HackBenjamin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 04:02 Swede wrote:On December 20 2011 02:57 HackBenjamin wrote: People can get addicted to anything. For some people it's crack, for others it's cheeseburgers.
The difference is the withdrawls. I want to stress that there is a significant difference between mental withdrawls and physical withdrawls. The mental withdrawls can be overcome with sufficient willpower. I'm firmly of the opinion that people who are "addicted to video games" are addicted because they want to be. Once you're addicted to something there is no question of 'want'. It's a compulsion. It's needed to feel normal. It begins with them 'wanting' to play the game but after hours and hours of conditioning it becomes something else. WoW is the perfect example of a game which uses classical conditioning to ensnare players. Like they mentioned in the video in the OP, the leveling system starts off fast and easy so that you're experiencing the aesthetic rewards of leveling up a lot. This is classical conditioning. It is associating a neutral stimulus (just playing the game) with an unconditional stimulus (aesthetic reward of leveling up) to create a conditional stimulus, and it's doing it in a way which is perfectly comparable to Pavlov. Starting out with a shit ton of reinforcement and then slowly reducing it until the behavior is virtually ingrained in the subject and the 'unconditional stimulus' (leveling up) is required less and less. Anyway, all I'm saying is that a lot of people are really underestimating what an addiction actually is. If you think it's as simple as just saying no then your opinion is actually just invalidated. People with addictions will rationalise their choices so that they make total logical sense in their minds. It's possible that you can be addicted without even being aware because you will keep making up 'rational' reasons to continue the addictive behavior. I guess what I'm trying to get at is everyone has the power to make a change in their life when it comes to an addiction like this. Trying to pass it off as a compulsion or something just seems like similar reasoning for feeding hyper kids ritalin. Lack of mental discipline seems to be the underlying problem.
Sigh. I'm not trying to 'pass it off' as a compulsion. If you are addicted then it IS a compulsion. Compulsion is part of the definition of addiction. If you are addicted you will feel a compulsion towards the activity you're addicted to.
The number of people who don't understand the power of addiction is astounding. Seriously, half the people in this thread need to start smoking to get some perspective on things.
|
On December 20 2011 08:08 Swede wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 04:21 HackBenjamin wrote:On December 20 2011 04:02 Swede wrote:On December 20 2011 02:57 HackBenjamin wrote: People can get addicted to anything. For some people it's crack, for others it's cheeseburgers.
The difference is the withdrawls. I want to stress that there is a significant difference between mental withdrawls and physical withdrawls. The mental withdrawls can be overcome with sufficient willpower. I'm firmly of the opinion that people who are "addicted to video games" are addicted because they want to be. Once you're addicted to something there is no question of 'want'. It's a compulsion. It's needed to feel normal. It begins with them 'wanting' to play the game but after hours and hours of conditioning it becomes something else. WoW is the perfect example of a game which uses classical conditioning to ensnare players. Like they mentioned in the video in the OP, the leveling system starts off fast and easy so that you're experiencing the aesthetic rewards of leveling up a lot. This is classical conditioning. It is associating a neutral stimulus (just playing the game) with an unconditional stimulus (aesthetic reward of leveling up) to create a conditional stimulus, and it's doing it in a way which is perfectly comparable to Pavlov. Starting out with a shit ton of reinforcement and then slowly reducing it until the behavior is virtually ingrained in the subject and the 'unconditional stimulus' (leveling up) is required less and less. Anyway, all I'm saying is that a lot of people are really underestimating what an addiction actually is. If you think it's as simple as just saying no then your opinion is actually just invalidated. People with addictions will rationalise their choices so that they make total logical sense in their minds. It's possible that you can be addicted without even being aware because you will keep making up 'rational' reasons to continue the addictive behavior. I guess what I'm trying to get at is everyone has the power to make a change in their life when it comes to an addiction like this. Trying to pass it off as a compulsion or something just seems like similar reasoning for feeding hyper kids ritalin. Lack of mental discipline seems to be the underlying problem. Sigh. I'm not trying to 'pass it off' as a compulsion. If you are addicted then it IS a compulsion. Compulsion is part of the definition of addiction. If you are addicted you will feel a compulsion towards the activity you're addicted to. The number of people who don't understand the power of addiction is astounding. Seriously, half the people in this thread need to start smoking to get some perspective on things. But isnt it all in the mind, even addiction?
|
Unethical is a strong word, I don't consider there is much ethics in video game industry quite yet (other than following the laws, respecting the ratings and the basic stuff).
Bad and lazy design would be a better formulation.
|
what? since when did facebook applications like farmville become games? and for anyone that says they always have been, a game constitutes some sort of puzzle and reward system. farmville has a reward system but wheres the puzzle?
|
Unethical game design? Are you fucking kidding me? How is that actually a thing?
|
I kinda buy games with the expectation that they'll be addicting.
|
So good product is unethical now, really?
|
In all seriousness: Is that a troll video? I really cant tell
EDIT: Ive watched the whole video now. Orginaly I only watched the first 30 seconds and went -_- inb4ban. It certainly brings up and interesting point.
|
Best way to overcome gaming addiction: Stream viewing. I would play so much more sc2 if I wasn't too busy watching...
|
This 5 inch floppy guy is pretty lame. His arguments are weak and his understanding of the concepts he's talking about is minimal. His guests at least know what they're talking about. The psychologist outlining the difference between addictions and compulsions was pretty informative.
The Extra Credits episode that deals with Skinner box techniques explains addictive elements in gaming far better than the OP's video. I'd suggest not watching it if you enjoy WoW or Farmville or any other game that frequently employs this type of bullshit, it's hard to not see Skinner box techniques afterward.
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/the-skinner-box
|
On December 20 2011 09:11 Offhand wrote:This 5 inch floppy guy is pretty lame. His arguments are weak and his understanding of the concepts he's talking about is minimal. His guests at least know what they're talking about. The psychologist outlining the difference between addictions and compulsions was pretty informative. The Extra Credits episode that deals with Skinner box techniques explains addictive elements in gaming far better than the OP's video. I'd suggest not watching it if you enjoy WoW or Farmville or any other game that frequently employs this type of bullshit, it's hard to not see Skinner box techniques afterward. http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/the-skinner-box Yeah agreed. One of the reasons I think the show is not as awesome as it could have been
|
I guess I should also be upset when people serve me food that tastes really good. After all, they are unethically exploiting the fact that evolution has instilled a desire for good tasting food. I'm gonna demand bad food from now on, I don't want to feed my compulsion any further.
|
On December 20 2011 18:19 liberal wrote: I guess I should also be upset when people serve me food that tastes really good. After all, they are unethically exploiting the fact that evolution has instilled a desire for good tasting food. I'm gonna demand bad food from now on, I don't want to feed my compulsion any further.
Socrates would be proud of you.
|
On December 20 2011 18:19 liberal wrote: I guess I should also be upset when people serve me food that tastes really good. After all, they are unethically exploiting the fact that evolution has instilled a desire for good tasting food. I'm gonna demand bad food from now on, I don't want to feed my compulsion any further.
You either DID NOT COMPREHEND what was explained in the Skinner Box video by Extra Credits or you're trolling. Survival behaviors conditionning is not what they call ''unethical''. They're part of our evolution and survival. Obviously, when you eat.. you generate pleasure from the act it self.
So I'm going to ask you this simple question... Do you gain pleasure from the act of playing or from the rewards given afterward?
Conditionning is based upon rewards given AFTER the act; this way the person giving you rewards have full control on your extrinsic motivations of this behavior.This behavior will last until you figure out your motivations behind the actions and/or find something else to do.
The twisted thing about ''reward based actions'' is that they take away the pleasure from the act itself. You're now doing the actions for the rewards given, and not from pleasure gained from the action.
If you enjoy the game because of the rewards given such as ''virtual achivements or equipment'', then you should know that you've been conditionned to do so. It's unethical in the way that if you are misinformed or not concious of your motivations, your behavior could last forever.
If you play soccer (or football), you play it because you like running, controlling the ball, kicking the ball, competing with others, etc. Now if I was to give you a salary for playing, I can assure you that after a while, you will play only because of the money and not because of the pleasure you previously gained from the actions. This phenomenom is well known in relation to behavioral conditioning and intrinsic & extrinsic motivations.
Dont get me wrong, It's not because theres contionning factors in a game that its automaticly wrong to play. It's not because you do certain behaviors for the rewards that you're a terrible human beeing. But you should at least be concious of why you're driven to do a certain behavior. Extrinsic motivations are socially accepted to a certain extent.
|
On December 20 2011 18:19 liberal wrote: I guess I should also be upset when people serve me food that tastes really good. After all, they are unethically exploiting the fact that evolution has instilled a desire for good tasting food. I'm gonna demand bad food from now on, I don't want to feed my compulsion any further.
It's more like adding nicotine to your food than making it taste good
|
On December 20 2011 23:39 ezk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 18:19 liberal wrote: I guess I should also be upset when people serve me food that tastes really good. After all, they are unethically exploiting the fact that evolution has instilled a desire for good tasting food. I'm gonna demand bad food from now on, I don't want to feed my compulsion any further. You either DID NOT COMPREHEND what was explained in the Skinner Box video by Extra Credits or you're trolling. Survival behaviors conditionning is not what they call ''unethical''. They're part of our evolution and survival. Obviously, when you eat.. you generate pleasure from the act it self. So I'm going to ask you this simple question... Do you gain pleasure from the act of playing or from the rewards given afterward?Conditionning is based upon rewards given AFTER the act; this way the person giving you rewards have full control on your extrinsic motivations of this behavior.This behavior will last until you figure out your motivations behind the actions and/or find something else to do. The twisted thing about ''reward based actions'' is that they take away the pleasure from the act itself. You're now doing the actions for the rewards given, and not from pleasure gained from the action. If you enjoy the game because of the rewards given such as ''virtual achivements or equipment'', then you should know that you've been conditionned to do so. It's unethical in the way that if you are misinformed or not concious of your motivations, your behavior could last forever. If you play soccer (or football), you play it because you like running, controlling the ball, kicking the ball, competing with others, etc. Now if I was to give you a salary for playing, I can assure you that after a while, you will play only because of the money and not because of the pleasure you previously gained from the actions. This phenomenom is well known in relation to behavioral conditioning and intrinsic & extrinsic motivations. Dont get me wrong, It's not because theres contionning factors in a game that its automaticly wrong to play. It's not because you do certain behaviors for the rewards that you're a terrible human beeing. But you should at least be concious of why you're driven to do a certain behavior. Extrinsic motivations are socially accepted to a certain extent. I must be missing something. Is there a problem with feeling accomplished by gathering some form of virtual wealth in these games?
|
On December 20 2011 23:39 ezk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 18:19 liberal wrote: I guess I should also be upset when people serve me food that tastes really good. After all, they are unethically exploiting the fact that evolution has instilled a desire for good tasting food. I'm gonna demand bad food from now on, I don't want to feed my compulsion any further. You either DID NOT COMPREHEND what was explained in the Skinner Box video by Extra Credits or you're trolling. Survival behaviors conditionning is not what they call ''unethical''. They're part of our evolution and survival. Obviously, when you eat.. you generate pleasure from the act it self. So I'm going to ask you this simple question... Do you gain pleasure from the act of playing or from the rewards given afterward?Conditionning is based upon rewards given AFTER the act; this way the person giving you rewards have full control on your extrinsic motivations of this behavior.This behavior will last until you figure out your motivations behind the actions and/or find something else to do. The twisted thing about ''reward based actions'' is that they take away the pleasure from the act itself. You're now doing the actions for the rewards given, and not from pleasure gained from the action. If you enjoy the game because of the rewards given such as ''virtual achivements or equipment'', then you should know that you've been conditionned to do so. It's unethical in the way that if you are misinformed or not concious of your motivations, your behavior could last forever. If you play soccer (or football), you play it because you like running, controlling the ball, kicking the ball, competing with others, etc. Now if I was to give you a salary for playing, I can assure you that after a while, you will play only because of the money and not because of the pleasure you previously gained from the actions. This phenomenom is well known in relation to behavioral conditioning and intrinsic & extrinsic motivations. Dont get me wrong, It's not because theres contionning factors in a game that its automaticly wrong to play. It's not because you do certain behaviors for the rewards that you're a terrible human beeing. But you should at least be concious of why you're driven to do a certain behavior. Extrinsic motivations are socially accepted to a certain extent.
I don't like you mixing different theories for learning and motivation. Operant conditioning is all about consequence and the type of reward or punisment it entails. It isn't about if the reward was internal or external, and differentiating between these two types of motivators is pretty irrelevant. If you want to look more into the subject look at RFT which is based on conditioning and not just some application of two different theories that don't really fit together. RFT makes a difference between how language and thoughts can be motivators which are sort of internal, but not in the way you think about it.
Something like delivering a school paper on time and getting a good grade is explained by the reward and consequence. Enjoying the act of writing it would be more of a bonus and that is in itself a consequence of writing a certain piece. Enjoying soccer because you like it and doing it because you get paid are just two different rewards. The consequence of moving and playing would be reinforcing just like the money can reinforce the behavior.
t's unethical in the way that if you are misinformed or not concious of your motivations, your behavior could last forever.
You are pretty much never aware of your motivations. All behavior is conditioned and you can try to be aware of what it is but you can never really answer it or come up with an answer that can be falsified. Operant conditioning gives a simple explanatory model for how consequence is the basis for all types of learning, and other theories about for example intrinsic and extrinsic motivation doesn't get close to it regarding explanatory value and simplicity which are some of the criteria that these kinds of theories can to be judged upon. Mixing the two theories together just makes it even worse.
Regarding the main subject I think games can be somewhat unethical for using the knowledge at hand. It just has nothing to do with being conscious about it or having an internal motivation or not. Whatever the thin line is between learning and manipulation I think it is crossed when too many people start feeling like shit because of a product.
|
On December 21 2011 02:27 Sablar wrote: It isn't about if the reward was internal or external, and differentiating between these two types of motivators is pretty irrelevant.
Intrinsic motivation refers to motivation that is driven by an interest or enjoyment in the task itself, and exists within the individual rather than relying on any external pressure. Intrinsic Motivation is based on taking pleasure in an activity rather working towards an external reward. Students who are intrinsically motivated are more likely to engage in the task willingly as well as work to improve their skills, which will increase their capabilities. Students are likely to be intrinsically motivated if they:
* attribute their educational results to factors under their own control, also known as autonomy, * believe they have the skill that will allow them to be effective agents in reaching desired goals * are interested in mastering a topic, rather than just rote-learning to achieve good grades.
Extrinsic motivation refers to the performance of an activity in order to attain an outcome, which then contradicts intrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation comes from outside of the individual. Common extrinsic motivations are rewards like money and grades, coercion and threat of punishment. Competition is in general extrinsic because it encourages the performer to win and beat others, not to enjoy the intrinsic rewards of the activity. A crowd cheering on the individual and trophies are also extrinsic incentives. Social psychological research has indicated that extrinsic rewards can lead to over justification and a subsequent reduction in intrinsic motivation.
Source: Wikipedia
You still think its irrelevant? Let me put it this way then...
When you play World of Warcraft, the first time you encounter a raid boss, you get different intrinsic motivators. First of all, you are actively learning which is a intrinsic motivation. You get thrilled by the coordination challenge (skills required) and you are interested in mastering this encounter. You actually had fun playing because of the intrinsic factors.The "boss" finally dies and the loots are pretty much a "bonus" for you and your raid.
After doing this encounter numerous times, you aren't actively learning anymore because you already mastered this content. You aren't thrilled by the encounter because its trivial. Although, you feel driven to keep doing the encounter again, not because you're still having fun doing it but because you're seeking the extrinsic reward, also known as loots which leads to social recognition among the community. This is what KEEPS you playing.
Can you still say you're doing this for fun?
This is what a lot of players are confronted to with the "reward" type of games. It's okay to seek rewards but at least be conscious of it, and understand the real value of those rewards.
On December 21 2011 02:27 Sablar wrote: You are pretty much never aware of your motivations.
Maybe you meant to say that a significant portion of human behavior is energized and directed by unconscious motives for some individuals? You might not be aware of the direct stimulus or motives such as game mechanics, but you are aware of your behaviors and with a little introspection, you can have an vague idea of what drives you to perform these behaviors.
|
On December 20 2011 18:06 Keyboard Warrior wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 09:11 Offhand wrote:This 5 inch floppy guy is pretty lame. His arguments are weak and his understanding of the concepts he's talking about is minimal. His guests at least know what they're talking about. The psychologist outlining the difference between addictions and compulsions was pretty informative. The Extra Credits episode that deals with Skinner box techniques explains addictive elements in gaming far better than the OP's video. I'd suggest not watching it if you enjoy WoW or Farmville or any other game that frequently employs this type of bullshit, it's hard to not see Skinner box techniques afterward. http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/the-skinner-box Yeah agreed. One of the reasons I think the show is not as awesome as it could have been
so i guess according to this video... a the defining feature that makes starcraft interesting is flow.
|
I'm not saying that there is no such thing as a theory about intrinsic/extrinsic motivation. I said it was a poor theory and that mixing it with behaviorism made it even worse.
Anyway, I can understand your viewpoint if trying to explain the quality of behaviour, as in questions such as "what is stimulating?" or "what is the most fun?".
But I'm talking about motivation and as such I think the theory doesn't really explain anything. There is a huge difficulty in calling one thing intrinsic and another extrinsic. You find something 'new and challenging' based on previous consequences, rewards or punishment, and subsequent learning. Many people would just find that wow-boss boring even the first time. Everyone has a reward system that is somewhat similar but it isn't triggered by the same factors apart from some basic needs. It's based on a history of learning associations in life. So we learn to want money just like we learn to enjoy an activity. A theory like what I am writing tries to explain "why do we do things" (= motivation) instead of "what are the consequences of different concepts of motivation". The whole "intrinsically motivated" concept is a combination of different aspects of thinking that has shown to be common in successful individuals. There is no innate "motivation ability" but rather it is learned and based upon history and genes.
You seem to want to say that there is a better way to spend your time than MMORPGs, and base it on some mish-mash of psychological theories. We aren't talking about the same thing because I am or was comparing theories based on their scientific value and you are talking about what has 'real value' and what is 'fun'. Whatever that is it isn't about science but about your point of view.
Intrinsic Motivation is based on taking pleasure in an activity rather working towards an external reward
I wish the world was more extrinsically motivated according to the way you describe it. A lot of problems are based on immediate rewards being better reinforcers than long term goals and rewards. Like smoking instead of quitting. Or playing WoW instead of going to school. Or eating compared to barely exercising.
Anyway, I understand the meaning of the concepts and I do think that it is better to be motivated by mastery instead of money, or having a belief that I can succeed than not having it. It's just that this a pretty superficial account of motivation and the question of why we are motivated to do something isn't the same thing as a population mean of self-reported attitudes towards life.
So again, WoW can be bad, and intrinsic or extrinsic motivational factors is a poor way of explaining why. If anything the exploitation of psychological knowledge with for example intermittent rewards and it's effect on motivation / learning can be considered problematic but in general wow employs the same mechanisms as any other type of learning and activity that we enjoy doing and come back to.
|
|
|
|