Motivation and Emotion

, Volume 30, Issue 4, pp 344–360 | Cite as

The Motivational Pull of Video Games: A Self-Determination Theory Approach

  • Richard M. Ryan
  • C. Scott Rigby
  • Andrew Przybylski
Original Paper

Abstract

Four studies apply self-determination theory (SDT; Ryan & Deci, 2000) in investigating motivation for computer game play, and the effects of game play on well-being. Studies 1–3 examine individuals playing 1, 2 and 4 games, respectively and show that perceived in-game autonomy and competence are associated with game enjoyment, preferences, and changes in well-being pre- to post-play. Competence and autonomy perceptions are also related to the intuitive nature of game controls, and the sense of presence or immersion in participants’ game play experiences. Study 4 surveys an on-line community with experience in multi-player games. Results show that SDT’s theorized needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness independently predict enjoyment and future game play. The SDT model is also compared with Yee’s (2005) motivation taxonomy of game play motivations. Results are discussed in terms of the relatively unexplored landscape of human motivation within virtual worlds.

Keywords

Computer games Motivation Self-determination theory 

References

  1. Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12, 353–359.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartle, R. (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs. Journal of MUD Research, 1 (1). Retrieved October 3, 2006, from http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htmGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartle, R. A. (2004). Designing virtual worlds. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.Google Scholar
  5. Bostic, T. J., Rubio, D. M., & Hood, M. (2000). A validation of the subjective vitality scale using structural equation modeling. Social Indicators Research, 52, 313–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  8. Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  9. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A Meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 627–668.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1980). The Empirical exploration of intrinsic motivational processes. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 13, pp. 39–80). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  12. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Diener, E. & Emmons, R. A. (1984) The independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1105–1117.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frederick, C., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Differences in motivation for sport and exercise and their relations with participation and mental health. Journal of Sport Behavior, 16, 124–146.Google Scholar
  15. Frederick, C. M., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Self-determination in sport: A review using cognitive evaluation theory. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 26, 5–23.Google Scholar
  16. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillian.Google Scholar
  17. Gentile, D. A., & Anderson, C. A. (2003). Violent video games: The newest media violence hazard. In D. Gentile (Ed.), Media violence and children (pp. 131–152). Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  18. Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L. D., Culverhouse, T., & Biddle, S. J. H. (2003). The process by which perceived autonomy support in physical education promotes leisure-time physical activity intentions and behavior: A trans-contextual model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 784–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Healy, J. M. (1990). Endangered minds. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  20. Johnson, S. (2005). Everything bad is good for you. New York: Riverhead Books.Google Scholar
  21. Jones, G. (2002). Killing monsters: Why children need fantasy, super heroes, and make-believe violence. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  22. Kirsch, S. J. (2006). Children, adolescents, and media violence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Koster, R. (2005). A theory of fun for game design. Scottsdale, AZ: Paraglyph Press.Google Scholar
  24. La Guardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: A Self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 367–384.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2). Retrieved October 3, 2006, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue2/lombard.htmlGoogle Scholar
  26. Lombard, M., Ditton, T. B., Crane, D., Davis, B., Gil-Egui, G., Horvath, K., Rossman, J., & Park, S. (2000). Measuring presence: A literature-based approach to the development of a standardized paper-and-pencil instrument. Presented at the Third International Workshop on Presence, Delft, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  27. Malone, T. & Lepper, M. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations in learning. In R. E. Snow & M. J. Farr (Eds.)Aptitude, learning and instruction: vol. 3. Conative and affective process analyses (pp. 223–253). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. O’Brien, E. J., & Epstein, S. (1988). The Multidimensional self-esteem inventory: Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  29. Raudenbush, R. W., Bryk, A., Cheong, Y. F., & Congdon, R. (2000). HLM5: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Chicago: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
  30. Rigby, S. (2004). Player Motivational Analysis: A model for applied research into the motivational dynamics of virtual worlds. Presented to the Motivation Research Group, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.Google Scholar
  31. Ryan, R. M. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. Journal of Personality, 63, 397–427.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ryan, R. M. & Brown, K. W. (2005). Legislating competence: The motivational impact of high stakes testing as an educational reform. In C. Dweck & A. E. Elliot (Eds.), Handbook of Competence (pp. 354–374) New York: Guilford PressGoogle Scholar
  33. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A Review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. In S. Fiske (Ed.), Annual Review of Psychology (vol. 52, pp. 141–166). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, Inc.Google Scholar
  36. Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. M. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65, 529–565.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ryan, R. M., Mims, V., & Koestner, R. (1983). Relation of reward contingency and interpersonal context to intrinsic motivation: A Review and test using cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 736–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Setzer, V. W., & Duckett, G. E. (2000). The risks to children using electronic games. Retrieved October 3, 2006, from http://www.ime.usp.br/∼vwsetzer/video-g-risks.htmlGoogle Scholar
  39. Vallerand, R. J., & Reid, G. (1984). On the causal effects of perceived competence on intrinsic motivation: A test of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Sport Psychology, 6, 94–102.Google Scholar
  40. White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The Concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66, 297–333.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yee, N. (2005, March 15). A model of player motivations. Retrieved October 3, 2006, from http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/archives/001298.php?page=1Google Scholar
  42. Yee, N. (in press). Motivations of play in online games. CyperberPsychology and Behavior.Google Scholar
  43. Yi, M. (2004, December 18). They got game: Stacks of new releases for hungry video enthusiasts mean its boom time for an industry now even bigger than Hollywood. San Francisco Chronicle, p. A1.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard M. Ryan
    • 1
  • C. Scott Rigby
    • 2
  • Andrew Przybylski
    • 1
  1. 1.Clinical and Social Sciences in PsychologyUniversity of RochesterRochesterUSA
  2. 2.Immersyve Inc.CelebrationUSA

Personalised recommendations