Advertisement

Self-control and demand for commitment in online game playing: evidence from a field experiment

  • Dan AclandEmail author
  • Vinci Chow
Original Paper
  • 124 Downloads

Abstract

We conduct an experiment on an online game, exploring the effect on gameplay behavior of voluntary commitment devices that allow players to limit their gameplay. Approximately 25% of players use the devices. Median and 75th percentile device users use devices approximately 60 and 100% of the time, respectively. Players who chose to use the device were those who had previously played longer and more frequently than those who chose not to use the device. Offering the commitment devices decreased session length and session frequency by 2.8 and 6.1%, respectively, while increasing weeks of play by 5.5%. Our results are consistent with some players having self-identified self-control problems, leading to longer and more frequent play than they would prefer, and to demand for commitment, and also with commitment devices creating a more rewarding experience, leading to longer-lasting involvement with the game. Our results suggest incentivizing or requiring commitment devices in computer games.

Keywords

Online games Self-control Commitment devices Online experiment Libertarian paternalism 

JEL Classification

D91 C93 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Michael Urbancic, Stefano DellaVigna, Matthew Rabin, Ulrike Malmendier, Rob MacCoun, Matthew Levy, Rob Letzler, Eugene Smolensky, as well as all of the participants in the U.C. Berkeley, Psychology and Economics “Non-lunch” and all of the participants in the 2016 Habit-Driven Consumer conference. The experiment would not have been possible without the help of the WordsPlay site owner, Evan Simpson. Funding was generously provided by the Russell Sage Foundation and the Institute for Business and Economic Research.

References

  1. Ariely, D., & Wertenbroch, K. (2002). Procrastination, deadlines, and performance: Self-control by precommitment. Psychological Science, 13(3), 219–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashraf, N., Karlan, D., & Yin, W. (2006). Tying Odysseus to the mast: Evidence from a commitment savings product in the Philippines. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2), 635–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Educational Software Association. (2015). The 2015 essential facts about the computer and video game industry. http://www.theESA.com.
  4. Giné, X., Karlan, D., & Zinman, J. (2010). Put your money where your butt is: A commitment contract for smoking cessation. American Economic Journal Applied Economics, 2(4), 213–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gul, F., & Pesendorfer, W. (2001). Temptation and self-control. Econometrica, 69(6), 1403–1435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kuss, D. J. (2013). Internet gaming addiction: Current perspectives. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 2013(6), 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Laibson, D. (1997). Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 443–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. O’Donoghue, T., & Rabin, M. (1999). Doing it now or later. The American Economic Review, 89(1), 103–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Thaler, R., & Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. American Economic Review, 93(2), 175–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Economic Science Association 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong

Personalised recommendations