In a previous blog I examined my favourite board game (Scrabble) and the extent to which someone could become addicted to it. Today’s blog takes a broader look at the psychology of play more generally. Arguably, many of the topics that I research involve the psychology of playing games with video games and gambling games being my two most obvious areas of interest.
It’s been argued by myself (and others) that the ritualized play of several childhood games provides ‘training’ in the acquisition of gambling behaviour and that some games are pre-cursors to actual gambling (e.g., playing marbles, card flipping, etc.). Some authors (such as Igor Kusyszyn) hold the view that gambling is in itself ‘adult play’. Unsurprisingly, Freud was one of the first people to concentrate on the ‘functions’ of play and concluded that play in all its varieties (a) provides a wish-fulfilment, (b) leads to conflict reduction, (c) provides temporary leave of absence from reality, and (d) brings about a change from the passive to the active.
Since Freud, most psychologists have concentrated on the idea of ‘conflict reduction’ and in doing so have ignored his other three postulations. A more modern approach in the 1970s by Mihalyi Czikszentmihalyi asserted that during play a person can “concentrate on a limited stimulus field, in which he or she can use skills to meet clear demands, thereby forgetting his or her own problems and separate identity” (and provides one of the reasons that a small minority of people can develop problems playing games). Seminal research on the sociology of play by Roger Caillois states notes that play is a “free and voluntary activity”, “a source of joy and amusement” and “bounded by precise limits of time and space” whereas Erving Goffman views it as a “world building activity”.
Games provide the opportunity to prove one’s superiority, the desire to challenge and overcome an obstacle, and a medium by which to test one’s skill, endurance and ingenuity. Games, unlike some activities (including life itself!), tell us whether we have won or lost. As observed by James Smith and Vicki Abt in the 1980s:
“…in the context of a competitive and materialistic culture that has become increasingly regimented and standardized with little room for individual creativity and personal achievement, games (including gambling) offer the illusion of control over destiny and circumstance”.
Perhaps the best categorisation of game types was formulated by Roger Caillois who listed four classifications – agon (competition), alea (chance), mimicry (simulation), and ilinx (vertigo). In the context of games involving gambling, alea and agon are crucial in that they offer a combination of skill, chance and luck. As was previously asserted, most people desire opportunities to test their strength and skill against an adversary, and those games which offer a component of skill or talent combined with luck and chance provide the most favourable conditions. This is particularly prevalent in males who are deemed ‘masculine’ if during the socialization process they show (socially) important traits such as courage, independence, and bravery.
According to Caillois, play is “an occasion of pure waste: waste of time, energy, ingenuity, skill, and often of money” and is a “free and voluntary activity that occurs in a pure space, isolated and protected from the rest of life”. According to Caillois, play is best described by six core characteristics:
- It is free, or not obligatory.
- It is separate (from the routine of life) occupying its own time and space.
- It is uncertain, so that the results of play cannot be pre-determined and so that the player’s initiative is involved.
- It is unproductive in that it creates no wealth and ends as it begins.
- It is governed by rules that suspend ordinary laws and behaviours and that must be followed by players.
- It involves make-believe that confirms for players the existence of imagined realities that may be set against ‘real life’.
Back in 2000, I published an article on the psychology of games in Psychology Review and what makes a good game. I noted that:
- All good games are relatively easy to play but can take a lifetime to become truly adept. In short, there will always room for improvement.
- For games of any complexity there must be a bibliography that people can reference and consult. Without books and magazines to instruct and provide information there will be no development and the activity will die.
- There needs to be competitions and tournaments. Without somewhere to play (and likeminded people to play with) there will be little development within the field over long periods of time.
- Finally – and very much a sign of the times – no leisure activity can succeed today without corporate sponsorship of some kind.
I was recently interviewed by Lucy Orr for an article on board games for The Register – particularly about the psychology of winning. For instance, why is winning so important? I responded to Orr by pointing out that winning makes us feel good both psychologically and physiologically. Winning something – especially if it is a result of something skilful rather than by chance – can feel even better (unless the chance winning is something life changing like winning the lottery). Winning something using your own skill can demand respect from other competitors and brings about esteem (that can feed into one’s own self-esteem). Winning can be a validation that what you are doing is worthwhile. Other parts of my interview were not used.
I was asked whether beating other people makes winning more rewarding? Of course it does. Any time we engage in a behaviour that feels good we want to do it again (and again). Winning can be reinforcing on many different levels. There may be financial rewards, social rewards (peer praise, admiration and respect from others), psychological rewards (feeling better about oneself and feeling that the activity is a life-affirming and life-enhancing activity that feeds into self-esteem), and physiological rewards (increases in adrenaline and serotonin that trigger dopamine and makes us feel happy).
For some people, winning can become addictive. You can’t become addicted to something unless you are constantly reinforced and rewarded for engaging in the behaviour, and (as mentioned above) there are many different types of rewards (e.g., financial, social, psychological and physiological). Any (or all of these) could lead to repetitive and habitual behaviour and in a small minority of cases be addictive. However, as I have noted in a number of my papers, doing something to excess is not addiction. The difference between a healthy excessive enthusiasm and an addiction is that excessive enthusiasms add to life and addictions take away from it. For most people, winning behaviour – particularly in the context of playing board games – will be highly rewarding without being in any way problematic
Dr. Mark Griffiths, Professor of Behavioural Addiction, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK
Brown, J. (2011). Scrabble addict. Sabotage Times, May 16. Located at: http://sabotagetimes.com/life/scrabble-addict/
Caillois, R. (1961). Man, play and games. Paris: Simon and Schuster.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). Play and intrinsic rewards. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 16, 41-63.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction Ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Garden City, New York: Doubleday Anchor.
Griffiths, M.D. (2000). The psychology of games. Psychology Review, 7(2), 24-26.
Griffiths, M.D. (2005). A ‘components’ model of addiction within a biopsychosocial framework. Journal of Substance Use, 10, 191-197.
Griffiths, M.D. (2010). The role of context in online gaming excess and addiction: Some case study evidence. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 8, 119-125.
Kusyszyn, I. (1984). The psychology of gambling. Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 474, 133-145.
Orr, L. (2016). Winner! Crush your loved ones at Connect Four this Christmas. The Register, December 16. Located at: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/15/beating_your_family_and_winning_this_christmas/
Smith, J. F. & Abt, V. (1984). Gambling as play Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 474, 122-132.
Walsh, J. (2004). Scrabble addicts. The Independent, October 9. Located at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/scrabble-addicts-535160.html
“I recently got a new blow dryer. I was reading the warning tag that says ‘Do not use while sleeping”’ I thought who in the heck uses the blow dryer while sleeping. Well now I know why”
This posting on an online message board was in reaction to one of the cases featured on the US television programme ‘My Strange Addiction’. The television documentary first aired over the 2010 Christmas holiday period highlighted a case of “hair dryer addiction”. The alleged “hair dryer addict” was 31-year old female Lori Broady. Every night since she was eight years of age, Lori has gone to sleep with the hair dryer on in her bed. She claimed that she can’t get to sleep without the sound and the warmth of the hair dryer blowing, and finds it both psychologically and physiologically comforting. She claimed: “It’s a comfort thing, it’s a security thing, it’s the noise, it’s the air, it’s all-encompassing”.
Clearly, there are no operational definitions of addiction that would class this behaviour as genuinely addictive, but she was clearly engaging in a behaviour that was potentially life threatening (as she could start an electrical fire and get burned). In fact, she has suffered burns on both her chest and arms as a result of falling asleep with the hair dryer still blowing hot air. There was also an incident that led to an electrical fire when the hair dryer fell on the floor after she had fallen asleep. She also claimed that her unusual use of a hair dryer at bedtime was a factor in the breakdown of some of her romantic relationships. Despite these potential risks, Broady claimed she could not go to sleep without the use of the hair dryer (since the airing of the programme she has received professional intervention and has now stopped her hair dryer use at bedtime).
Broady admitted that she “knew it was a problem [but that] I just had a hard time sleeping at night when I was a kid. To me that is insignificant to the comfort that it gives me”. For Broady, the warmth alone was not enough as the sound the hair dryer made was also a critical factor in needing to get to sleep. Having engaged in the habit (and that is what it appears to be – a habit) since she was a young child, it was a hard habit to break as there was years of both operant and classical conditioning to overcome.
If the sound the hair dryer made was as equally as important as the warmth, then wouldn’t an electric blanket plus the sound of a fan suffice? Apparently not. As with most longstanding habits, people get used to specifics. The behaviour can become ritualized. The more someone begins to associate reward and pleasure with a very specific and ritualistic behaviour, the more they want to repeat the experience.
In this particular case, the hair dryer appeared to act as a ‘psychological soother’ and is akin to many other metaphorical ‘comfort blankets’ (such as thumb sucking or hair twirling) that people use as a way to relieve particular day-to-day stresses and strains. In this case, the behaviour certainly appeared to have similarities to addiction (e.g., self-injurious behaviour, comprising of relationships) but there was little to suggest that the behaviour was particularly salient except just before bedtime.
On one level, the need to feel warm and comfortable I bed is natural as many people sleep with the aid of electric blankets. As one commentator on this story noted:
“Well, I know that there are many people who like to have something fuzzy or furry like a teddy bear to take to sleep. In Asian countries like Singapore and Malaysia, many children and some adults are addicted to sleeping hugging a bolster. In fact, the Malay name for a bolster is bantal peluk, which literally means hugging pillow”
In relation to the Broady case and other “strange addictions” that featured on the show, Dr. Jason Elias (Director of psychological services and clinical research at McLean Hospital’s OCD Institute, US) said: “Nothing people do surprises me”. Following the broadcast of the programme on American national television, Broady was interviewed by Entertainment Weekly about the negative criticism against her, and the fact that the appearing on the show led to her quitting her need for a hair dryer to get to sleep. She said:
“At first, when I started seeing the things that people were saying about me, it really made me feel bad. But then I realized that a lot of people are just ignorant. Maybe they don’t want to look within and realize they might have some things that they’re dealing with as well. We kind of set ourselves up for people to say things about us and pick on us or laugh at us. I second-guessed myself a little bit along the way, but I got through it. I became successful with beating my personal addiction…I’m completely done with it. Since I’ve quit, I’m kind of on the outside looking in. It took a long time to get here, but I’m doing really well without it. That being said, I did not realize just how dangerous using the blow dryer really was. I guess that’s part of my denial process. I really, really in my heart felt like ‘what is the big deal?’ It’s just something I’ve always done. I knew it was strange. I knew it was weird. But I did not understand the severity of it”.
Following her television appearance, many people got in touch with Broady saying that they too relied on hair dryers to go to sleep. It seems as though she was not the only one. She said in her Entertainment Weekly interview that:
“I didn’t realize that there’s a whole community of blow dryer users out there. And they all surfaced after the episode aired. There are tons of them. Everywhere. The day that my episode aired [Dec. 29, 2010], there was a gentleman in Virginia whose home burnt down with him and his 15-year-old daughter inside from blow dryer misuse. It was all over national news”.
My own take on this is that in Broady’s case, the behaviour was a deeply ingrained habit that could have had catastrophic effects. It’s certainly not a behavioural addiction as defined by the addictions component model that I overviewed in a previous blog. However, that doesn’t mean that it was a behaviour that was unproblematic.
Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK
Abraham, T. (2011). The world’s strangest addictions: Meet the man who eats glass and the mother who can’t sleep without her hairdryer. Daily Mail, June 9. Located at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2001807/The-worlds-strangest-addictions-Meet-man-eats-glass-mother-sleep-hairdryer.html
Building Bridges (2010). Can’t sleep without a hair dryer. December 24. Located at: http://buildingbridgesworld.wordpress.com/2010/12/24/cant-sleep-without-a-hair-dryer/
Brissey. B. (2011). ‘My Strange Addiction’ blow dryer addict speaks; plus footage of the season finale. Entertainment Weekly, February 15. Located at: http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/02/15/my-strange-addiction-season-finale-video/
MSN Today Health (2010). Their strange addictions: Hair dryer and ventriloquism. December 22. Located at: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/40780006/ns/today-today_health/t/their-strange-addictions-hair-dryer-ventriloquism/