To date, competitive gaming has not been widely researched or recognized in the scientific and professional literature on video games. As the name suggests, competitive gaming comprises players who regularly compete in tournaments organized and run by the gaming community, often for large monetary gains. Secondary benefits include the recognition and admiration of other gaming community members. Such tournaments are now often run by companies that host the events at large convention centers in major cities (e.g., New York City, Los Angeles, Seoul, etc.).
Despite three decades of worldwide growth in competitive gaming, little empirical investigation has catalogued these activities. Although empirical studies are lacking, studies have noted that competitive games now use Internet radio coverage with play-by-play commentaries, large-screen televised projections of game footage, sizeable live audiences, and cash prizes in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. For elite competitive gamers (i.e., professional gamers), the activity is a full-time job. Many games played competitively appear to demand high levels of sophistication in strategizing, planning, multi-tasking, and timing to master.
Academic studies have shown that certain competitive games, if used properly, can also promote prosocial behaviour and skill development. Furthermore, professional success in competitive gaming seemingly requires persistent practice and sophisticated skill sets. It is likely that these positive effects are more substantial than the effects of games played on a casual level. Numerous studies have demonstrated the benefits of gaming more generally in lieu of the positive effects of competitive gaming, particularly in relation to improved spatial cognitive benefits. Studies have also suggested that video games can provide an enriched medium for strategic problem solving. Other studies support the differences between novice and advanced levels of play in video games. For instance, research has demonstrated measurable differences between novice and expert game players, the latter group often demonstrating enhanced short-term memory, executive control/self-monitoring, pattern recognition, visual-spatial abilities (e.g., object rotation), and task-switching efficiency, along with more efficient problem-solving skills.
Competitive gaming has the potential to change the dynamics and motivations of gaming. For instance, if a player can make a financial living and career from playing a video game, it becomes an occupation rather than a hobby. This raises interesting questions about the role of context in excessive gaming and potential addiction. Although there is ongoing scientific debate on the nature and extent of adverse consequences associated with excessive digital technology use, I have noted (in a 2010 issue of the International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction) that long hours of video game use alone do not indicate video game addiction (i.e., heavy use on its own is not a sufficient criterion for addiction). Therefore, in order to evaluate problematic video game use, researchers must consider possible negative consequences players are experiencing in their lives. When video game players are capable of financially supporting themselves from their play, this matter becomes more complex. For example, how would one categorize a professional video game player who was making over $100,000 per year playing video games, but was also experiencing social difficulties as a result of excessive video game use? This point is not meant to imply that a successful professional gamer is incapable of suffering pathological effects from game use, but rather to raise the distinct possibility that professional gamers will view their use as non-problematic due to the success they experience.
When it comes to competitive gaming, many players will play excessively and spend hours and hours every single day either practicing or competing. For many competitive gamers, their whole life is dominated by the activity and may impact on their relationships and family life. However, this does not necessarily mean they are addicted to playing the games because the excessive game playing is clearly a by-product of the activity being their job. However, it could perhaps be argued that they are addicted to their work (and in this case, their work comprises video game playing).
Workaholics have been conceptualized in different ways. For instance, in a 2011 review I published in The Psychologist, I noted that workaholics are typically viewed as one (or a combination) of the following. They are (i) viewed as hyper-performers, (ii) work as a way of stopping themselves thinking about their emotional and personal lives, and (iii) are over concerned with their work and neglect other areas of their lives. Some of these may indeed be applied to competitive gamers (particularly the reference to ‘hyper-performers’ and the fact that other areas of their lives may be neglected in pursuit of their ultimate goal). Some authors note that there is a behavioural component and a psychological component to workaholism. The behavioural component comprises working excessively hard (i.e., a high number of hours per day and/or week), whereas the psychological (dispositional) component comprises being obsessed with work (i.e., working compulsively and being unable to detach from work). Again, these behavioural and psychological components could potentially be applied to competitive gamers.
I have also noted that there are those who differentiate between positive and negative forms of workaholism. For instance, some (like myself) view workaholism as both a negative and complex process that eventually affects the person’s ability to function properly. In contrast, others highlight the workaholics who are totally achievement oriented and have perfectionist and compulsive-dependent traits. Here, the competitive gamer might be viewed as a more positive form of workaholism. Research appears to indicate there are a number of central characteristics of workaholics. In short, they typically: (i) spend a great deal of time in work activities, (ii) are preoccupied with work even when they are not working, (iii) work beyond what is reasonably expected from them to meet their job requirements, and (iv) spend more time working because of an inner compulsion, rather than because of any external factors. Again, some or all of these characteristics could be applied to competitive gamers.
Furthermore, competitive gaming is not the sole means by which proficient gamers can financially support themselves. Researchers (such as Dr. Edward Castranova) studying the economics of synthetic worlds (e.g., digital gaming environments) have observed that gamers also procure income by marketing virtual objects in Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games (MMORPGs). These digital objects often include avatars, or characters controlled by players that interact with gaming environments and other players. Each avatar has unique physical attributes and skills that a player may select, purchase, and/or develop over many hours of game play (e.g., the gradual enhancement strength, speed, weapon-wielding abilities, etc.).
As noted above, competitive gamers are likely to play for extended periods of time and sacrifice other areas of their lives if they have the potential to make a living from gaming. This single-minded dedication may become a problem for some players because the goal of becoming a professional gamer is often unrealistic. There are currently no precise figures relating to the number of competitive game players, but anecdotal evidence suggests that few professional gamers generate sufficient income to support themselves financially. Although viability may change in the future, at present, the great majority of competitive gamers have little chance of becoming successful and financially independent professionals. For this reason (i.e., the motivation to become a professional), competitive gamers may be more susceptible to excessive use than the average video game player. Additionally, even successful professional gamers are likely to play for extended periods of time, as playing less than eight hours each day could mean that they are not practicing enough compared to other professional players. Those who work with (and treat) problematic video game players should keep this factor in mind (especially given that excessive video game use may increase as competitive gaming receives more bona fide recognition as a possible career choice).
Competitive gaming, as with video game playing more generally, has psychosocial advantages and disadvantages and is thus an important area to consider when evaluating gaming as a whole. It may be critical to include questions about competitive gaming (and context more generally) in measures evaluating the degree, extent, and “addictive” potential of video game use. Furthermore, it would appear essential for psychologists to inquire about competitive gaming in a clinical interview during which a client reports playing video games. If clients turn out to be competitive gamers, this will likely distinguish them in many ways from a person who simply plays video games excessively for fun and/or escape.
Various approaches and strategies could be used to stimulate research into competitive gaming. For example, studies could compare the abilities of professional or high-level competitive gamers with everyday or far less experienced gamers to better understand (a) similarities and contrasts in capacities, and (b) whether skills transfer to other domains. Another possibility is to utilize case studies of highly successful professional gamers. Such in-depth studies can generate descriptive information that can help in formulating hypotheses about potential differences between these individuals and non-competitive gamers and lead to better informed and more rigorous empirical investigations. How and why are some competitive gamers able to succeed while so many other players try and fail? Are some of these characteristics and skills (e.g., persistence and speed of mental processing) similar to those seen in professional athletes or others who are extremely successful in their occupations?
Competitive gaming may offer numerous benefits that could be more pronounced than the positive effects found when games are played casually. It may also be problematic, as competitive gamers might be more likely to sacrifice other areas of their lives if they believe they can become professional players. Most importantly, those researchers in the gaming studies field might keep in mind that competitive and professional gamers are a distinct population and may differ considerably (both psychologically and/or behaviorally) from casual gamers.
Dr. Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK
Additional input: Kyle Faust and Joseph Meyer
Andrews, G., & Murphy, K. (2006). Does video game playing improve executive functioning? In M. A. Vanchevsky (Ed.), Frontiers in: Cognitive psychology (pp. 145–161). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
Boot, W. R., Kramer, A. F., Simons, D. J., Fabiani, M., & Gratton, G. (2008). The effects of video game playing on attention, memory, and executive control. Acta Psychologica, 129, 387–398.
Castronova, E. (2005). Synthetic worlds: The business and culture of online games. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Castronova, E., Williams, D., Shen, C., Ratan, R., Xiong, L., Huang, Y., & Keegan, B. (2009). As real as real? Macroeconomic behavior in a large-scale virtual world. New Media and Society, 11, 685–707.
Cheshire, T. (2011, July 4). Career gamers: Inside the world of modern professional gaming. Wired. Retrieved from http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/2011/07/features/career-gamers?page=all
Faust, K., Meyer, J. & Griffiths, M.D. (2013). Competitive gaming: The potential benefits of scientific study. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning, 3(1), 67-76.
Goodale, G. (2003, August 8). Are video games a sport? They may not break a sweat, but these competitors say they are tomorrow’s athletes. The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved from http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0808/p13s01-alsp.html
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.
Griffiths, M.D. (2011). Workaholism: A 21st century addiction. The Psychologist: Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 24, 740-744.
Hong, J-C, & Liu, M-C. (2003). A study on thinking strategy between experts and novices of computer games. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 245–258.
Hutchins, B. (2008). Signs of meta-change in second modernity: The growth of e-sport and the World Cyber Games. New Media Society, 10, 851–869.
King, D., Delfabbro, P., & Griffiths, M. (2009). The psychological study of video game players: Methodological challenges and practical advice. International Journal of Mental Health Addiction, 7, 555-562.
Lee, Y-H, & Lin, H. (2011). ‘Gaming is my work’: Identity work in internet-hobbyist game workers. Work Employment Society, 25, 451–467.
Reeves, S., Brown, B., & Laurier, E. (2009). Experts at play: Understanding skilled expertise. Games and Culture, 4, 205–227.
A couple of days ago, I was interviewed by BBC Online News for a story about a Chinese father (Mr. Feng) who hired ‘virtual assassins’ to hunt down his son in online video games and kill off his avatar as a way of trying to get his video game addicted son to stop playing online games. The story emanated from the Kotaku gaming website that reported:
“Feng’s 23 year-old son, ‘Xiao Feng’ started playing video games in high school. Through his years of playing various online games, he supposedly thought himself a master of Chinese online role playing games. According to his father, Xiao Feng had good grades in school, so they allowed him to play games; but when he couldn’t land a job they started looking into things. He, however, says he simply couldn’t find any work that he liked…Unhappy with his son not finding a job, Feng decided to hire players in his son’s favorite online games to hunt down Xiao Feng…Feng’s idea was that his son would get bored of playing games if he was killed every time he logged on, and that he would start putting more effort into getting a job…One thing’s for sure; Feng’s way of deterring his son from playing games might be one of the best ideas to come out of China recently, particularly as reactions to ‘gaming and internet addiction’ have been very extreme”.
My quotes from the story were reproduced in over 100 newspapers and website stories within a 48-hour period including the Daily Mail (UK), New York Daily News (US), Epoch Times (China), Times of India (India), Deccan Herald (India), Pakistan Today (Pakistan), National Post (Canada), Kenya Daily Eye (Africa) and Expressen (Sweden). I was quoted as saying:
“It’s not going to do much for family relations. I‘ve never heard of that kind of intervention before, but I don’t think these top-down approaches work. Most excessive game playing is usually a symptom of an underlying problem. I’ve spent 25 years studying excessive video game playing. I’ve come across very excessive players – playing for 10 to 14 hours a day – but for a lot of these people it causes no detrimental problems if they are not employed, aren’t in relationships and don’t have children. It’s not the time you spend doing something, it’s the impact it has on your life.”
My quotes (somewhat paraphrased from a 15-minute interview) were based on my research examining the role of context in determining whether someone is addicted to online gaming (and which I discussed at length last year in a previous blog). To me, the core of the issue concerning video game addiction is the extent to which excessive gaming impacts detrimentally on someone’s life. If there are no negative consequences as a result of excessive gaming, I wouldn’t class it as an addiction. However, for me, the most interesting part of the story was the intervention by the man’s father in trying to wean his son off playing video games. I’m not convinced that the father’s approach would work in general (and I’m not convinced it worked in this individual case).
The issue of online gaming addiction is a hot issue in South East Asia, and the prevalence of problematic online gaming appears to be higher in countries such as China, South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore, than in Europe and North America. In South East Asia, there is a growing concern in relation to the need to develop treatment programs for online computer game addiction. According to one report by the Korean government, 2.4% of its population was said to be addicted to video games. The report also indicated that mental health counselling bears a heavy stigma in Korea. In one case discussed in the report, the father of a child addicted to gaming refused to acknowledge his son had a problem for three months, even though he had borrowed substantial amounts of money from family members to support his addiction. Similar accounts have also appeared in China. Reports such as these indicate cultural concerns and differences.
China introduced an anti-online gaming system and a few clinics as a response to the growing problem of excessive playing of online games there. The system allows for three hours a day of gaming without penalties, but after three hours the values of items won in the game starts to decrease. After five hours of gaming per day no experience or benefits can be accrued. This system was clearly designed by those who know ‘how to hit players where it hurts’ so to speak. However, without further details of how the program operates, it is hard to evaluate whether this would work effectively given that people might be able to create multiple accounts (with characters in each account) to get round the blocking. Such a system will also require monitoring and evaluation, and would be much less effective in countries where the government allows a greater level of personal freedom.
Press reports indicate that China’s system to curtail excessive game playing only applies to adult gamers. However the Chinese solution was predictably unpopular with gamers and led to a mass exodus from one server to another server when first implemented. The Chinese system also includes: (i) the banning teenagers from cyber-cafes, (ii) limiting online gaming sessions, (iii) boot camps, (iv) psychological counselling, and (v) electrocution. There is little detailed information about the treatment technique utilized in these therapy centres. The ‘electrocution’ technique is apparently more akin to acupuncture, but it is still hard to see how that might help. It could be that it is a type of aversive therapy where they shock players whilst they are playing computer games – but this is entirely speculative on my part.
Finally, I am a great believer that the gaming addiction treatment should be fitted to the individual although some of my recent papers with my Australian colleagues Dr. Daniel King and Dr. Paul Delfabbro (at the University of Adelaide) have recommended cognitive-behavioural therapy (which I will look at in a future blog). The cognitive-behavioural model is both better researched (though with reference to different disorders), has tried and tested therapeutic techniques, and is underpinned by a verified psychological theory. However, further research is required to establish the therapeutic efficacy of all treatment programs directed at excessive gaming.
Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK
Beranuy, M., Carbonell, X., & Griffiths, M.D. (2013). A qualitative analysis of online gaming addicts in treatment. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, DOI 10.1007/s11469-012-9405-2
Griffiths, M.D. (1997). Video games and clinical practice: Issues, uses and treatments. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 36, 639-641.
Griffiths, M.D. (2008). Diagnosis and management of video game addiction. New Directions in Addiction Treatment and Prevention, 12, 27-41.
Griffiths, M.D. (2010). Online video gaming: What should educational psychologists know? Educational Psychology in Practice, 26(1), 35-40.
Griffiths, M.D., Kuss, D.J. & King, D.L. (2012). Video game addiction: Past, present and future. Current Psychiatry Reviews, 8, 308-318.
Griffiths, M.D. & Meredith, A. (2009). Videogame addiction and treatment. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 39(4), 47-53.
King, D.L., Delfabbro, P.H., Griffiths, M.D. & Gradisar, M. (2011). Assessing clinical trials of Internet addiction treatment: A systematic review and CONSORT evaluation. Clinical Psychology Review, 31, 1110-1116.
King, D.L., Delfabbro, P.H., Griffiths, M.D. & Gradisar, M. (2012). Cognitive-behavioural approaches to outpatient treatment of Internet addiction in children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Psychology: In Session, 68, 1185-1195.
Kuss, D.J. & Griffiths, M.D. (2012). Online gaming addiction in adolescence: A literature review of empirical research. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 1, 3-22.
Kuss, D.J. & Griffiths, M.D. (2012). Online gaming addiction: A systematic review. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 10, 278-296.
Kuss, D.J. & Griffiths, M.D. (2012). Internet and gaming addiction: A systematic literature review of neuroimaging studies. Brain Sciences, 2, 347-374.