Content uploaded by Rebecca Smith
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rebecca Smith on Mar 25, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Abstract
Research has begun to explore the potential benefits of video games as intervention
methods for a variety of issues. This study explores the role of video games in
assisting the recovery from ostracism. Undergraduate volunteers (n = 117) were either
included or excluded during a game of cyberball, after which their relational needs
(self-esteem and belonging), as well as positive and negative affect were assessed.
They were then randomly allocated to a video game condition (self-esteem enhancing,
pro-social, or control) and following 5 minutes of play, needs and affect were
reassessed. Participants’ anti/pro – social responses were also recorded after
administering the video game intervention. Results showed that all game conditions
were successful in restoring psychological needs and affect scores following
ostracism. Additionally, the pro-social game was the most successful in increasing
positive affect following ostracism. There were no differences in pro-social behaviour
scores between groups, with participants demonstrating neutral to social behaviour
scores. This study is the first of its kind to demonstrate that games have the potential
to restore needs and affect following ostracism. Exploring such low-cost and easily
accessible intervention methods is crucial, given that ostracism is a prevalent issue
with serious negative effects on wellbeing. This study adds to the growing research
demonstrating the therapeutic benefits of video games, suggesting it is a valuable
method of intervention for ostracism that needs to be further explored.
Keywords: Video games, gaming, intervention, self-esteem, belonging, ostracism
1. Introduction
Recently researchers have begun to adopt an intervention-focused approach towards
the psychological research into video games, exploring their potential to improve
wellbeing (Przybylski, Ryan, & Rigby, 2010; Baronowski, Buday, Thompson, &
Baronowski, 2008). Indeed, research has shown that video games have the ability to
satisfy basic human needs, such as autonomy, competence and relatedness (Sailer,
Hense, Mayr, & Mandl, 2017; see also Ryan, Rigby, & Przybylski, 2006).
Importantly, whether video games may be used as interventions for such negative
experiences as ostracism, social exclusion and rejection has not yet been fully
investigated. The present study therefore explores whether different video games are
able to restore psychological relational needs (i.e., self-esteem and belonging) and
mood (i.e., positive and negative affect) in ostracised participants, while also
comparing their behavioural pro/anti social behavioural responses to non-ostracised
individuals.
1.1 Ostracism
Ostracism, defined as the act of being ignored or excluded, is a painful and
damaging experience. Previously, Williams (2007) has argued that ostracism affects
four basic human needs; self-esteem, belonging, control and meaningful existence,
whilst also reducing positive affect and increasing negative affect (Williams, 2005).
To experimentally test the effects of ostracism, Williams, Cheung, and Choi (2000)
created the CyberBall manipulation, a virtual game of ball-toss where participants are
either passed the ball or ignored. Results from numerous Cyberball studies have
shown that players in the ignored condition demonstrate lower scores on the four
basic needs compared to players in the included condition, thereby demonstrating that
ostracism can be experienced in a virtual setting as well as in ‘real world’ interactions
(see Hartgerink, van Beest, Wicherts, & Williams, 2015 for a review). The recovery
from an experience of ostracism is signified by fundamental needs scores and mood
returning to levels similar to included individuals, and research has shown that
individuals apply various cognitive and behavioural strategies in order to restore their
needs and mood following ostracism (see Wesselmann, Ren, & Williams, 2015).
Importantly, individuals appear to engage with various forms of media, including
video games, in order to regulate dysphoric moods and satisfy their psychological
needs (Sherry, Greenberg, Lucas, & Lachlan, 2006; Ryan et al., 2006). Therefore, it is
possible that video games may possess specific attributes that can help alleviate the
negative consequences of ostracism experience.
1.2 Video Game Interventions
Research suggests that video games possess great therapeutic benefits in mental
health settings (e.g. Horne-Moyer, Moyer, Messer, & Messer, 2014). The ways in
which games benefit those who play have been categorised into different domains
(e.g., social, cognitive, emotional, etc.; for a review see Granic, Engles & Lobel,
2014). For instance, game designers have begun to explore some psychological
concepts, such as the benefits of in-game flow (e.g. Sherry, 2004) in order to promote
feelings of wellbeing in those who play. With a growing interest in the development
of serious games (i.e. designed for purposes other than entertainment; Starks, 2014), it
remains to be seen whether they have the ability to assist in the recovery of
psychological needs following an experience of ostracism.
1.2.1 Video games in recovery from ostracism: relational needs
Leary and Downs (1995) suggest that in order to manage experiences of social
exclusion humans have developed a Sociometer that serves as a gauge for an
individual’s inclusionary status and is primarily reflected in an individual’s self-
esteem. Picket and Gardener (2005) proposed a complimentary model to the
Sociometer known as Social Monitoring Theory, whereby individuals naturally
monitor their environment for social cues (e.g., eye-contact, facial expression)
through the Social Monitoring System, with the purpose of guiding the individual
towards remedying and recovering from an experience of exclusion (see also
Bernstein, Young , Brown, Sacco, & Claypool, 2008; Böckler, Hömke, &
Sebanz, 2014; Wesselmann et al., 2015). Accordingly, an event of ostracism alerts the
Sociometer that inclusionary status has been threatened, which in turn activates the
Social Monitoring System and prompts the individual to begin scanning their
environment for social inclusion cues.
Self-esteem thus has been shown to be predominantly affected by events of
ostracism. Importantly, the needs of self-esteem and belonging have been linked
within the ostracism literature (e.g., Gerber, Chang, & Reimel, 2017; Knowles, Lucas,
Molden, Gardner, & Dean, 2009), and are often referred to as a composite factor
called relational needs (Wesselmann et al., 2015). Gardner, Pickett, Jefferis, and
Knowles (2005) have suggested that, as with self-esteem, the social monitoring
system regulates optimal levels of belonging, and when the need for belonging is
threatened, the individual will become more sensitive to social information. These
relational needs appear to attenuate mood, or affect, as well (e.g., Heatherton &
Polivy, 1991; Peterson, Park & Seligman, 2005; Shteynberg, Hirsh, Galinsky &
Knight, 2013). Indeed, feelings of self-esteem and belonging are theoretically and
experimentally linked to emotions of happiness, joy and pride, as well as general
feelings of psychological wellbeing (Tracy, Cheng, Robbins, & Trzesniewski, 2009;
Paradise & Kernis, 2002).
To the authors’ knowledge there has only been one attempt to design a serious
game that focuses on ostracism coping. Grow Your Own Chi is a game that involves
identifying smiling faces (as opposed to angry faces or faces not making eye contact)
and the player’s own name. The game was designed by Dandeneau and Baldwin
(2004) to raise feelings of self-esteem, to inhibit rejection information, and to boost an
individuals’ sense of social connectedness by incorporating social psychological
theories of social monitoring (Leary & Downs, 1995; .
Accordingly, the results showed that participants with low self-esteem could be
trained through the game to focus less on negative social information. Furthermore,
the participants’ feelings of self-esteem were increased by presenting self-relevant
information (participants’ name), paired with positive and accepting feedback in the
form of inclusionary social cues (e.g. eye contact). Therefore, Grow Your Own Chi is
an example of a serious game that could have promising therapeutic properties to
assist in recovery of relational needs and affect depleted through ostracism.
1.2.2 Video games in recovery from ostracism: behavioural responses
Recovery from ostracism can also be measured in behavioural choices
following an experience of social exclusion (Wesselmann et al., 2015). Research into
behavioural strategies of recovery focuses mainly on pro and anti-social behaviours
and how they might assist in restoring psychological needs (Williams, 2009).
Ostracised individuals respond more anti-socially than included individuals and have
shown to act more aggressively toward another person regardless of whether this
person ostracised them or not (Buckley, Winkel, & Leary, 2004; Twenge, Baumeister,
Tice, & Stucke, 2001; Warburton, Williams, & Cairns 2006). However, experimental
research has also demonstrated that ostracised individuals can respond more pro-
socially than included individuals in order to restore the needs that have been
threatened or lost through ostracism. For instance, ostracised individuals work harder
on group tasks (Williams & Sommer, 1997), focus more on re-inclusion (Maner,
DeWall, Baumeister, & Schaller, 2007; Molden, Lucas, Gardner, Dean, & Knowles,
2009) and generally engage in behaviours that may encourage favourable responses
from other people, such as acting in a pro-social way (Baumeister & Leary, 1995;
Leary, Twenge, & Quinlivan, 2006; Williams & Nida, 2011). Indeed, existing research
suggests that acting in pro-social ways may be psychologically beneficial beyond the
benefits of being re-included. For example, helping others has shown to increase the
helper’s feelings of self-esteem (Buchanan & Bardi, 2010; Klien, 2017; Schwartz,
Meisenhelder, Ma, & Reed, 2003) and positive mood (Snippe, Jeronimus, Rot, Bos,
Jonge, & Wichers, 2017).
Serious games are argued to support pro-social attitudes and make a positive
change in society. For instance, Free Rice is an ad supported free-to-play game that
allows players to donate to charities by playing multiple-choice quiz games. For every
question the player answers correctly, 10 grains of rice are donated via the World
Food Programme. Research into the benefits of pro-social video game play have
found that participants who played a pro-social video game behaved more pro-
socially towards others compared to those who played a control game (Gentile et al.,
2009). Indeed, video games offer excellent conditions for learning as they
simultaneously expose gamers to modelling and rehearsal, whilst reinforcing the
behaviour of the games’ theme (Buckley & Anderson, 2006; Hartgerink, van Beest,
Wicherts, & Williams, 2015). Accordingly research has shown that playing pro-social
video games decreased both aggressive cognitions and aggressive behaviours, and
increased positive affect (Greitemeyer, Traut-Mattausch, & Osswald, 2012; Whitaker
& Bushman, 2012). Similarly, Liu, Tend, Lan, Zhang, and Yao (2015) showed that
short-term exposure to a pro-social video game resulted in inhibiting aggressive
thoughts and a reduced aggressive behaviours. Thus, there are reasons to suggest that
playing video games with pro-social content, such as Free Rice, might foster pro-
social behaviours following an experience of ostracism, while positively attenuating
self-esteem and affect.
1.3 The present study
With the discussed literature in mind, the present study was set out to examine
whether different video games have the potential to assist in recovery of relational
needs and affect depleted through ostracism. Included and excluded participants’
relational needs and affect were tested before and after playing one of the three video
games, while also measuring their behavioural responses.
First, it was hypothesised that Grow Your Own Chi game will significantly
increase relational needs (self-esteem and belonging) compared to the control game
(Snake) due to its incorporation of Social Monitoring mechanisms. Second, given that
pro-social video games appear to increase pro-social attitudes, increase self-esteem
and reduce aggressive responses, it was predicted that excluded participants who
played the pro-social game Free Rice would demonstrate an increase in relational
needs and generate higher pro-social responses compared to excluded participants
playing the control game (Snake). Finally, given that relational needs and pro-social
behaviour attenuate affect, it was hypothesised that both Grow Your Own Chi and
Free Rice would also significantly increase positive affect and reduce negative affect
compared to the control game (Snake).
2. Methods
2.1 Design
A 2 (included, excluded) x 2 (intervention time: pre, post) x 3 (intervention
type: Grow Your Own Chi, Free Rice, Snake) mixed factor design was employed, in
which included and excluded participants generated psychological need and affect
scores before and after playing one of the three video games. A single post
intervention measure of pro/anti- social response was included as an independent
measure and was compared across included and excluded participants and three video
game conditions.
2.2 Participants
The participants were undergraduate students (n = 117, male = 291, female = 85;
mean age = 21.35, SD = 5.94) who were recruited through the university SONA
system that rewards university students with points for participating in research
(student annual requirement). Cyberball was used to divide participants into excluded
(n = 54, female = 41, male = 13; mean age = 20.62, SD = 4.58) and included (n = 63,
female = 44, male = 16; mean age = 21.98, SD = 6.90) groups.
Note: gender was not recorded for 3 participants
2.3 Materials
Cyberball: The Cyberball game was used to induce the feeling of being
included or excluded (Williams et al., 2000). Participants were randomly assigned to a
virtual game of ball toss in which they were either included or excluded (i.e.,
ostracised) by other players. They were told they were playing against two students
when in fact they were playing against the computer. When the participants were
passed the ball, they were required to click on one of the two players with the mouse
in order to pass them the ball. There was also a dialogue box where the participant
could talk to other players.
Assessment of Need Satisfaction Following Ostracism Scale: To assess
psychological needs after the game of Cyberball, participants completed the
Assessment of Need Satisfaction Following Ostracism Scale (20 items, α = .95)
(Jamieson, Harkins, & Williams, 2010) The participants were asked to indicate on a 5-
point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely) how they currently felt in regards to a
series of feelings and emotional adjectives that were categorised into four domains:
belonging, self-esteem, meaningful existence, and control. The four needs were
analysed as a single factor. However, because of the theoretical framework of the
study concerns only needs for belonging and self-esteem needs, these were analysed
as a separate sub-factor (10 items, α = .93). Examples of the self-esteem subscale
questions include: “I felt good about myself” and “My self-esteem was high.”
Examples of the belonging subscale include: “I felt disconnected” or “I felt rejected.”
The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule: To assess mood the Positive and
Negative Affect Schedule (Watson, Clark, & Tellegan, 1988) was employed. The scale
contains 20 emotional adjectives that are categorised into two domains; positive affect
(10 items, α = .90) and negative affect (10 items, α = .77). Examples of the positive
items include, “Interested” and “Enthusiastic”. Examples of the negative items
include “Upset” and “Afraid”. Participants were asked to rate their current emotions
on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely).
Video Games
Grow Your Own Chi: This game is modelled to target self-esteem and sense of
social acceptance, drawing on the Sociometer (Leary & Downs, 1995) and Social
monitoring (Picket & Gardener, 2005) theories (see also Dandeneau & Baldwin,
2004). The aim of the game is to click on SMILING FACES and YOUR NAME when
you see them fly past, and to ignore NEGATIVE FACES. The player is rewarded with
positive feedback each time they click on a positive cue by their ‘chi’ being powered
up.
FreeRice: This game is modelled to target pro-social behaviour. The aim of the
game is to match words to their correct meaning. For every correct response, a real
portion of rice is donated, thereby inducing in participants a feeling of being pro-
social. Before playing, the gamer is presented with the text:
“Whether you are CEO of a large corporation or a street child
in a poor country, improving your education can improve your
life. It is a great investment in yourself. Perhaps even greater
is the investment your donated rice makes in hungry human
beings, enabling them to function and be productive.
Somewhere in the world, a person is eating rice that you
helped provide.”
Snake: In line with previous research (Gentile et al., 2009; Hartgerink, van
Beest, Wicherts, & Williams, 2015), the Snake game was chosen as a control game
due to its neutral theme. The game involves a snake moving within a rectangle area.
The participants are required to navigate the snake’s movement to collect food
without letting it touch the rectangle walls. Participants are required to use the
keyboard keys (i.e., left, right, up, down) to navigate the snake. If the snake touches
the wall, the participant loses and the screen displays: GAME OVER.
Pro/Anti-Social Responses
In order to measure pro/anti-social responses following ostracism the
participants, upon finishing playing one of the three intervention games, were told that
as they were the first to finish their tasks, they are able to select the difficulty level of
the game that the other CyberBall players are about to play. Participants are informed
that the harder they make the game, the longer the other participants will have to sit in
their room until they finish their game, and that their scores may be affected by how
much harder the game is. Participants are also told that their decision will remain
anonymous. The participants are presented with the prompt “Please select difficulty
level for player 1” and the same option for player 2. They can choose between 1 – 3
on a Likert scale (1 = easy, 2= medium and 3= hard). In accordance with Warburton
et al.’s (2006) measurement of anti-social responses following ostracism, and
Greitemeyer and Osswald’s (2010) measure of pro-social responses, lower scores
suggest a more pro-social response to other participants and a higher score - a more
anti-social response.
2.4 Procedure
Participants completed the present study via the online Qualtrics questionnaire
in digital form accessed through the university SONA system for participant
recruitment. Upon signing the consent form, participants were prompted to play a
short game of Cyberball. Participants were then asked to complete the Assessment of
Need Satisfaction Following Ostracism Scale and The Positive and Negative Affect
Schedule. Participants were then prompted to play one of three intervention video
games (FreeRice, Grow Your Own Chi, or Snake). Participants were then prompted
to complete the Assessment of Need Satisfaction Following Ostracism Scale and The
Positive and Negative Affect Schedule again, followed by the pro/anti-social response
measure. Upon completion, participants completed the additional/demographic
information forms. Participants were fully debriefed at the end of the study.
3. Results
Overall and relational needs: Two 2 (included; excluded) x 2 (intervention
time: pre; post) x 3 (intervention type: GYOC; FR; control) ANOVAs were conducted
to investigate the overall needs measured by the Assessment of Need Satisfaction
Following Ostracism Scale and the sub-factor of that scale referred to as relational
needs (belonging and self-esteem), pre and post intervention in included and excluded
participants. The group average scores are presented in Table 1, while significant
results are reported in Table 2.
Table 1. Mean scores on relational needs and affect for participants in included and
excluded conditions for conditions of Grow Your Own Chi, Free Rice and Snake
(control)
GYOC FR Snake
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)
General need scores
Included Pre 3.20 (.69) 3.24 (.67) 3.45 (.83)
Post 3.15 (.79) 3.38 (.78) 3.14 (.73)
Excluded Pre 1.90 (.51) 1.94 (.50) 1.97 (.55)
Post 3.48 (.68) 3.61 (.67) 3.28 (.63)
Relational need scores: belonging + self-esteem
Included Pre 3.37 (.90) 3.34 (.73) 3.54 (.94)
Post 3.15 (.83) 3.26 (.75) 2.99 (.87)
Excluded Pre 1.93 (.64) 1.98 (.61) 2.09 (.62)
Post 3.39 (.69) 3.42 (.63) 3.21 (.66)
Positive affect
Included Pre 2.20 (.84) 2.10 (.76) 2.19 (.88)
Post 2.30 (1.08) 2.90 (.99) 2.37 (1.06)
Excluded Pre 1.43 (.49) 1.47 (.55) 1.69 (.76)
Post 2.42 (1.01) 3.06 (1.05) 2.51 (.96)
Negative affect
Included Pre 1.41 (.48) 1.40 (.48) 1.44 (.45)
Post 1.61 (.70) 1.35 (.52) 1.64 (.60)
Excluded Pre 1.87 (.60) 1.80 (.42) 1.85 (.63)
Post 1.47 (.77) 1.39 (.64) 1.42 (.46)
Participants’ scores on the overall needs and the relational needs sub-factor
generated similar results. The scores were higher after playing video games. Excluded
participants had significantly lower scores on all measures compared to the included
group. Participants showed significantly different scores pre intervention, with
excluded participants showing lower scores than included participants. Scores post
intervention were the same across both groups.
Table 2. ANOVA summary table of group comparisons of general and
relational needs pre and post intervention in excluded and included individuals
df F η2t D P
Mixed ANOVAs 2 (group: GRP) x 3 (Intervention type: INT) x 2 (Pre/Post Intervention: PPI)
General needs
PPI 1,111 91.93 .45 <.001
Group 1,111 29.95 .21 <.001
Interaction (PPI,
Group)
1,111 112.29 .50 <.001
Follow-up t-tests (Group: GRP)
Pre intervention 115 11.5 2.13 <.001
Post intervention 115 1.62 .31 .108
Relational needs
PPI 1,111 41.26 .27 <.001
Group 1,111 28.06 .20 <.001
Interaction (PPI,
Group)
1,111 97.76 .47 <.001
Follow-up t-tests (Group: GRP)
Pre intervention 115 10.1 1.91 <.001
Post intervention 115 1.42 .27 .158
Positive and Negative affect: Two 2 (group: included; excluded) x 2
(intervention time: pre; post) x 3 (intervention type: GYOC; FR; control) ANOVAs
were conducted to investigate positive and negative affect pre and post intervention in
ostracised and excluded participants. The group average scores are presented in Table
1, while significant results are reported in Table 2.
Positive affect: Participants’ positive affect scores were higher post intervention.
Participants showed significantly different scores pre intervention, with excluded
participants showing lower positive affect scores than included participants. Scores
post intervention were the same across both groups.
Table 3. Group Analyses investigating positive and negative affect pre and post
intervention in ostracised and included individuals
df F η2T d P
Mixed ANOVAs 2 (group: GRP) x 3 (Intervention type: INT) x 2 (PrePost Intervention: PPI)
Positive Affect
PPI 1,111 73.06 .40 <.001
Interaction (PPI,
Group)
1,111 20.00 .15 <.001
Follow-up t-tests (Group:GRP)
Pre intervention 115 -4.64 .87 <.001
Post intervention 115 < 1 .10 >.2
Interaction (PPI,
INT)
1,111 6.40 .10 .002
Follow-up ANOVAs (Intervention type) by PPI
Pre intervention 2,111 .48 .01 >.2
Post intervention 2,111 4.02 .07 .021
Post intervention comparisons (Intervention type )
FR - GYOC 74 2.59 .59 .011
FR – Snake 76 2.32 .53 .023
GYOC - Snake 78 < 1 .07 >.2
Negative affect
PPI 1,111 7.84 .07 .006
Interaction 1,111 24.87 .18 <.001
Follow-up t-tests (Group:GRP)
Pre intervention 115 4.49 .91 <.001
Post intervention 115 < 1 .16 >.2
As expected, pre intervention, participants generated similar scores regardless of
the game being assigned to them, but showed different scores post intervention.
Participants who played the Free Rice game generated higher positive affect scores
than participants who played Grow Your Own Chi and control video games, while the
latter 2 generated similar scores (Figure 1).
Negative Affect: Participants’ negative affect scores were lower post
intervention. Participants showed significantly different scores pre intervention, with
excluded participants showing higher negative affect scores than included
participants. Scores post intervention were the same across both groups. Note that
while there were no significant interactions, included participants showed marginal
increase in negative affect post game intervention in Grow Your Own Chi and Snake
conditions, but not in Free Rice condition (Figure 1), an observation further
elaborated on in the Discussion.
Figure 1. Average scores on Positive and Negative Affect in included and excluded
participants pre- and post-intervention.
Pro/Anti - Social Responses: The average scores measuring pro/anti- social
responses in included and excluded participants are presented in Table 4. A 2 (group:
included; excluded) x 3 (game type: GYOC; FR; control) ANOVA examined the
potential effect of video game intervention on pro/anti -social responses following
ostracism. The main effect of group was not significant F(1, 109) < 1. There was no
two-way interaction F(2,109) = 1.60, p = 2.07, η2 = .03.
Table 4. Frequency and mean of pro/anti- social responses in included and excluded
participants
Level of difficulty
assigned to Player 1
Level of difficulty
assigned to Player 2
Mean level of
difficulty assigned
to 2 players
Frequency % Frequency % M (SD)
1 = easy, 2 = medium, 3 = hard 1 2 3 1 2 3
Included Included Included
GYOC 25.0 45.0 30.0 25.0 55.0 20.0 2.00 (.63)
FR 36.4 40.9 22.7 27.3 54.5 18.2 1.89 (.69)
Snake 47.6 33.3 19.0 28.6 47.6 23.8 1.83 (.64)
Excluded Excluded Excluded
GYOC 47.4 36.8 15.8 42.1 36.8 21.1 1.74 (.75)
FR 26.7 66.7 6.7 20.0 66.7 13.3 1.87 (.55)
Snake 15.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 40.0 35.0 2.10 (.68)
Based on the data presented in Table 4, both included and excluded
participants generated medium to pro-social responses, as their responses generally
remained within the 1-2 range (i.e. assigning easy – medium game levels for other
players). While analyses generated no significant differences, the pattern of responses
suggests that when examining the anti-social responses (level 3 = hard), frequency
distribution would indicate that participants playing the control game were more
likely to assign a difficult level to other players, than participants who played Grow
Your Own Chi and Free Rice.
4. Discussion
The present study aimed to explore the use of video games in ostracism
recovery. Included and excluded participants’ relational needs (self-esteem and
belonging; Williams, 2007), positive and negative affect as well as behavioural
responses were measured before and after playing one of the video game conditions.
Although not in the manner predicted the findings of this study demonstrate that video
games posses the ability to assist in the recovery from ostracism.
First, in line with previous research (Williams & Sommer, 1997; Williams et al.,
2000), the participants ostracised through cyberball showed significantly lower scores
of relational needs (self-esteem and belonging). Importantly, results indicate that
while particapnts included in the cyberball game (i.e., non-ostracised participants)
showed no difference in relational need scores before and after video game
intervention, ostracised participants’ reduced need scores were restored post-game
intervention. Drawing from existing research on social monitoring theory (e.g.
Gardner et al., 2005) and how ostracised individuals become more attentive to social
information in order to remedy an experience of ostracism, it was predicted that
playing the videogame Grow Your Own Chi would significantly increase feelings of
self-esteem and belonging in ostracised participants compared to the control game
condition. However, there were no differences between game conditions, with all
three video games successfully increasing relational needs following ostracism. While
previous studies have demonstrated that video games have the ability to satisfy such
needs as autonomy, relatedness and competence (Legate, DeHaan, & Ryan, 2015;
Przybylski et al., 2010), this is the first study to show that relational needs depleted
through an event of ostracism can be restored through video game play.
Additionally, it was predicted that Grow Your Own Chi and Free Rice would
significantly increase positive affect and reduce negative affect following ostracism.
This study demonstrated that excluded participants, as expected, had lower scores on
positive affect and higher scores on negative affect than included participants pre-
intervention, which were successfully restored post-intervention. However, contrary
to predictions, positive and negative affect were restored in all game conditions.
It is noteworthy that the game Free Rice showed a distinct pattern of results in
both excluded and included participants when examining their affect scores (Figure
1). First, excluded participants who played Free Rice restored their positive affect
more successfully than those who played the Grow Your Own Chi and the control
games. Second, included participants who played the Grow Your Own Chi and the
control games, but not Free Rice, showed marginally significant increase in negative
affect. Taken together these findings suggest that the game Free Rice was the most
effective in regulating participants’ positive and negative affect. Thus in line with
previous research (e.g. Whitaker & Bushman, 2012), playing a game with pro-social
attributes has a positive effect on mood.
While the rise in negative affect in included participants after videogame
interventions may seem counterintuitive at first, it falls in line with previous research.
Indeed, Bowman, Kowert and Cohen (2015) showed that included participants were
less likely to enjoy videogames than excluded participants. The authors proposed that
it could be due to the fact that included participants did not enjoy playing the
intervention game alone after having played cyberball in a virtual group. For now we
can only speculate to the process, and future research would be useful in this area.
It was also predicted that excluded participants who played the game Free
Rice would have higher scores on the pro-social response measure following
ostracism. However, contrary to predictions results showed no significant differences
in pro-social response scores between intervention groups. In line with predictions,
both included and excluded participants’ generated medium to pro-social responses
post video game intervention (Table 4).
This study has limitations. First, Wesselmann et al. (2015) state that recovery
can begin within minutes after ostracism occurs, therefore participants excluded in
this study have begun their recovery prior intervention and regardless of game
condition assigned to them. Future studies will need to address this limitation in order
to further test the value of video game interventions, possibly by monitoring the real-
time impact of ostracism or using a measure that elicits a longer lasting ostracism
effect. Furthermore, it is possible that having experienced an event of ostracism
through a video game (cyberball), and then receiving an intervention through another
video game, may have resulted in a positive outcome for all game conditions.
Experiencing ‘real-world’ face-to-face ostracism and then playing a video game may
yield different results, and future research could explore the differences between
contrasting intervention methods. Another limitation is that the present study did not
explore such factors as participants’ initial mood levels, personality differences and
experiences of enjoyment and flow whilst playing. Exploring these factors and their
potential influence on ostracism recovery may provide explanations for why all of the
games within the present study were successful. Finally, it may be worthwhile
exploring the potential therapeutic benefits of AAA games (high budget popular high
street games) as opposed to the basic games employed in this study, as they may play
a more complex role in ostracism recovery.
In conclusion, this study is the first of its kind to demonstrate that a brief period
of video game play can restore relational needs, whilst restoring affect following an
experience of ostracism. These findings add to the current literature that is beginning
to explore potential benefits of video games. Exploring such low-cost and accessible
intervention methods is important, as ostracism is a prevalent issue with serious side
effects on individuals’ wellbeing. However, the interplay between psychological needs
affected by ostracism and different game themes needs to be further explored in order
to fully harness the potential benefits of video games as an intervention for ostracism
recovery.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declare that they had no conflicts of interest with respect to their
authorship or the publication of this article.
Funding
This work is part of a PhD project funded internally by the University (Vice
Chancellor’s Doctoral Scholarship).
References
!"#$%&'(" )*+(,
-, (.
,/(0#".',(-12,(
3
,,4(5+675., 2(,8&,,4(9%
60-,
)',0 ((,(-,..1".',
.0%1
+ (7:;6<7%5.,",0)8(
-,1
2(,. ((-+ .+ ,',
1
(<9=,+0!,4><!,8:>62,,
<%
2'7(2,((,!,?*+(,)!,7@,
& 2,'(8,,-7:! (
%1
,4 $A,47>,.?%B.."(,2(
.-+(,2(
,,)5. 2,-(,+(,,',0 @,6
!"#1
+.A%(,-A(((,-
$,'6/;-
!(-,$%%1
+6A?(,>., ,,-./(
,(C+(,-260',0 (&D,9
6%?(
&'()"!*
%221$9;?)<.4.
+6A?B7?;6<7%7,(,
2
@,)/(,-'(C+,-,
'+,+,"%
1
8+!84<B%5.&.",,-!,6
7@0
&-, , ,0,24.0.D(+(;,4!-1?( )
5.7,,-,(.?/(,-(7+,
50!-%
1
B;>;9/(DA,4(<%E
.,+(
,,0),(((, ,,0
%1
8(,>=+4!&.,$! <
<0;
%5.?/(,-,(,D, (,,(,
.',()&,?':, >,,
;,0+?*2 !+(
%1
"9>.0!7 %>,(+'6,-
B (F
,(( (.(.
/01&;,"?0(7
%5."G(,-260',0 (
1 %1
65E((4!%?/(,-2,(,',
0 (,
2,(,".',
2%
1
655+1<+(.?E((4!%,4,
,
0'/(,-',',0 (,,,2,)6
,,2'6 !"#-2
1
0>'(&B.(9B (A%5.
E
?/(,-E(( )<16((,->6""!+(
3445+%%
.,5:,'69%8',2 ',,-
(-,
(+0((-1(
1%%1
,1<,6<,6<((8<((?%5.+(
,-,
0 (.26)'44. 2,(!
)"1%
9 (,9(!B (A8%$.
,'
2-, -,((
1%1
A$%,(,".',((22,(,-
0-$
-%1
;6<78,4(8;%&2(,-+,(,-.
(-1(
,')5.(-1( (6( ((,, %<
A(?
+6(+221
;6<75409<H+'?%&2(,
@,(
,-000((,(,6
)7%1
;0$8>767%70.0.B,0)
72'>,20
-,0,0B.E(( $
"
1
;+=5I;I.0J=,8%!.,1
/(,-
2,(,',0 (,00((,)'1
2,(+685
%
<9A8B>$+ (7:!.<%
8,((,
*+(, ,'2(,,,K7(,'0.
L2,+2
2," M -
1
<,8;+(B8AA,4(<%
<,',(
-,',,, ,,:,,40!,?*+(,)0
7@
D(+(0&0,"
" 1%
1
(A(<%!-1( (6.,,0
B1"0)
& 2,(,-:0!-1(
!
-1
>;B;%5.!,<,,0!6( )
?. !('6,!,>+((2'7(2,(,
!,?*+(,&
A8B (9:,0(B',2249
4
+,):%221$4=,)
(6.,,06((
#6"6(A767<70"6>!%<,',
<,,-D,
?00 )7'%1
78B(( ?8B (A8%?'-,
,.
7(2,(,E(( )!,+!0
%3
767<70"6!>#6"6(%5.<,',
+,-D,
()!-18 ,5.,622,.
+%1
!<(9N<6!A<%,4
0 G,
,'()*2 (+6,-./(,-(2G
0 (0 (,2(6.,,0((-,
!"#1 1
!.4#><(.9<=7%+(
(,
(".',(((,4." ..
1%1
!.69;%:,4 @,6 !
$%
1
!.69;"0!;+(A;.A%
D,0 +((
0G,((2,(,-+(0 2-
&D,
96%?(&'9)"
!*%221
!.6"0(.9(68A0.%
!.
,&((<,,&-+(,+,"
1
! 17. ;;6<7%7,(,
( ,
(0 #,,(( ,.-, (,-2(,
@,)
+ ,' ,)71%1
!22?9, +(:7,<,(?9,0B.(
<%5.
72,6,-,(,.',,('/86
;-
21%
!(A%>,0'".',0 (0)+G ,
-,
(00(,+(0 (8%
569>.097,"(75#(4(A%+.
+"( )5./'>,,-!-1?(
$((( . 2%1
5409<+ (7:58<!+5!%&-
6,+F@,
. ". O/(,-(,*(+,,00(('
".',+
21
B"+,BB (A8>(87%B.
,(( (, 00((,)5. ,0D(,-
,,2',
+,"-3
B(,8>;50%8',2
D,,-
-<(+(,-,('$0'/)5.$!
!(
%1
B(( ?878B (A8%<,',(-,
(2,((,
,(( 81%1
B(( ?878!4 ?B (A8%
7+ ,
.(,'6-, ,((
/"
%1
B.9;+(. 9%L7 AM
?/(,-
*0',0 (,00(('2,(,".',
1
B (A8%E(( )7
21
B (A%E(( ).( 6,
(6(
1
B (A%E(( )5.A((,-!,8.
!"%1
B (A8%E(( ) 2,1. ,&
<I
%?,"";
,""%D,221!
80,>N!)
?(' ((
B (A8$!%E(( )>,(C+(
,20!
/-%1
B (A8!, A;%!,,(( "6,F(
,4,()
8,(@,,,G0,, 2(,K
-1
B (A8>.+0>A>.,B%>6",(( )
/(,-"0
0,,'.&
%1
