4.3 Article

Caught them all: Gaming disorder, motivations for playing and spending among core Pokemon Go players

Journal

ENTERTAINMENT COMPUTING
Volume 45, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.entcom.2023.100548

Keywords

Mobile games; Microtransactions; Gaming disorder; Game addiction; Self-determination theory; Motivations

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Poke 'mon Go not only has a huge following among players worldwide, but it has also caught the attention of the scientific community. This study examined the characteristics and motivations of hardcore players by analyzing data from 1630 trainers of level 25 and above. The study found that although there were more female players, males played more and made more progress. The need for in-game relatedness was the strongest predictor of playing, followed by the need for in-game competence.
Poke ' mon Go (2016) not only enjoys tremendous worldwide appeal among players, the game has also captivated the scientific community. The aim of this study was to examine the characteristics and motivations of hardcore Poke ' mon Go players by analyzing self-reported data from 1630 trainers of level 25 and higher. There were more female players in our sample, yet males played more and showed more progress in the game. In general, the need for in-game relatedness was the strongest predictor of playing, followed by the need for in-game competence. Male players showed stronger in-game motivational needs for relatedness and competence, whereas female players were more strongly motivated by a need for autonomy. The needs for relatedness and competence predicted spending on microtransactions, whereas the need for autonomy did not. Depending on the measure for gaming disorder, between 1% and 9% of these core players met the diagnostic criteria. Gaming disorder was also related to social anxiety and increased spending on in-game microtransactions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available