Doing a research project. Want to participate? - by AntiMatter_16
AntiMatter_16 on 29/5/2009 at 16:35
Hey, glad to see some people interested. Hopefully, some more people will participate as well since I'll need quite a few more to get statistically significant results.
@Henke
I can't really imagine people finishing the level in under 30 minutes, but just in case I suppose one should restart the level.
I've seen a speedrun for just under 5 minutes, but some engine bugs were used, and I expect to get that run the player invested several hours.
As for sending me the answers, you could if you wanted just type them out in notepad, or on a sheet of paper, and grade the test yourself. I'm expecting everyone to be honest here. =) If you don't want to grade the test yourself, you could just send me the answers for all the questions, but I expected most participants to grade the test and send me the final result.
@Macha
Yes, aggression before the test might influence final aggression results, however, random assignment should help to take care of this problem. That's why people are randomly assigned to one of the difficultly levels based on their birthday. Hopefully people born in June aren't significantly more aggressive than those in January. =P
@Queue
Sorry, no shock therapy, though there is an aggression test in which participants give noise blasts to an unseen opponent, and the intensity of the noise blasts are used as a measure of aggression. The State Hostility Scale developed by Craig A Anderson is both free, quick and uncomplicated, which is why I choose it, even if it is a self report ranging between strongly agree and strongly disagree. =P
@Gingerbread man
Yes, it would be awesome if I could invest a lot longer in this study, who knows, I might study this more in grad school, but for now, I just want to finish my senior project and graduate. =) There are a few other flaws in the design and other things I haven't controlled for as well which I'll address in the write-up as well. I came up with another idea for a research project in which several different groups doing different activities were measured for aggression, and then plotted to determine how aggression changes for video game players measure up to others such as playing board games, or sports, etc. Some research has found that video games increase aggression scores (at least temporarily), but whether or not these changes constitute a threat hasn't been shown. Showing them in contrast to other activities would help to show what kind of a threat video games pose, if any.
catbarf on 29/5/2009 at 16:48
I fail to understand the difference between mad, furious, and enraged. Honestly, I don't know what significant results you can pull from what amounts to word games.
I'll give it a shot anyway. Legendary's the only way to make the game challenging.
Enchantermon on 29/5/2009 at 16:52
Quote Posted by AntiMatter_16
Yes, aggression before the test might influence final aggression results, however, random assignment should help to take care of this problem.
Depends on how much faith you put in astrology. :p
I'm a little confused on how we're supposed to use our answers to come up with a final grade. Do we add up the ones without asterisks and subtract the ones with, or what?
Gingerbread Man on 29/5/2009 at 16:53
I think mostly what I was trying to get across is that a game that involves a 360 degree environment where you are shooting or being shot has a far different flavour of frustration / aggression than a game where you have a set perspective, the opponent pieces aren't human / humanoid / facsimilies of living entities, and the speed of action is more constant and predictable.
Again, I'm not punching a hole in your design, but I do think there are several highly relevant distinctions between FPS / RTS / etc in terms of the subjective experience of play, and it might be smart to at least touch on these (or at least acknowledge their relevance) in the Discussion / Implications for Further Study sections of the paper.
Gingerbread Man on 29/5/2009 at 16:57
Quote Posted by catbarf
I fail to understand the difference between mad, furious, and enraged. Honestly, I don't know what significant results you can pull from what amounts to word games.
Sapir-Whorf, for one thing.
Lookit, the particular words we use to describe our inner feelings are of paramount importance in psych. I'll tell you something fun, and you'll have to look the shit up on your own time because a) I don't teach this shit no mo' and b) I kinda got spiky at the dismissal of something that I know is way more important to human behaviour than unpsychs think and I want YOU to do the legwork for yourself so that I can imagine you feel chagrin in the end. ;)
Dig this: One of the best ways to teach anger management to extremely violent offenders is to IMPROVE THEIR VOCABULARY. Wrap your brain on that one :D
Linguistic relativity is fucking fascinating to me.
Vivian on 29/5/2009 at 18:04
I'm appealing to the god-given right of academics to roundly deride fields they're not directly involved in
Enchantermon on 29/5/2009 at 18:14
Quote Posted by Gingerbread Man
Dig this: One of the best ways to teach anger management to extremely violent offenders is to IMPROVE THEIR VOCABULARY. Wrap your brain on that one :D
Interesting. Maybe, since they can better express their anger in words than they could previously, they're less likely to need to express it in violence.
Gingerbread Man on 29/5/2009 at 18:29
No, that's not what I was saying at all. :(
When you have a label for something you can separate it and distinguish it from another thing. If all you know is MAD SAD HAPPY TIRED then you aren't going to make any sort of nuanced distinction between PEEVED and FURIOUS, and so modification of response based on subjective severity of the stimulus becomes irrelevant / unimportant to the subject. In effect, since they don't make a point of differentiating between "slightly irritated" and "fucking rage" the behavioural response tends to err on the side of RAAAAAAARRRGHHHH!!!!
They're still gonna express themselves with violence, but hopefully with a more appropriate intensity. Appropriate to their perception of the situation, obviously (kinda hard to change that one) but it's basically like giving people better tools with which to scope out the world within and without... Look at it like this: black and white TV with rabbit ears and a storm outside vs HDTV and a 72" flat panel.
To put it horribly simplistically.
Vivian on 29/5/2009 at 18:33
So what, once you have the mental equipment to dissect your negative feelings you get more occupied in doing just that? I admit I don't get it, but don't think you can get away with bombing in with obvious knowledge and then be all ' but I don't teach anymore'.
Enchantermon on 29/5/2009 at 18:49
Not quite (if I'm understanding correctly). It's not that they're more preoccupied with analyzing their emotions, it's that they'll realize that there are different levels of anger, and each level commands a different expression of that anger, some more harsh than others. Then they'll be more likely to express their anger with the appropriate level of harshness, rather than them responding to small peeves the same as they would if someone slapped them in the face.
Did I get that right?
