Not just a game: Identity fusion and extremism in gaming cultures

Abstract

Extremist ideologies have clearly become increasingly prevalent in the world of video games. What is less clear, however, is the mechanism through which these ideologies make their way into the psyches of gamers. Here we focus on the potential role of identity fusion in the radicalization of video gamers. In three studies, we show that fusion with gaming culture is uniquely predictive of a host of socially pernicious outcomes, including racism, sexism, and endorsement of extreme behaviors. We also show that specific personality attributes (e.g., insecure attachment, loneliness) may interact with fusion with gaming culture to further amplify support for extreme behavior, and that specific gaming communities (e.g., Call of Duty) may serve as catalysts that encourage strongly fused gamers to embrace antisocial attitudes and behaviors. These findings contribute to a theoretical understanding of the psychological processes that foment radicalization and guide the development of strategies for discouraging extremist ideologies in gaming spaces.

Time to Think “Meta”: A Critical Viewpoint on the Risks and Benefits of Virtual Worlds for Mental Health

“…Exposure to cyberbullying is relatively common among the youth and has been associated with higher subsequent risk of psychological distress, suicidal ideations, and delinquency [ 61 ]. People in virtual worlds may feel emboldened to enact discriminatory and aggressive behaviors, as suggested by reports of sexual harassment, racism, homophobia, and transphobia within some video game communities [ 59 , 62 , 63 ]. Considering that 3D embodiment over an avatar, and its interactions with a virtual environment, can make internet-based interactions particularly vivid, one question that appears relevant for future research is to consider whether the metaverse risks magnifying the psychological impacts of internet-based bullying and discrimination.…”

Four grand challenges for video game effects scholars: How digital trace data can improve the way we study games

“…Yet, the first empirical research investigating the impacts of loot boxes on consumers came as late as 2018, years after issues were first raised and this mechanism came to prominence (Macey & Hamari, 2019;. This is but one example of multiple potential video game effects whose thorough investigation has not begun in an adequately rapid manner: Other examples of literature that are inappropriately in their nascence include the study of toxic behaviour; extremist attitudes; and novel web3-related business models (such as 'play-to-earn' and the use of in-game NFTs) (Delfabbro et al, 2022;Kowert, 2020;Kowert et al, 2022;Scholten et al, 2019).…”

The Basic Needs in Games (BANG) Model of Video Game Play and Mental Health

“…On the other hand, we have equally strong evidence for negative effects of games on some users. Gaming can at times displace other important activities (Drummond and Sauer, 2020), lead to dysregulated or disordered use (Przybylski and Weinstein, 2019), expose players to toxicity, harassment, or extremism (Kordyaka et al, 2020;Kowert et al, 2022), or prey on vulnerable user's finances (Petrovskaya and Zendle, 2021). And despite these numerous examples that games can affect mental health, both directly and indirectly, it appears many players experience only minimal positive or negative effects: recent evidence supports the absence of any meaningful relationship between time spent playing games and mental health-both at an aggregate population level and for the majority of individuals (Johannes et al, 2021;Vuorre et al, 2021).…”