Skip to main content
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2020 Oct 7;113:106694. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106694

Avatar identification and problematic gaming: The role of self-concept clarity

Raquel Green a, Paul H Delfabbro a, Daniel L King a,b,
PMCID: PMC7539898  PMID: 33099249

Highlights

  • Survey of 993 gamers to study avatar identification, self-concept clarity, and problem gaming.

  • Avatar identification scores did not differ greatly according to avatar features or game type.

  • Wishful identification was the only significant avatar identification predictor of problem gaming.

  • Avatar identification was related to higher problem gaming scores and poorer self-concept clarity.

  • Significant indirect effect of avatar identification on problem gaming through self-concept clarity.

Keywords: Gaming disorder, Problematic gaming, Avatar identification, Self-concept clarity

Abstract

Some video-gaming activities feature customizable avatars that enable users to fulfil self-identity needs. Research evidence (e.g., fMRI and survey studies) has suggested that poorer self-concept and stronger avatar identification are associated with problematic gaming. Player-avatar relationships have thus been proposed to require attention in gaming disorder assessment and interventions. To examine the interplay of player-avatar interactions in problematic gaming, this study investigated whether avatar identification differed according to avatar characteristics and game types, and whether the association between avatar identification and problem gaming was mediated by self-concept clarity. A total of 993 adult respondents completed an online survey that assessed problematic gaming, avatar identification, and self-concept clarity. The results indicated that avatar identification scores were generally unrelated to avatar characteristics (e.g., human resemblance, degree of customizability, and in-game perspective). Avatar identification was significantly positively related to problematic gaming and significantly negatively related to self-concept clarity. There was a significant indirect relationship between avatar identification on problem gaming mediated through self-concept clarity. These findings suggest that poorer self-concept clarity may be one mechanism by which avatar identification affects problem gaming. Future research with clinical samples may help to gain a better understanding of avatar-related processes and psychological vulnerabilities related to problematic gaming.

1. Introduction

Online gaming activities have become increasingly sophisticated in terms of the interactive experiences offered to players (Billieux et al., 2015, King et al., 2018, King et al., 2019a, Lemenager et al., 2020). An important element of gaming that enhances this interactivity is the playable avatar projected into an immersive digital environment (Bailey et al., 2013, Bessière et al., 2007, Burleigh et al., 2018, King and Delfabbro, 2014, Trepte and Reinecke, 2010). Avatars are the representations of the player or the self that are projected to other players (Bailey et al., 2013, Bessière et al., 2007, Burleigh et al., 2018, Trepte and Reinecke, 2010). Such playable avatars can be realistic or stylized and come with customization options that allow players to alter their attributes, abilities, and their appearance. Certain games that emphasize avatar creation are generally referred to as ‘role-playing’ games, such as massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) (Smahel, Blinka, & Ledabyl, 2008), but avatar elements can be found in many types of games. Avatar features have attracted increasing attention to explain the popularity of gaming as well as the development and maintenance of problematic gaming (Wan & Chiou, 2006).

Problematic gaming, in its most serious form, has been recognized as gaming disorder (GD) in the International Classification of Diseases-11 (ICD-11; World Health Organization, 2019) and as a condition for further study in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). The prevalence of gaming disorder is estimated to fall between 1 and 3% (Stevens et al., 2020). The conceptualization of gaming disorder shares features and symptoms (e.g., loss of control and continuation despite awareness of harm) with other addictive behaviors (e.g., gambling disorder), substance use disorders (SUDs), impulse control disorders (e.g., compulsive buying disorder [CBD]) and obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) (King & Delfabbro, 2019). This condition is characterized by persistent involvement in gaming activities, impaired control over gaming, and continued use despite harm to multiple areas of functioning, including psychological and physical health, relationships, and work or study (King et al., 2018, Saunders et al., 2017, Walther et al., 2012). We employ the term ‘problematic gaming’ to encompass the DSM-5 and ICD-11 classifications, and to refer the broader spectrum of problematic gaming behaviors that fall below the clinical threshold.

Research suggests that players form an attachment to, or identify with aspects of, their avatar (Li et al., 2013, Liew et al., 2018, Przybylski et al., 2012). This has been described in the literature as a “strong emotional bond” (Mancini et al., 2019), “powerful psychological component of the gaming world” (Stavropoulos, Pinches, Morcos, & Pontes, 2019), and important to an “individual’s personal narrative, psychological wellbeing, and self-conception” (Wolfendale, 2007). Further, avatars have been proposed to fulfil important needs of the user (Wolfendale, 2007), allowing gamers to express “suppressed versions of their psyche” (Stavropoulos et al., 2020a). ‘Avatar identification’, a common term in this literature, refers to “the temporary alteration in self-perception of the player induced by the mental association with their game character” (van Looy et al., 2012; p.206). Avatar identification is described as a positive or desired experience, as avatars enable identity expression, creativity, and immersion in the virtual world (Klimmt, Hefner, & Vorderer, 2009; van Looy, 2015; Whang & Chang, 2004).

Avatar identification has also been linked to excessive gaming (Sioni et al., 2017, Mancini and Sibilla, 2017, Smahel et al., 2008a) and depressive mood (Bessière et al., 2007, You et al., 2017, Burleigh et al., 2018). Neuroimaging (fMRI) studies have reported consistently that problematic gamers exhibit greater brain activity during avatar-reflection (Lemenager et al., 2016, Dieter et al., 2015) and less activity during self-reflection on actual self compared to controls (Klimmt et al., 2009, Choi et al., 2018). Burleigh et al. (2018) examined cross-sectional and longitudinal data and reported that gamer-avatar relationships were a significant individual risk factor for problematic gaming over time. Such evidence has been cited to support proposals to add avatar identification to the criteria for gaming disorder (e.g., in the DSM-5 or ICD-11) (Sioni et al. 2017) and as a target to address in treatment (Stavropoulos et al. 2020b). Despite these findings, avatar identification is not generally considered inherently problematic (i.e., it can often be an important part of the ‘fun’ and appeal of gaming; Neustaedter and Fedorovskaya, 2009, Yee and Bailenson, 2007).

Other researchers (e.g., Li et al., 2011, Stavropoulos et al., 2020) have proposed that avatar identification may more readily elicit problem gaming among more vulnerable individuals, particularly those with identity needs related to the avatar experience. Van Looy’s (2015) multidimensional model of avatar identification provides useful points of reference to distinguish these important aspects of avatar identification. His model proposes three basic dimensions, including similarity identification, wishful identification, and embodied presence. Of particular relevance to understanding gamers’ personal vulnerabilities is the concept of wishful identification, which refers to a process whereby a person desires to emulate or live vicariously through the avatar. Drawing on Higgins (1987) self-discrepancy theory, van Looy argues that wishful identification relates to a desire to compensate for perceived discrepancies between their real-world and virtual selves. According to van Looy (2015), avatar identification involves a process of temporarily experiencing an altered sense of self due to the mental association with an avatar, which can lead to a tendency to use the avatar to escape from reality and one’s problems. This tendency, in turn, may lead to gaming that generates negative consequences (Kwon, Chung, & Lee, 2011).

Extending this, Šporčić and Glavak-Tkalić (2018) proposed that a poorly defined sense of self was a risk factor for overuse of avatar-based games. They argued that players with poorer self-concept engaged in gaming to become immersed into different roles offered within a game, or to create an avatar as a representation of one’s ideal self to develop a clearer concept of themselves. These avatar-related experiences could provide a “temporary detachment from reality and their actual self, and therefore may lead to excessive and problematic video game playing” (p.8). Šporčić and Glavak-Tkalić surveyed 509 adult gamers and reported that poorer self-concept clarity was related to problematic gaming. The results of their mediation model showed that self-concept clarity was both directly and indirectly (via escape motive) associated with problematic online gaming. These findings were consistent with other studies that reported that some players created an avatar with idealized attributes to compensate for perceived inadequacies (Bessière et al., 2007, Lemenager et al., 2014, 2020), and studies reporting significant positive correlations between avatar identification and excessive gaming (Lemenager et al. 2013; Mancini et al., 2019; Smahel et al., 2008; You et al., 2017, T’ng and Pau, 2020).

Another research gap has been the study of different avatar characteristics and how these may relate to psychological processes, including avatar identification. The communications literature suggests that users tend to prefer avatars that are more similar, either visually or psychologically, to the user, and tend to find such avatars more persuasive (Ducheneaut et al., 2009, Nowak and Fox, 2018). Research by Yee and colleagues (e.g., Yee and Bailenson, 2007, Yee et al., 2009, Yee and Bailenson, 2006) in relation to the ‘Proteus Effect’ suggests that digital self-representation can affect player’s gaming behaviors. Yee et al.’s studies reported that characteristics of the avatar – including, for example, its physical attributes (height, attractiveness) – can influence the user’s in-game choices and behaviors (e.g., a taller avatar increases the user’s aggressiveness; Yee et al., 2009). Other researchers have reported that certain Proteus Effect ‘profiles’, such as users who reported that their emotions and behaviors were more strongly affected by their avatar, were more at risk of problem gaming (Stavropolous et al., 2020c).

There has been limited work on how aspects of the avatar (e.g., avatar race) may affect avatar identification and problem gaming (Christou and Michael, 2014, Lim and Reeves, 2009, Morcos et al., 2019, Stavropoulos et al., 2020). Research has focused on massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) players (Collins et al., 2012, Hyun et al., 2015), despite the prominence of avatars across many types of games, including first-person shooter (FPS) and multiplayer online battle arenas (MOBAs). Most MMORPGs are long-played games (usually with one avatar), featuring options for character development, customization, emphasis on group play and social functionality, and have been identified as a ‘high-risk’ game for problematic use (Eichenbaum et al., 2015, Stavropoulos et al., 2020). Mancini et al. (2019) reported that MMORPG players’ intention to play was higher among those who customized and identified with an idealized avatar. While studies have examined gaming motivations (Hussain et al., 2015, King et al., 2018, Zhong and Yao, 2013), little research has examined avatar features in relation to avatar identification and problem gaming (Stavropolous et al., 2020d).

1.1. The present study

The present study was guided by van Looy’s (2015) multidimensional model of avatar identification, which proposes that players can develop an attachment to their avatar which affects their in-game choices, emotions, and behaviors, which may increase their desire to play to escape from problems and reality. As outlined by the concept of wishful identification in van Looy’s (2015) model, and based on recent research (Šporčić & Glavak-Tkalić, 2018), we predicted that poorer self-concept clarity may be a mechanism by which avatar identification is related to problematic gaming. We also sought to examine potential differences in avatar identification according to the avatar’s characteristics. Specifically, we explored whether customization of avatar characteristics to match preferences for attributes such as their gender, race, attitude, background, and current situation would be positively associated with avatar identification.

The following hypotheses were proposed: (1) humanoid, personalized, and customizable avatars would be associated with stronger avatar identification than non-human, non-customizable ‘default’ avatars; (2) stronger avatar identification and poorer self-concept clarity would be significantly related to problem gaming; (3) wishful identification would have a stronger relationship to problem gaming than similarity identification and embodied presence; and (4) the expected positive association between avatar identification and problem gaming would be mediated by poorer self-concept clarity.

2. Method

2.1. Participants

A total of 993 adult participants (73% male; n = 725) with a mean age of 26.4 years (SD = 8.1), completed an online survey advertised on online gaming-related forums (Reddit, GameSpot, Games Planet, and PC Gamer Forum). Most respondents reported being Caucasian (75.4%), single (59.5%), engaged in employment (61.3%) and/or further study (45.3%). Based on GD checklist scores, there were 162 (16.3%) problem gamers. The sample comprised of players of MMORPG (n = 419, 42.2%), single-player RPG (n = 253, 25.5%), FPS (n = 125, 12.6%), MOBA (n = 80, 8.1%), and other games (n = 116, 11.7%). Missing/incomplete data (n = 646) and ineligible participants were excluded (e.g., aged under 18 years old [n = 4]).

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Demographic and gaming-related information

Each participant provided socio-demographic information (e.g., gender, age, other details). Participants reported the typical number of hours spent gaming each day in the last 3 months. Participants reported their preferred gaming genre, including MMORPG, MOBA, FPS, RPG (single-player), or Other. Questions about avatar characteristics referred to the main game currently played. Participants reported the number of avatars they controlled (1 avatar; 2 or more avatars; no identifiable avatar), avatar type (human; non-human creature; non-human non-creature), avatar perspective (first-person only; third-person only; both first-person and third-person perspective), pre-game avatar customizability (default avatar; choice from multiple defaults; fully customizable avatar), and in-game avatar customization (none; some vs. many options).

2.2.2. Problematic gaming

Petry et al.’s (2014) checklist is a 9-item self-report measure to assess the DSM-5 gaming disorder. Response options are dichotomous (Yes/No). A score of 5 + indicated problematic status. The checklist has been used in clinical and neurobiological studies of GD, and shown solid psychometric qualities (King et al., 2020b, King et al., 2020c). Internal consistency of the scale in this study was 0.68, which was relatively low but consistent with other studies (Evans et al., 2018, Jeromin et al., 2016, King et al., 2018), and which may be attributed to the variable sensitivity of the 9 DSM-5 criteria (Ko et al., 2014).

2.2.3. Avatar identification

The Player Identification Scale (Van Looy, Courtois, De Vocht, & De Marez, 2012) is a 28-item measure that includes 17 items that measure avatar identification (e.g., “my character is an extension of myself”). There are three subscales for avatar identification: similarity identification (e.g., “my character resembles me”), embodied presence (e.g., “I feel like I am inside my character when playing”), and wishful identification (e.g., “my character is a better me”). Each statement is rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Avatar identification scores range from 17 to 85, with higher scores indicating stronger identification. Game and group identification variables were not included in this study. The measure has demonstrated adequate to excellent psychometric properties (van Looy et al., 2012). Cronbach’s alpha for the total Avatar identification scale was 0.93, and for the subscales: similarity identification (0.90), embodied presence (0.92), and wishful identification (0.90).

2.2.4. Self-concept clarity

Self-concept clarity refers to the extent to which an individual holds self-beliefs or schema that are stable, clearly, and confidently defined (Usborne & Taylor, 2010) The Self-Concept Clarity Scale (Campbell et al., 1996), presents 12 statements (e.g., “In general, I have a clear sense of who I am and what I am”) and asks participants to indicate their level of agreement. Responses range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Higher scores (i.e., sum of all items) indicate higher self-concept clarity. Campbell et al. (1996) reported that the scale had excellent reliability and validity. This sample yielded a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.89.

2.3. Procedure

Ethics approval was granted by the School of Psychology Human Research Ethics Subcommittee (approval number: 20/18). Participants who were aged 18 or older and played games weekly were eligible to participate. Upon completion of the survey, participants entered a prize draw for a $50 AUD voucher.

2.4. Statistical analysis

Analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Version 26 software. Pearson product-moment correlations were used to assess bivariate associations. One-way ANOVAs and Bonferroni tests compared avatar identification across gender, game genres, and avatar-related characteristics and features. An exploratory multiple regression examined the predictive value of each variable on GD scores. Version 3.5 of the PROCESS macro for SPSS (Hayes, 2013) was used to conduct mediation analyses.

3. Results

3.1. Descriptive statistics and mean comparisons

Table 1 presents a summary of group differences in avatar identification according to participants’ gender and avatar characteristics. Avatar identification was significantly higher among: (1) female gamers as compared to male gamers; (2) participants who used fully customizable avatars as compared to a default avatar or one of multiple default avatar options; (3) participants who had many in-game avatar customization options as compared to some or no customization options; (4) participants who used one main avatar as compared to multiple or no discernible avatars; and (5) participants whose avatar had both first- and third-person perspective compared to only one of either perspective. However, avatar identification did not differ according to whether the avatar was human, a non-human creature, or non-human non-creature. All significant comparisons yielded only small effect sizes. Thus, there was limited support for the hypothesis that humanoid, personalized, and customizable avatars would be associated with stronger avatar identification than non-human, non-customizable avatars.

Table 1.

Avatar identification scores according to gender and avatar characteristics.

Avatar identificationa
Group n M (SD) F(2,992) Partial η2 Post-hocb
Gender
 1. Male 725 40.77 (15.39) 15.40* 0.03 2 > 1
 2. Female 243 46.61 (13.76)
 3. Other 25 44.16 (14.62)
Avatar type
 1. Human 897 42.45 (15.15) 1.06
 2. Non-human creature 82 41.48 (15.49)
 3. Non-human non-creature 14 36.86 (15.19)
Number of avatars controlled
 1. 1 main avatar 435 44.36 (14.88) 7.81* 0.02 1 > 2–3
 2. 2+ avatars 511 40.87 (15.19)
 3. No main avatar 47 38.53 (15.68)
Avatar perspective
 1. First-person only 128 40.07 (16.06) 8.57* 0.02 3 > 1–2
 2. Third-person only 675 41.60 (15.09)
 3. Both perspectives 190 46.22 (14.30)
Initial avatar customizability
 1. Single default 212 39.54 (15.55) 8.11* 0.02 3 > 1–2
 2. Multiple defaults 196 40.52 (15.86)
 3. Fully customizable 585 43.87 (14.63)
In-game avatar customization
 1. No option 133 38.99 (17.15) 11.24* 0.02 3 > 1–2
 2. Some options 383 40.51 (14.50)
 3. Many options 477 44.63 (14.80)
Game genre
 1. MMO 419 43.60 (15.22) 3.95* 0.02 3 < 1–2
 2. RPG 253 43.38 (14.67)
 3. MOBA 80 37.64 (16.37)
 4. FPS 125 40.34 (15.08)
 5. Other 116 40.48 (14.64)

*p < .01. aHigher scores indicated stronger avatar identification (Range: 17–85). Total score on the main subscale. bBonferroni post-hoc analyses, except for gender and avatar customization options when there were unequal variances assumed (Games-Howell). MMO: Massively Multiplayer Online; RPG: Role-Playing Game; MOBA: Multiplayer Online Battle Arena; FPS: First Person Shooter.

3.2. Correlations

Table 2 summarizes the Pearson product-moment correlations between the main variables. In support of Hypothesis 2, avatar identification was significantly positively related to problem gaming (r = 0.26) and significantly negatively related to self-concept clarity (r = -0.39). Self-concept clarity was significantly negatively correlated with problem gaming. Avatar identification was not related to gaming time, suggesting that the player-avatar bond may not change greatly as a function of time spent playing.

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics and Pearson product-moment correlations between main study variables.

Variable M (SD) 1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Problem gaming 2.68 (1.93)
2. Weekly gaming time 25.85 (8.55) 0.19**
3. Avatar identification (AI) 42.29 (15.18) 0.27** 0.02
4. AI: Similarity identification 14.79 (6.27) 0.16** -0.04 0.84**
5. AI: Embodied presence 14.47 (6.55) 0.20** 0.001 0.85** 0.56**
6. AI: Wishful identification 13.03 (5.56) 0.32** 0.09* 0.78** 0.49** 0.51**
7. Self-concept clarity 38.90 (10.05) −0.39** −0.07 −0.27* −0.12** −0.23** −0.33**

*p < .05; **p < .01.

3.3. Multiple regression

Table 3 presents a simultaneous multiple regression examining the three subscales of avatar identification (similarity identification, embodied presence, wishful identification), self-concept clarity, and gaming time as predictors of GD. The model explained 20.6% of the variance in GD. Of the three avatar identification subscales, wishful identification (β = 0.19) was the only significant predictor of problem gaming. Therefore, Hypothesis 3 was supported.

Table 3.

Multiple regression predicting problem gaming from similarity identification, embodied presence, wishful identification, self-concept clarity, and gaming time.

Predictor B Beta (β) p
Similarity identification 0.01 0.03 0.376
Embodied presence 0.01 0.02 0.682
Wishful identification 0.06 0.18 <0.01
Self-concept clarity −0.06 −0.32 <0.01
Weekly gaming time 0.02 0.11 <0.01
R2 = 0.206, F(5,987) = 51.10, p < .01

3.4. Mediation analysis

Fig. 1 presents a summary of the mediation analysis, including the regression weights for paths a, b, c, and c′. The model assessed whether self-concept clarity mediated the relationship between avatar identification and problem gaming. Time spent gaming was included as a covariate in the model (b = 0.03, p < 05). The model explained 11% of the variance in IGD scores. The 95th percentile confidence intervals (CI) for the indirect effects were estimated with bias-corrected bootstrap analyses (5000 samples). There was a significant indirect effect of avatar identification on problem gaming through self-concept clarity, b = 0.1, 95% CI [0.008, 0.016]. Therefore, Hypothesis 3 was supported.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

The direct and indirect effects of self-concept clarity on the relationship between avatar identification and problem gaming, with gaming time as a covariate.

An additional mediation analysis, which included wishful identification instead of avatar identification, was performed by request. Fig. 2 presents a summary of the results, which were largely comparable to those presented in Fig. 1. The model explained 12% of the variance in IGD scores.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

The direct and indirect effects of self-concept clarity on the relationship between wishful avatar identification and problem gaming.

4. Discussion

This study examined avatar identification and self-concept clarity in relation to problematic gaming, as well as differences in avatar identification according to avatar characteristics. Avatar identification was modestly associated with problematic gaming in bivariate and multivariate analyses. This finding was consistent with past studies (Mancini et al., 2019, Smahel et al., 2008b, Sioni et al., 2017, You et al., 2017). Further, the wishful identification subscale of avatar identification was the only significant avatar-related predictor of problem gaming. Wishful identification refers to the process whereby a person desires to emulate or live vicariously through the avatar (van Looy, 2015). For example, wishful identification items refer to experiencing the avatar as a “better me”, and as having “characteristics that I would like to have”. Thus, while the avatar identification construct was a significant predictor of problem gaming, it appears that the most important aspect of avatar identification in relation to problem gaming involves the avatar providing the means of compensating for the player’s perceived self-deficiencies in the real world. This result was consistent with the two mediation analyses, which found a significant indirect effect of avatar identification (Fig. 1) and wishful identification (Fig. 2) on problem gaming through self-concept clarity. Poorer self-concept clarity may be a psychological mechanism or vulnerability by which avatar identification, and particularly wishful identification, affects problem gaming. It is important to note, however, that these two models reported only modest coefficients and explained a total of 11% and 12% of the variance in IGD scores, respectively.

This study found only limited support for the notion that personalized and customizable avatars are more strongly associated with stronger avatar identification than non-customizable avatars. Differences in avatar identification scores across avatar types were statistically significant (due to large sample size) but constituted small effects only. Avatar identification was also slightly higher among those who controlled a single avatar (versus multiple avatars) and those who viewed their avatar from both first and third-person perspectives. MOBA users reported slightly lower avatar identification than MMORPG and RPG users. However, avatar identification did not differ greatly according to whether the participant’s avatar was a human, a non-human creature, or non-human non-creature. Avatar identification was not associated with time spent playing the game, suggesting that stronger avatar identification may not be the product of mere exposure (i.e., repeatedly viewing the avatar) (Zajonc, 1968) or the target of cognitive dissonance (i.e., a need to rationalize one’s investment in the gaming activity as being worthwhile) (Festinger, 1957). Similarly, wishful identification was only weakly positively correlated with gaming time. These results suggest that player-avatar bonds, including positive perceptions or desires to be like the avatar, may occur or form relatively quickly and endure over time, and that different implementations of avatar features may not greatly affect or inhibit potential avatar identification.

The present study’s findings add to continuing discussion of problem gaming interventions that refer to the need to address avatar-related phenomena. For example, Lemenager et al. (2016) describes a therapy that focuses on achieving emotional detachment from the avatar, where “addicted gamers discuss in a group setting all positive characteristics of their avatar and how they can transfer some of them into their own personality” (p.496). Similarly, Burleigh et al. (2018) argued that “prevention and treatment initiatives should target the gamer-avatar relationship…to guide cognitive and self-reflective interventions” (p.116). Stavropoulos et al., 2020, Stavropoulos et al., 2020, Stavropoulos et al., 2020, Stavropoulos et al., 2020 refers to inviting gamers “to talk about their virtual personas, and their game-related achievements and investigating ways that such avatar aspects of their ‘in-game’ avatar life can be transferred to real life” (p.9). The extent to which guided exploration of the avatar may aid therapy objectives warrants further examination. As noted in our review (Green et al., 2020), treatment engagement is often low among individuals with GD, particularly among adolescents (Humphreys, 2019), and therefore clinicians should apply evidence-based guidelines to optimize what can be delivered within a typically limited period of engagement. Brief cognitive-behavioral therapy (see Stevens et al., 2019, Wölfling et al., 2012, Wölfling et al., 2019) designed to establish new non-gaming routines, including identifying personal barriers and employing harm minimization strategies, may be the most feasible and effective option.

The present study was not without limitations. First, although the study recruited a very large and diverse sample of regular gamers, the recruitment approach was purposive (i.e., to select more individuals with relevant gaming and avatar-related experiences) and therefore these findings may not generalize to the wider gaming population nor to individuals with more severe gaming problems, such as those described in case reports (Allison et al., 2006). Another limitation is the potential transience of gaming for many participants, which may have affected the specificity of measurement. It is possible, for example, that some individuals may play numerous games and sometimes take extended ‘breaks’ from their main game. The study’s questions provided only a ‘snapshot’ and thus did not systematically gather data on the player’s history with specific games and avatars. Acquiring such information may be a worthwhile follow-up project, which could also examine the predictive value of avatar identification to habit formation or predicting future gaming behaviors.

This study employed measures with abstract concepts requiring insight and English language competency that may preclude the comprehension of some populations (e.g., individuals with low verbal comprehension). This study also did not examine identity issues (e.g., gender dysphoria) or personality traits (e.g., conscientiousness, perfectionism) that may influence avatar and in-game goal motivations. This work should be considered preliminary and in need of replication, particularly in clinical samples, and using alternative methods of data collection, such as interviews, to confirm experiences. Finally, this study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and, while most variables would be relatively stable constructs, it is possible that participants may have responded differently due to pandemic-related stress and uncertainties (King, Delfabbro, Billieux, & Potenza, 2020).

4.1. Conclusions

This study found a significant relationship between avatar identification and problem gaming that was mediated by self-concept clarity. Gamers with poor self-concept clarity may be more vulnerable to relying on avatar features in games to meet their identity-related needs (i.e., to compensate for lack of real-world identity), which may, in turn, increase the risk of problem gaming. Players who have a stronger need to be like their avatar, or who view their avatar as the ideal version of themselves, appear to be slightly more at risk of problematic gaming. Avatar identification was not generally related to features of the avatar itself, including whether it was humanoid or customizable. These data will hopefully contribute to continuing efforts to identify potential mechanisms of problematic gaming. At a time when the validity of GD is criticized for ‘pathologizing’ gaming (Bean et al., 2017), the notion that avatar identification underlies and maintains GD may attract similar scrutiny. In our view, despite these and other promising findings, it may be premature for avatar identification to be considered a symptom of gaming disorder. However, the concept may nevertheless be a useful psychological process (see Brand et al., 2020) for understanding the importance of in-game rewards that some players’ desire and seek out excessively. This study emphasizes the important role of player vulnerabilities in understanding the formation of problem gaming. Future research may gain a better understanding of avatar-related processes, including how avatar-stimuli preferences develop and operate in connection to established addictive processes such as approach bias and inhibitory control (Brand et al., 2019).

Role of Funding Sources

This work received financial support from a Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DECRA) DE170101198 funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC).

Contributors

RG and DLK designed the study and cowrote the first draft of the manuscript. RG recruited participants and analyzed the data. All authors contributed to and approved the final manuscript.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Raquel Green: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data curation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Paul H. Delfabbro: Formal analysis, Writing - review & editing. Daniel L. King: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. Allison S.E., Von Wahlde L., Shockley T., Gabbard G.O. The development of the self in the era of the internet and role-playing fantasy games. American Journal of Psychiatry. 2006;163:381–385. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.163.3.381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bailey K., West R., Kuffel J. What would my avatar do? Gaming, pathology, and risky decision making. Frontiers in Psychology. 2013;4:609. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00609. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bean A.M., Nielsen R.K., van Rooij A.J., Ferguson C.J. Video game addiction: The push to pathologize video games. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 2017;48(5):378. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bessière K., Seay A.F., Kiesler S. The ideal elf: Identity exploration in World of Warcraft. Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 2007;10:530–535. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2007.9994. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Billieux J., Thorens G., Khazaal Y., Zullino D., Achab S., Van der Linden M. Problematic involvement in online games: A cluster analytic approach. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015;43:242–250. [Google Scholar]
  6. Brand M., Rumpf H.-J., King D.L., Potenza M.N., Wegmann E. Clarifying terminologies in research on gaming disorder and other addictive behaviors: Distinctions between core symptoms and underlying psychological processes. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2020;36:49–54. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.04.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Brand M., Wegmann E., Stark R., Müller A., Wölfling K., Robbins T.W., Potenza M.N. The Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution (I-PACE) model for addictive behaviors: Update, generalization to addictive behaviors beyond Internet-use disorders, and specification of the process character of addictive behaviors. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. 2019;104:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.06.032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Burleigh T.L., Stavropoulos V., Liew L.W., Adams B.L., Griffiths M.D. Depression, internet gaming disorder, and the moderating effect of the gamer-avatar relationship: An exploratory longitudinal study. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. 2018;16(1):102–124. [Google Scholar]
  9. Campbell J.D., Trapnell P.D., Heine S.J., Katz I.M., Lavallee L.F., Lehman D.R. Self-concept clarity: Measurement, personality correlates, and cultural boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996;70(1):141–156. [Google Scholar]
  10. Christou C., Michael D. 2014 6th international conference on games and virtual worlds for serious applications (VS-GAMES) 2014. September). Aliens versus humans: Do avatars make a difference in how we play the game? pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  11. Choi E.J., Taylor M.J., Hong S.B., Kim C., Kim J.W., McIntyre R.S., Yi S.H. Gaming-addicted teens identify more with their cyber-self than their own self: Neural evidence. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging. 2018;279:51–59. doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2018.05.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Collins E., Freeman J., Chamarro-Premuzic T. Personality traits associated with problematic and non-problematic massively multiplayer online role playing game use. Personality and Individual Differences. 2012;52:133–138. [Google Scholar]
  13. Dieter J., Hill H., Sell M., Reinhard I., Vollstädt-Klein S., Kiefer F.…Lemenager T. Avatar’s neurobiological traces in the self-concept of massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) addicts. Behavioral Neuroscience. 2015;129:8–17. doi: 10.1037/bne0000025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Ducheneaut N., Wen M.H., Yee N., Wadley G. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2009. Body and mind: A study of avatar personalization in three virtual worlds; pp. 1151–1160. [Google Scholar]
  15. Eichenbaum A., Kattner F., Bradford D., Gentile D.A., Green C.S. Role-playing and real-time strategy games associated with greater probability of Internet gaming disorder. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 2015;18:480–485. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2015.0092. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Evans C., King D.L., Delfabbro P.H. Effect of gaming abstinence on self-reported withdrawal in adolescent at-risk daily gamers: A randomized controlled study. Computers in Human Behavior. 2018;88:70–77. [Google Scholar]
  17. Festinger L. Stanford University Press; Stanford, CA: 1957. A theory of cognitive dissonance. [Google Scholar]
  18. Green R., Delfabbro P.H., King D.L. Avatar- and self-related processes and gaming disorder: A systematic review. Addictive Behaviors. 2020;108 doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106461. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hayes A.F. Guilford Press; New York: 2013. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. [Google Scholar]
  20. Higgins E.T. Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review. 1987;94:319–340. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Humphreys G. Sharpening the focus on gaming disorder. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2019;97:382–383. doi: 10.2471/BLT.19.020619. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hussain Z., Williams G.A., Griffiths M.D. An exploratory study of the association between online gaming addiction and enjoyment motivations for playing massively multiplayer online role-playing games. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015;50:221–230. [Google Scholar]
  23. Hyun G.J., Han D.H., Lee Y.S., Kang K.D., Yoo S.K., Chung U.S., Renshaw P.F. Risk factors associated with online game addiction: A hierarchical model. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015;48:706–713. [Google Scholar]
  24. Jeromin F., Rief W., Barke A. Validation of the Internet Gaming Disorder questionnaire in a sample of adult German-speaking Internet gamers. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 2016;19:453–459. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2016.0168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. King D.L., Delfabbro P.H. The cognitive psychology of Internet gaming disorder. Clinical Psychology Review. 2014;34:298–308. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2014.03.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. King D.L., Delfabbro P.H. Elsevier, Academic Press; Cambridge, MA: 2019. Internet gaming disorder: Theory, assessment, treatment, and prevention. [Google Scholar]
  27. King D.L., Herd M.C.E., Delfabbro P.H. Motivational components of tolerance in Internet gaming disorder. Computers in Human Behavior. 2018;78:133–141. [Google Scholar]
  28. King D.L., Koster E., Billieux J. Study what makes games addictive. Nature. 2019;573:346. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-02776-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. King D.L., Adair C., Saunders J.B., Delfabbro P.H. Clinical predictors of gaming abstinence in help-seeking adult problematic gamers. Psychiatry Research. 2018;261:581–588. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2018.01.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. King D.L., Delfabbro P.H., Billieux J., Potenza M.N. Problematic online gaming and the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Behavioral Addictions. 2020;9:184–186. doi: 10.1556/2006.2020.00016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. King D.L., Delfabbro P.H., Potenza M.N., Demetrovics Z., Billieux J., Brand M. Internet gaming disorder should qualify as a mental disorder. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry. 2018;52:615–617. doi: 10.1177/0004867418771189. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. King D.L., Billieux J., Carragher N., Delfabbro P.H. Face validity evaluation of screening tools for gaming disorder: Scope, language, and overpathologizing issues. Journal of Behavioral Addictions. 2020;9:1–13. doi: 10.1556/2006.2020.00001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. King D.L., Chamberlain S.R., Carragher N., Billieux J., Stein D., Mueller K., Potenza M.N., Rumpf H.-J., Saunders J., Starcevic V., Demetrovics Z., Brand M., Lee H.K., Spada M., Lindenberg K., Wu A.M.S., Lemenager T., Pallesen S., Achab S., Kyrios M., Higuchi S., Fineberg N., Delfabbro P.H. Screening and assessment tools for gaming disorder: A comprehensive systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review. 2020;77 doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101831. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Klimmt C., Hefner D., Vorderer P. The video game experience as “true” identification: A theory of enjoyable alterations of players’ self-perception. Communication Theory. 2009;19:351–373. [Google Scholar]
  35. Kwon J.H., Chung C.S., Lee J. The effects of escape from self and interpersonal relationship on the pathological use of Internet games. Community Mental Health Journal. 2011;47:113–121. doi: 10.1007/s10597-009-9236-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Ko C.H., Yen J.Y., Chen S.H., Wang P.W., Chen C.S., Yen C.F. Evaluation of the diagnostic criteria of Internet gaming disorder in the DSM-5 among young adults in Taiwan. Journal of Psychiatric Research. 2014;53:103–110. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.02.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Lemenager T., Dieter J., Hill H., Koopmann A., Reinhard I., Sell M.…Mann K. Neurobiological correlates of physical self-concept and self-identification with avatars in addicted players of Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games (MMORPGs) Addictive Behaviors. 2014;39:1789–1797. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.07.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Lemenager T., Dieter J., Hill H., Hoffmann S., Reinhard I., Beutel M.…Mann K. Exploring the neural basis of avatar identification in pathological Internet gamers and of self-reflection in pathological social network users. Journal of Behavioral Addictions. 2016;5:485–499. doi: 10.1556/2006.5.2016.048. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Lemenager T., Neissner M., Sabo T., Mann K., Kiefer F. “Who am I” and “How should I be”: A systematic review on self-concept and avatar identification in gaming disorder. Current Addiction Reports. 2020;7:166–193. [Google Scholar]
  40. Liew L.W., Stavropoulos V., Adams B.L., Burleigh T.L., Griffiths M.D. Internet gaming disorder: The interplay between physical activity and user–avatar relationship. Behaviour & Information Technology. 2018;37:558–574. [Google Scholar]
  41. Li D., Liau A., Khoo A. Examining the influence of actual-ideal self-discrepancies, depression, and escapism, on pathological gaming among massively multiplayer online adolescent gamers. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 2011;14:535–539. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2010.0463. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Li D.D., Liau A.K., Khoo A. Player-Avatar Identification in video gaming: Concept and measurement. Computers in Human Behavior. 2013;29:257–263. [Google Scholar]
  43. Lim S., Reeves B. Being in the game: Effects of avatar choice and point of view on psychophysiological responses during play. Media Psychology. 2009;12:348–370. [Google Scholar]
  44. Mancini T., Imperato C., Sibilla F. Does avatar's character and emotional bond expose to gaming addiction? Two studies on virtual self-discrepancy, avatar identification and gaming addiction in massively multiplayer online role-playing game players. Computers in Human Behavior. 2019;92:297–305. [Google Scholar]
  45. Mancini T., Sibilla F. Offline personality and avatar customisation: Discrepancy profiles and avatar identification in a sample of MMORPG players. Computers in Human Behavior. 2017;69:275–283. [Google Scholar]
  46. Morcos M., Stavropoulos V., Rennie J.J., Clark M., Pontes H.M. Internet gaming disorder: Compensating as a Draenei in World of Warcraft. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. 2019:1–17. [Google Scholar]
  47. Neustaedter, C., & Fedorovskaya, E. (2009, May). Presenting identity in a virtual world through avatar appearance. Proceedings of Graphics Interface. (Toronto, Canada).
  48. Nowak K.L., Fox J. Avatars and computer-mediated communication: A review of the definitions, uses, and effects of digital representations. Review of Communication Research. 2018;6:30–53. [Google Scholar]
  49. Petry N.M., Rehbein F., Gentile D.A., Lemmens J.S., Rumpf H.J., Mößle T.…Auriacombe M. An international consensus for assessing Internet Gaming Disorder using the new DSM-5 approach. Addiction. 2014;109(9):1399–1406. doi: 10.1111/add.12457. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Przybylski A.K., Weinstein N., Murayama K., Lynch M.F., Ryan R.M. The ideal self at play: The appeal of video games that let you be all you can be. Psychological Science. 2012;23:69–76. doi: 10.1177/0956797611418676. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Saunders J.B., Hao W., Long J., King D.L., Mann K., Fauth-Bühler M.…Chan E. Gaming disorder: Its delineation as an important condition for diagnosis, management, and prevention. Journal of Behavioral Addictions. 2017;6:271–279. doi: 10.1556/2006.6.2017.039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Sioni S.R., Burleson M.H., Bekerian D.A. Internet gaming disorder: Social phobia and identifying with your virtual self. Computers in Human Behavior. 2017;71:11–15. [Google Scholar]
  53. Smahel D., Blinka L., Ledabyl O. Playing MMORPGs: Connections between addiction and identifying with a character. Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 2008;11(6):715–718. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Šporčić B., Glavak-Tkalić R. The relationship between online gaming motivation, self-concept clarity and tendency toward problematic gaming. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace. 2018;12(1):1–13. [Google Scholar]
  55. Smahel D., Blinka L., Ledabyl O. Playing MMORPGs: Connections between addiction and identifying with a character. Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 2008;11:715–718. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Stavropoulos V., Pinches J., Morcos M., Pontes H. InPsych; APS: 2020. My avatar, my self. [Google Scholar]
  57. Stavropoulos V., Gomez R., Mueller A., Yucel M., Griffiths M. User-avatar bond profiles: How do they associate with disordered gaming? Addictive Behaviors. 2020;103 doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.106245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Stavropoulos V., Pontes H.M., Gomez R., Schivinski B., Griffiths M. Proteus effect profiles: How do they relate with disordered gaming behaviours? Psychiatric Quarterly. 2020;91:615–628. doi: 10.1007/s11126-020-09727-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Stavropoulos V., Rennie J., Morcos M., Gomez R., Griffiths M.D. Understanding the relationship between the Proteus effect, immersion, and gender among World of Warcraft players: An empirical survey study. Behaviour & Information Technology. 2020 doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2020.1729240. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  60. Stevens M.W.R., King D.L., Dorstyn D., Delfabbro P.H. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for Internet gaming disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy. 2019;26:191–203. doi: 10.1002/cpp.2341. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Stevens M.W.R., Dorstyn D., Delfabbro P.H., King D.L. Global prevalence of gaming disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry. 2020 doi: 10.1177/0004867420962851. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. T’ng, S. T., & Pau, K. (2020). Identification of avatar mediates the associations between motivations of gaming and internet gaming disorder among the Malaysian youth. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. doi: 10.1007/s11469-020-00229-9.
  63. Trepte S., Reinecke L. Avatar creation and video game enjoyment. Journal of Media Psychology. 2010;22:171–184. [Google Scholar]
  64. Usborne E., Taylor D.M. The role of cultural identity clarity for self-concept clarity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2010;36:883–897. doi: 10.1177/0146167210372215. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. van Looy J., Courtois C., De Vocht M., De Marez L. Player identification in online games: Validation of a scale for measuring identification in MMOGs. Media Psychology. 2012;15:197–221. [Google Scholar]
  66. Walther B., Morgenstern M., Hanewinkel R. Co-occurrence of addictive behaviours: Personality factors related to substance use, gambling and computer gaming. European Addiction Research. 2012;18:167–174. doi: 10.1159/000335662. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Wan C.S., Chiou W.B. Why are adolescents addicted to online gaming? An interview study in Taiwan. Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 2006;9:762–766. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9.762. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Whang L.S.M., Chang G. Lifestyles of virtual world residents: Living in the on-line game “Lineage”. Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 2004;7(5):592–600. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2004.7.592. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Wolfendale J. My avatar, my self: Virtual harm and attachment. Ethics and Information Technology. 2007;9:111–119. [Google Scholar]
  70. Wölfling K., Jo C., Bengesser I., Beutel M., Müller K. Kohlhammer; Stuttgart: 2012. Computerspiel- und Internetsucht. Ein kognitiv-behaviorales Behandlungsmanual. [Google Scholar]
  71. Wölfling K., Müller K.W., Dreier M., Ruckes C., Deuster O., Batra A.…Hanke S. Efficacy of short-term treatment of internet and computer game addiction: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry. 2019;76:1018–1025. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.1676. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. World Health Organization. (2019). International Classification of Diseases 11. Retrieved from https://icd.who.int/browse11/l-m/en.
  73. Yee, N., & Bailenson, J. (2006, Aug). Walk a mile in digital shoes: The impact of embodied perspective-taking on the reduction of negative stereotyping in immersive virtual environments. Proceedings of PRESENCE 2006: The 9th Annual International Workshop on Presence (Cleveland, Ohio, US).
  74. Yee N., Bailenson J. The Proteus Effect: The effect of transformed self-representation on behaviour. Human Communication Research. 2007;33:271–290. [Google Scholar]
  75. Yee N., Bailenson J.N., Ducheneaut N. The Proteus Effect: Implications of transformed digital self-representation on online and offline behaviour. Communication Research. 2009;36:285–312. [Google Scholar]
  76. You S., Kim E., Lee D. Virtually real: Exploring avatar identification in game addiction among massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPG) players. Games and Culture. 2017;12:56–71. [Google Scholar]
  77. Zajonc R.B. Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1968;9:1–27. [Google Scholar]
  78. Zhong Z.J., Yao M.Z. Gaming motivations, avatar-self identification and symptoms of online game addiction. Asian Journal of Communication. 2013;23:555–573. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Addictive Behaviors are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES