1. Video Games: Flow,Video Games: Flow,
Distraction, andDistraction, and
LudologyLudology
Jerry PickardJerry Pickard

2. Flow Experience:Flow Experience:
What is it?What is it?
 ““In the zone”In the zone”
 Complete absorption or engagement inComplete absorption or engagement in
an activity (Csikszentmihalyi 1991)an activity (Csikszentmihalyi 1991)
 High performance without being aware ofHigh performance without being aware of
the environment (Finneran and Zhangthe environment (Finneran and Zhang
2005)2005)

3. Ingredients for FlowIngredients for Flow
1.1. Concentration and focused attention.Concentration and focused attention.
2.2. Skill level balanced with challengeSkill level balanced with challenge
level.level.
3.3. Loss of concept of self.Loss of concept of self.
4.4. Feeling of satisfaction and enjoyment.Feeling of satisfaction and enjoyment.

4. DistractionDistraction
 Without concentration and focusedWithout concentration and focused
attention it is impossible to enter theattention it is impossible to enter the
flow experience (Csikszentmihalyiflow experience (Csikszentmihalyi
1991).1991).
 A distracter could cause the flowA distracter could cause the flow
experience to be broken.experience to be broken.
 We examined the effect of distractionWe examined the effect of distraction
on flow.on flow.

5. Why videogames?Why videogames?
 More than half of all Americans age 6More than half of all Americans age 6
and up play some sort of electronic gameand up play some sort of electronic game
regularly. (Lee & LaRose 2007).regularly. (Lee & LaRose 2007).
 Flow is often induced by video games:Flow is often induced by video games:
 Games are designed to create a positiveGames are designed to create a positive
experience with players (Kiili 2005).experience with players (Kiili 2005).
 Video games provide a great way to pitVideo games provide a great way to pit
challenge against skill (Inal & Cagiltaychallenge against skill (Inal & Cagiltay
2007).2007).

6. Ludology andLudology and
NarratologyNarratology
 Ludology and Narratology, proposed byLudology and Narratology, proposed by
Inal and Cagiltay (2007), are two aspectsInal and Cagiltay (2007), are two aspects
of game play that typically vary byof game play that typically vary by
gender.gender.
 Ludology refers to the game design andLudology refers to the game design and
concept as well as playability. This isconcept as well as playability. This is
preferred by males more than femalespreferred by males more than females
 Narratology is the game’s storyline. It isNarratology is the game’s storyline. It is
preferred more so by females than males.preferred more so by females than males.

7. HypothesesHypotheses
 Distraction will negatively affect the flowDistraction will negatively affect the flow
experience.experience.
 Previous experience with videogamesPrevious experience with videogames
will affect the participants’ flowwill affect the participants’ flow
experience.experience.
 Females will prefer the narratology of theFemales will prefer the narratology of the
game whereas males will prefer ludology.game whereas males will prefer ludology.

8. MethodMethod
 SampleSample: 13 individuals (5 male/8 female): 13 individuals (5 male/8 female)
undergraduate students.undergraduate students.
 Design:Design: Participants played “Little BigParticipants played “Little Big
Planet” for 30 minutes.Planet” for 30 minutes.
 Experimental group (n=6)Experimental group (n=6): Distraction of: Distraction of
shuffling papers.shuffling papers.
 Control group (n=7)Control group (n=7): No distraction.: No distraction.

9. MethodMethod
 Participants completed:Participants completed:
 A pre-game questionnaire measured:A pre-game questionnaire measured:
 Skill level (Novak & Hoffman 2007, Kiili 2005)Skill level (Novak & Hoffman 2007, Kiili 2005)
 A post-game questionnaire measured:A post-game questionnaire measured:
 Flow (Novak & Hoffman 2007, Kiili 2005)Flow (Novak & Hoffman 2007, Kiili 2005)
 Narratology (Inal Cagiltay 2007)Narratology (Inal Cagiltay 2007)
 Ludology (Inal Cagiltay 2007)Ludology (Inal Cagiltay 2007)

10. Skill LevelSkill Level
 Measured using questions relating toMeasured using questions relating to
past videogame experience.past videogame experience.
 ““How often do you play videogames?”How often do you play videogames?”
 ““I consider myself knowledgeable aboutI consider myself knowledgeable about
videogames.”videogames.”

11. FlowFlow
 Measured using questions relating to theMeasured using questions relating to the
game just played.game just played.
 Concentration/Focused AttentionConcentration/Focused Attention
 ““Playing this videogame made me think.”Playing this videogame made me think.”
 ““My attention was totally focused while playingMy attention was totally focused while playing
this videogame.”this videogame.”
 Skill level vs challenge levelSkill level vs challenge level
 ““I felt bored while playing this game.”I felt bored while playing this game.”

12. FlowFlow
 Loss of concept of selfLoss of concept of self
 ““I made the correct movements while playing thisI made the correct movements while playing this
game without having to think.”game without having to think.”
 ““My performance seemed automatic whileMy performance seemed automatic while
playing this game.”playing this game.”
 Satisfaction/EnjoymentSatisfaction/Enjoyment
 ““I liked the feeling I had while playing thisI liked the feeling I had while playing this
videogame.”videogame.”

13. NarratologyNarratology
 Measured by asking questions relating toMeasured by asking questions relating to
the story of the game.the story of the game.
 ““I liked the game’s story”I liked the game’s story”
 ““I liked the feeling that the storylineI liked the feeling that the storyline
provided.”provided.”

14. LudologyLudology
 Measured by asking questions relating toMeasured by asking questions relating to
the gameplay and mechanics of thethe gameplay and mechanics of the
game.game.
 ““I liked the skill required to play this game.”I liked the skill required to play this game.”
 ““I enjoyed the gameplay (controls, look andI enjoyed the gameplay (controls, look and
feel) involved with this game.”feel) involved with this game.”

15. ResultsResults
 ANCOVA showed:ANCOVA showed:
 Condition (distraction/no distraction) had noCondition (distraction/no distraction) had no
significant effect on flow.significant effect on flow.
 Skill level (covariant) had no significantSkill level (covariant) had no significant
effect on flow.effect on flow.

16. ResultsResults
 Correlational analysis showed that:Correlational analysis showed that:
 Skill level and distraction were positivelySkill level and distraction were positively
correlated (r=.626, p=.022 ).correlated (r=.626, p=.022 ).
 Flow and Ludology were positivelyFlow and Ludology were positively
correlated (r=.745, p=.003)correlated (r=.745, p=.003)

17. ResultsResults
Mean scoresMean scores
(SD)(SD)
LudologyLudology NarratologyNarratology FlowFlow Skill*Skill*
MaleMale 8 (1.41)8 (1.41) 7 (2.70)7 (2.70) 50.6 (6.54)50.6 (6.54) 28.4 (7.92)28.4 (7.92)
FemaleFemale 7.6 (1.30)7.6 (1.30) 7.5 (2.00)7.5 (2.00) 49.7 (6.71)49.7 (6.71) 20.3 (5.12)20.3 (5.12)
*F=5.01, p=.047
• There were no gender differences on Ludology,
Narratology and Flow.
• Skill was significantly correlated with gender.

18. DiscussionDiscussion
 Distraction did not interrupt flow.Distraction did not interrupt flow.
 Distraction was not noticeable enough.Distraction was not noticeable enough.
 Everyone experienced flow.Everyone experienced flow.
 Participants enjoyed game “can I stay longer” (KiiliParticipants enjoyed game “can I stay longer” (Kiili
2005)2005)
 High skill level led to higher probability ofHigh skill level led to higher probability of
distraction.distraction.
 Gender did not affect Ludology or NarratologyGender did not affect Ludology or Narratology
(in contrast to Inal and Cagiltay 2007).(in contrast to Inal and Cagiltay 2007).

19. Future ResearchFuture Research
 Larger sampleLarger sample
 Additional distractionsAdditional distractions
 Vary gamesVary games

20. ReferencesReferences
 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Flow: the psychology of optimal experience.
New York: Harper Perennial.
 Finneran, C. M. & Zhang, P. (2005). Flow in computer-mediated
environments: promises and challenges. Communications of the
Association for Information System, 15, 82–101.
 Inal, Y. & Cagiltay, K. (2007). Flow experiences of children in anInal, Y. & Cagiltay, K. (2007). Flow experiences of children in an
interactive social game environment.interactive social game environment. British Journal of EducationalBritish Journal of Educational
Technology, 38Technology, 38, 3, 455-464., 3, 455-464.
 Kiili, K. (2005). Digital game-based learning: toward an experiential
gaming model. Internet and Higher Education, 8, 13–24.
 Lee, D. & LaRose, R. (2007). A socio-cognitive model of video game
usage. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 12, 632-650
 Novak, T., Hoffman, D. (1997, July). Measuring the flow experience
among web users. Paper presented at the Interval Research Corporation.