In this mixed methods study, we investigate the impact of digital gaming on school social life among young people (17–19 year old) by combining over-time data investigating friendships as they form, with subjective experiences of friendships. We draw on one full cohort of Swedish pupils surveyed on three occasions during their first year in upper-secondary school (n = 115) and one interview sample of 10 game users.
Results indicate that how much time young people spend on gaming is not a significant factor for friendship formation in the studied sample. Moreover, high-use did not make game users socially isolated or less popular in school. We discuss how young people adhere to ideals of responsible leisure in order to become adults; practising time-management strategies to make place for time-consuming leisure while not letting it impact personal relationships.
BoyatzisR. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
4.
BuckinghamD. (2000). After the death of childhood: Growing up in the age of electronic media. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
5.
BuhrmesterD. (1990). Intimacy of friendship, interpersonal competence, and adjustment during preadolescence and adolescence. Child Development, 61(4), 1101–1011. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb02844.x
6.
CoyneS. M.Padilla-WalkerL. M.HowardE. (2013). Emerging in a digital world: A decade review of media use, effects, and gratifications in emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood, 1(2), 125–137. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696813479782
7.
CummingsH. M.VandewaterE. A. (2007). Relation of adolescent video game play to time spent in other activities. Archives Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 161(7), 684–689.
8.
De GroveF. (2014). Youth, friendship, and gaming: A network perspective. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(9), 603–608. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2014.0088
9.
EklundL. (2012). The sociality of gaming: A mixed methods approach to understanding digital gaming as a social leisure activity (thesis). Stockholm Studies in Sociology. New Series No. 56. Stockholm: Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis.
10.
FeilzerY. M. (2010). Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6–16. doi: 10.1177/1558689809349691
11.
GoodreauS. MKittsJ. A.MorrisM. (2009). Birds of a feather, or friend of a friend? Using exponential random graph models to investigate adolescent social networks. Demography, 46(1), 103–125.
12.
HayesN. (2000). Doing psychological research. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
13.
ItoM.HorstH. A.AntinJ.FinnM.LawA.ManionA.… YardiS. (2013). Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
14.
JohnsonR. B.OnwuegbuzieA. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.
15.
KitzingerJ. (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 311(7000), 299–302.
16.
KoloC.BauerT. (2004). Living a virtual life: Social dynamics of online gaming. Game Studies, 4(1).
17.
KowertR.DomahidiE.FestlR.QuandtT. (2014). Social gaming, lonely life? The impact of digital game play on adolescents’ social circles. Computers in Human Behavior, 36(2014), 385–390.
18.
KowertR.GriffithsM. D.OldmeadowJ. A. (2012). Geek or chic? Emerging stereotypes of online gamers. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 32(6), 471–479. doi: 10.1177/0270467612469078
19.
LewisK.KaufmanL.GonzalezM.WimmerA.ChristakisN. (2008). Tastes, ties, and time: A new social network dataset using Facebook.com. Social Networks, 30(4), 330–342. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2008.07.002
20.
LiS.HietajärviL.PalonenT.Salmela-AroK.HakkarainenK. (2017). Adolescents’ social networks: Exploring different patterns of socio-digital participation. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61(3), 255–274.
21.
LoS-K.WangC-C.FangW. (2005). Physical interpersonal relationships and social anxiety among online game players. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 8(1), 15–20.
22.
MajamäkiM.HellmanM. (2016). ‘When sense of time disappears’—Or does it? Online video gamers’ time management and time apprehension. Time & Society, 25(2), 355–373. doi: 10.1177/0961463X15577265
23.
MäyräF.KarvinenJ.ErmiL. (2016). Pelaajabarometri 2015—Lajityyppien suosio (TRIM Research Reports 21). Tampere: University of Tampere.
24.
MolyneuxL.VasudevanK.GildeZúñigaH. (2015). Gaming social capital: Exploring civic value in multiplayer video games. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(4), 381–399. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12123
25.
MouwT.EntwistleB. (2006). Residential segregation and interracial friendship in schools. American Journal of Sociology, 112(2), 394–441.
26.
MutzD. C.RobertsD. F.van VuurenD. P. (1993). Reconsidering the displacement hypothesis: Television’s influence on children’s time use. Communication Research, 20(1), 51–75.
27.
NieN. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the internet: Reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 420–435. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/00027640121957277
28.
R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/
29.
RipleyR. M.BoitmanisK.SnijdersT. A. B. (2013). RSiena: Siena-simulation investigation for empirical network analysis [R package version 1.1–232.]. Oxford: Department of Statistics, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
30.
RipleyR. M.SnijdersT. A. B.BodaZ.VörösA.PreciadoP. (2011). Manual for SIENA version 4.0 (version July 22, 2014). Oxford: Department of Statistics, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
31.
RojekC. (2010). The labour of leisure: The culture of free time. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
32.
ShenC.WilliamsD. (2011). Unpacking time online: Connecting internet and massively multiplayer online game use with psychosocial well-being. Communication Research, 38(1), 123–149.
SnijdersT. A. B.vandeBuntG. G.SeglichC. E. G. (2010). Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks, 32(1), 44–60.
35.
SnodgrassJ. G.LacyM. G.Dengah IIH. J. F.FaganJ. (2011). Enhancing one life rather than living two: Playing MMOs with offline friends. Computers in Human Behavior, Group Awareness in CSCL Environments, 27(3), 1211–1222.
36.
SteinkuehlerC. A.WilliamsD. (2006). Where everybody knows your (screen) name: Online games as ‘third places’. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(4), 1–26.
37.
Swedish Media Council. (2013). English summary: Kids & media 2012/13. Stockholm: Author.
38.
Swedish Media Council. (2015). English summary: Kids & media 2015. Stockholm: Author.
39.
TaylorT. L. (2006). Play between worlds: Exploring online gaming culture. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
40.
UrbergK. A.DegirmenciogluS. M.TolsonJ. M. (1998). Adolescent friendship selection and termination: The role of similarity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15(5), 703–710. doi: 10.1177/0265407598155008
41.
WilliamsD. (2006). Groups and goblins: The social and civic impact of an online game. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(4), 651–670. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem5004_5
42.
WimmerA.LewisK. (2010). Beyond and below racial homophily: ERG models of a friendship network documented on Facebook. American Journal of Sociology, 116(2), 583–642.
43.
YoungR. A.MarshallS. K.WilsonL. J.GreenA. R.KlubbenL.ParadaF.… ZhuM. (2015). Transition to adulthood as a peer project. Emerging Adulthood, 3(3), 166–178.
