Presence and Performance as a Function of Teammate Agency and Individual Differences in a Video Game

Abstract

Past research has examined the effects of agency on human performance and affect (e.g., Nowak & Biocca, 2001; Weibel et al., 2008), but results and design recommendations are still inconclusive. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the individual differences in video game efficacy, immersive tendency, avatar characteristics, and the way avatars impact presence and performance within a game-based training environment. Twenty six college students were told they were working with either a computer-programmed teammate or a human teammate who provided information about how to complete twelve specific tasks in a first-person shooter game, Arma 3^TM. Mean comparisons indicate some differences in performance and presence as a function of teammate agency, but none of these differences were statistically significant due to low observed power. We conclude that this common method of manipulating teammate agency in the literature may not be salient for some tasks.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bohemia Interactive (2015). Arma 3™.

Cohen

(1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

FRAPS (26 February, 2013). Fraps software (version 3.5.99)

Goffman

(1963).Behavior in public places; Notes on the social organization of gatherings. New York: The Free Press.

Heeter

(1992). Being there: The subjective experience of presence. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments, 1 (2), 262-271.

Orvis

K.A.

Horn

D.B.

Belanich

(2008). The roles of task difficulty and prior videogame experience on performance and motivation in instructional videogames. Computers in Human behavior 24 (5), 2415-2433.

Lombard

Reich

Grabe

M.E.

Bracken

Ditton

T.B.

(2000): Presence and television. Human Communication Research, 26(1), 75-98.

Nowak

(2001, May). Defining and differentiating copresence, social presence and presence as transportation. Paper presented at the Presence 2001 Conference, Philadelphia, PA.

Nowak

Biocca

(2003). The effect of the agency and anthropomorphism on users’ sense of telepresence, copresence, and social presence in virtual environments. Presence, 12(5), 481-494.

10.

Pavlas

(2010). A model of flow and play in game-based learning: The impact of game characteristics, player traits, and player states. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Central Florida. Orlando, FL.

11.

Schwarzer

Matthias Jerusalem

(1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs, 1, 35-37.

12.

Veletsianos

Doering

(2010). Long-term student experiences in a hybrid, open-ended and problem based Adventure Learning program. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(2), 280-296.

13.

Witmer

B. G.

Singer

M. J.

(1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments, 7(3), 225-240.

14.

Weibel

Wissmath

Habegger

Steiner

Groner

(2008). Playing online games against computer-vs. human-controlled opponents: Effects on presence, flow, and enjoyment. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 2274-2291.