Product design and psychology: The Mechanism of Skinner Box Techniques in Video Game Design
Keywords: Skinner Box, Video Gaming, Game Design, Operant Conditioning, Reward
Abstract:
This paper discusses the application of B.F. Skinner's operant conditioning framework, colloquially known as the Skinner Box mechanism, in the domain of modern video gaming. As a pivotal tool of psychological manipulation, this method has been integral in influencing player behaviour and engagement. Various case studies and examples are presented to provide a comprehensive understanding of its usage in game design.
Introduction:
The digital gaming industry has seen an unprecedented growth trajectory, fuelled by the increasing ubiquity of devices and the inherent human predilection towards engaging, interactive, and rewarding experiences. One psychological technique that has been instrumental in fostering these experiences is B.F. Skinner's operant conditioning principle. The primary objective of this paper is to delve into the specifics of the Skinner Box mechanism in video gaming, highlighting its implications from a product designer's perspective.
Skinner Box in Gaming: Conceptualization and Design
B.F. Skinner's operant conditioning theory revolves around the basic premise of reward and punishment. In a Skinner Box experiment, a rat is rewarded or punished based on its interaction with the environment. This principle, when mapped onto the gaming arena, translates into a design where player actions result in rewards or penalties, shaping subsequent behaviour.
The implementation of the Skinner Box mechanism varies greatly, from straightforward reward systems to intricate loot box mechanisms. For instance, in games like World of Warcraft, players are motivated to continue playing by the promise of levelling up or acquiring rare items, a phenomenon akin to the random reinforcement schedules of Skinner's experiments.
The effective use of the Skinner Box mechanism relies on the careful calibration of reward frequency and intensity. The random reinforcement schedule, akin to a slot machine's unpredictability, plays a pivotal role in maintaining player engagement and addiction. The concept of 'grinding' or performing repetitive tasks for rewards is a prime example of this method.
Case Study: Clash of Clans
Supercell's Clash of Clans offers an instructive example of the Skinner Box principle. Players are rewarded for attacking other players' bases, and these rewards can be used to upgrade their own base, troops, and defences. The time it takes to build and upgrade structures creates a variable ratio schedule of reinforcement that encourages regular engagement. A player might decide to continue playing, anticipating a shorter wait time or a more generous loot after an attack.
Case Study: Candy Crush Saga
King's Candy Crush Saga epitomizes the use of the Skinner Box mechanism through its reward system. As players progress through the levels, they receive varied types of reinforcement: unlocking new levels (positive reinforcement), losing lives for failed attempts (negative punishment), or gaining additional moves to complete a level (negative reinforcement). The unpredictability of rewards creates an intriguing suspense, impelling players to continue their interaction with the game.
Implications for Game Design
As a senior product designer, understanding the dynamics of the Skinner Box mechanism is crucial. The technique's potency lies in its ability to encourage player engagement, foster addiction, and influence in-game purchasing decisions. However, the ethical dimensions of this tool warrant careful consideration. Game designers must strike a delicate balance between maintaining player engagement and avoiding exploitative practices.
Conclusion
The Skinner Box mechanism has emerged as a powerful tool in the hands of game designers, helping sculpt player behaviour in a predictable manner. However, it is paramount for designers to consider the ethical implications of their design choices, ensuring their strategies promote a healthy and enjoyable gaming experience. As the digital gaming industry continues to evolve, it will be interesting to see how Skinner's principles continue to be integrated and innovated upon.
References:
Skinner, B. F. (1938). The Behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis. New York: Appleton-Century.
Zichermann, G., & Cunningham, C. (2011). Gamification by design: Implementing game mechanics in web and mobile apps. O'Reilly Media, Inc.
Eyal, N. (2014). Hooked: How to build habit-forming products. Penguin.
Hamari, J., & Keronen, L. (2017). Why do people buy virtual goods? Attitude towards virtual good purchases versus game enjoyment. International Journal of Information Management, 37(3), 299-308.
Przybylski, A. K., Rigby, C. S., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). A motivational model of video game engagement. Review of General Psychology, 14(2), 154–166.
King, D., & Delfabbro, P. (2019). The concept of “harm” in Internet gaming disorder. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 8(3), 456–468.
Koster, R. (2013). Theory of Fun for Game Design. O'Reilly Media.
Madigan, J. (2015). Getting Gamers: The Psychology of Video Games and Their Impact on the People who Play Them. Rowman & Littlefield.
Fizek, S. (2018). Why Fun Matters: In Search of Emergent Playful Experiences. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(5), 950-961.
Smith, S. L., & Toscano, A. J. (2016). Children's and adolescents' cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses to reward-related, child-targeted mobile applications. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(7), 441-447.
Chou, Y. K. (2015). Actionable Gamification: Beyond Points, Badges, and Leaderboards. Octalysis Media.
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining gamification. Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments, 9-15.
Supercell. (2012). Clash of Clans. [Video Game]. Helsinki, Finland.
King. (2012). Candy Crush Saga. [Video Game]. Stockholm, Sweden.
Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2014). Demographic differences in perceived benefits from gamification. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 179-188.
Alha, K., Koskinen, E., Paavilainen, J., & Hamari, J. (2019). Why do people play location-based augmented reality games? A study on Pokémon GO. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 35(9), 804-819.
10 notes
·
View notes