You are here:

Empathy with Non-Player Characters? An Empirical approach to the Foundations of Human/Non-Human Relationships
ARTICLE

Journal of Virtual Worlds Research Volume 10, Number 2, ISSN 1941-8477 Publisher: Journal of Virtual Worlds Research

Abstract

This study deals with the question in which extent non-player characters (NPCs), in the practice of playing video games, appear as social persons ready for relationships or if they are only treated as mere objects. Due to the fact that for human players the computer game and its virtual inhabitants appear as black boxes, the presented gameplay and its more or less emergent narratives are always in need of interpretation. As a result, different types of play-practice emerge, which in different ways produce more or less empathic relationships towards non-human players.

Citation

Harth, J. (2017). Empathy with Non-Player Characters? An Empirical approach to the Foundations of Human/Non-Human Relationships. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research, 10(2),. Retrieved March 25, 2023 from .

© 2017 Journal of Virtual Worlds Research

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Aarseth, E. (2012). A narrative theory of games. In Proceedings of the International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (pp. 129–33). ACM.
  2. Afonso, N. & Prada, R. (2008). Agents that relate: Improving the social believability of non-player characters in role-playing games. In S.M. Stevens& S.J. Saldamarco (Eds.), Entertainment Computing-ICEC 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 34-45). Springer: Berlin.
  3. Baakes, S. (2010). Rapid adaptation of videogame AI. Retrieved from http://sander.landofsand.com/phdthesis/Sander_Bakkes__PhD_Thesis_Camera_Ready_Copy.pdf
  4. Biocca, F. (1997). The cyborg’s dilemma. Embodiment in virtual environments. Journal of CMC, 3(2), 12–26.
  5. Blumer, T., & Döring, N. (2012). Are we the same online? The expression of the five factor personality traits on the computer and the Internet. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 6(3), article 5.
  6. Bzohnsack, R., Pfaff, N. & Weller, W. (2010). Qualitative analysis and documentary method in international educational research. Opladen: Barbara Budrich Verlag.
  7. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  8. Bourdieu, P. & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
  9. Bowman, N.D., Oliver, M.B., Rogers, R., Sherrick, B., Wooley, J. & Chung, M.-Y. (2016). In control or in their shoes? How character attachment differentially influences videogame enjoyment and appreciation. Journal of Gaming& Virtual Worlds, 8(1), 83-99.
  10. Buccino, G., Lui, F., Canessa, N., Patteri, I., Lagravinese, G., Benuzzi, F., Porro, C.A. & Rizzolatti, G. (2004). Neural circuits involved in the recognition of actions performed by nonconspecifics: an fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16(1), pp. 114–126.
  11. Caillois, R. (2001). Man, play and games. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
  12. Coleridge, S.T. (2014). Biographia literaria. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  13. Dignum, F., Westra, J., van Doesburg, W. & Harbers, M. (2009). Games and agents. Designing intelligent gameplay. International Journal of Computer Games Technology, Volume 2009, Article ID 837095.
  14. Esposito, E. (1998). Fiktion und Virtualität. In Krämer, S. (Ed.), Medien, Computer, Realität. Wirklichkeitsvorstellungen und Neue Medien (pp. 269-296). Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.
  15. Ferdig, R., Mishra, P. (2004). Emotional responses to computers. Experiences in unfairness, anger, and spite. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(2), 143-161.
  16. Gallagher, S. & Zahavi, D. (2010). The phenomenological mind. An introduction to philosophy of mind and cognitive science. London/New York: Routledge.
  17. Gallese, V. (2002). The roots of empathy: the shared manifold hypothesis and the neural basis of intersubjectivity. Psychopathology, 36, 171–180.
  18. Green, P. (2017). Alexa, where have you been all my life? Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/style/alexa-amazon-echo.html
  19. Harth, J. (2014): Computergesteuerte Spielpartner. Formen der Medienpraxis zwischen Trivialität und Personalität. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
  20. Heeter, C. (1992). Being there. The subjective experience of presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 1(2), 262-271.
  21. Huizinga, J. (1980). Homo ludens. A study of the play-element in culture. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  22. Jenkins, H. (2004). Game design as narrative architecture. In Wardrip-Fruin, N. & Harrigan, P. (Eds.), First Person (pp. 118–30), Cambridge: MIT Press.
  23. Jones, S.E. (2008). The meaning of videogames. Gaming and textual strategies. New York: Routledge.
  24. Jorgensen, K. (2009). “I'm overburdened!” An empirical study of the player, the avatar, and the gameworld. In Proceedings of DiGRA 2009: Breaking New Ground: Innovation in Games, Play, Practice and Theory. Retrieved from http://www.digra.org/dl/db/09287.20429.pdf
  25. Juul, J. (2005). Half-real. Videogames between real rules and fictional worlds. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  26. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1997). Sociality with objects. Social relations in postsocial knowledge societies. Theory, Culture and Society, 14, 1-30.
  27. Lankoski, P. & Björk, S. (2007). Gameplay design patterns for believable non-player characters. In Proceedings of DiGRA 2007 Conference. Retrieved from http://www.digra.org/wpcontent/uploads/digital-library/07315.46085.pdf
  28. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social. An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  29. Latour, B. (2013). An enquiry into modes of existence. Anthropology of the moderns. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  30. Lee, K.M. (2004). Presence, explicated. Communication Theory, 14(1), 27–50.
  31. Lee, M.S. & Heeter, C. (2012). What do you mean by believable characters? The effect of character rating and hostility on the perception of character believability. Journal of Gaming and Virtual Worlds, 4(1), 81-97.
  32. Lindemann, G. (2005). The analysis of the borders of the social world: a challenge for sociological theory. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 35, 69–98.
  33. Lindemann, G. (2009). Das Soziale von seinen Grenzen her denken. Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft.
  34. Lindemann, G. (2010). Human beings, human rights and functional differentiation [Working Paper]. Retrieved from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-197945
  35. Lombard, M. & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: the concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2). Real Virtual Relationships/ August, 2017 http://jvwresearch.org
  36. Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  37. Luhmann, N. (2012). Theory of society. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  38. MacDonald, H. (2012). NPC romance as a safe space: BioWare and healthier identity tourism. Well played on Romance-a special issue on the theme of romance in games, 1(4), 23-40.
  39. Mannheim, K. (1952). On the interpretation of Weltanschauung. In Mannheim, K. (Ed.), Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge (33-83). New York: Oxford University Press.
  40. Morrison, I. & Ziemke, T. (2005). Empathy with computer game characters: a cognitive neuroscience perspective. In Proceedings of the Joint Symposium on Virtual Social Agents (7379).
  41. Mersch, D. (2008). Logik und Medialität des Computerspiels. Eine medientheoretische Analyse. In Diestelmeyer, J., Hanke, C. & Mersch, D. (Eds.), Game over!? Perspektiven des Computerspiels (19-42). Bielefeld: transcript.
  42. Nareyek, A. (2004). Artificial intelligence in computer games– state of the art and future directions. ACM Queue, 1(10), pp. 58-65.
  43. Nass, C., Moon, Y. & Carney, P. (1999). Are people polite to computers? Responses to computerbased interviewing systems. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(5), 1093-1110.
  44. Nohl, A.-M. (2010). Narrative interview and documentary interpretation. In Bohnsack, R., Pfaff, N. & Weller, W. (Eds.), Qualitative analysis and documentary method in international educational research (pp. 195-217). Opladen: Barbara Budrich Verlag.
  45. Ochs M., Pelachaud C. & Sadek, D. (2008). An empathic virtual dialog agent to improve humanmachine interaction. In Padgham, A., Parkers, A., Müller, A. & Parson, A. (Eds.), In Proceedings of 7th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2008) (pp. 89–96).
  46. Ochs, M., Sabouret, N. & Corruble, V. (2009). Simulation of the dynamics of non-player characters’ emotions and social relations in games. IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games, 1(4).
  47. Parsler, J. (2010). The non-player agent in computer role-playing games. Journal of Gaming and Virtual Worlds, 2(2), 135-143.
  48. Pinchbeck, D. (2009). An analysis of persistent non-player characters in the first-person gaming genre 1998-2007: a case for the fusion of mechanics and diegetics. Eludamos. Journal for Computer Game Culture. 3(2), 261-279.
  49. Ravenet, B., Pecune, F., Chollet, M. & Pelachaud, C. (2016). Emotion and attitude modeling for nonplayer characters. In Karpouzis, K. & Yannakakis, G. (Eds.), Emotion in games. Theory and praxis (pp. 139-154). Springer International Publishing.
  50. Reeves, B. & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation– how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  51. Rehm, M. (2008). “She is just stupid” – Analyzing user–agent interactions in emotional game situations. Interacting with Computers, 20, 311-325.
  52. Rizzolatti, G. & Sinigaglia, C. (2008). Mirrors in the brain. How our minds share actions and emotions. New York: Oxford University Press. Real Virtual Relationships/ August, 2017 http://jvwresearch.org
  53. Singer, T. & Lamm, C. (2009). The social neuroscience of empathy. The year in cognitive neuroscience 2009. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1156, 81–96.
  54. Stuart, K. (2016). Videogames where people matter? The strange future of emotional AI. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/12/video-game-characters-emotionalai-developers
  55. Tea, A. & Lee, B. (2004). Reference and blending in a computer role-playing game. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1609–1633.
  56. Turkle, S. (2005). The second self. Computers and the human spirit. Cambridge, London: MIT Press.
  57. Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together. Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. New York: Basic Books.
  58. Waern, A. (2011). ‘I'm in love with someone that doesn't exist!’ Bleed in the context of a computer game. Journal of Gaming and Virtual Worlds, 3(3), 239-257.
  59. Warpefelt, H. & Verhagen, H. (2016). A typology of non-player characters. In Proceedings of 1st International Joint Conference of DiGRA and FDG.
  60. Warpefelt, H. & Verhagen, H. (2017). A model of non-player character believability. Journal of Gaming& Virtual Worlds, 9(1), 39-53.
  61. Weizenbaum, J. (1966). ELIZA — a computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 9(1), 36-45.
  62. Whitby, B. (2008). Sometimes it’s hard to be a robot: a call for action on the ethics of abusing artificial agents. Interacting with Computers, 20, 326–333.
  63. Wolf, M.P. (2001). The medium of the videogame. Austin: University of Texas. Real Virtual Relationships/ August, 2017

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Links

Also Read

Related Collections