We can finally play Telephone Pictionary online at BrokenPictureTelephone!
Thanks Aaron for forwarding this!
We can finally play Telephone Pictionary online at BrokenPictureTelephone!
Thanks Aaron for forwarding this!
A lot has happened in the last few weeks:
A Comparison of Collaboration across Two Game Contexts: Lord of the Rings Online and World of Warcraft
To better understand the nature of virtual collaboration, we present analyses of high-stakes team activities, known as “raids,” in massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs). These situations are hotbeds of collaboration, which is increasingly recognized as a valuable twenty-first century skill (Karoly & Panis, 2004). Raids usually involve a great amount of communication and coordination of actions, interdependence of teammates, leadership, and execution of strategy, similar to elements of collaboration in other settings, such as business (Reeves, Malone & O’Driscoll, 2008), surgical teams (Edmondson, 2003), the military (Salas, Bower & Cannon-Bowers, 1995), control room teams (Patrick, et. al., 2006), sports teams (Eccles & Tenenbaum, 2004), and educational settings (Mercier, Goldman & Booker, 2006). These raid events often span hours at a time and are often repeated over several months before the raid zone is cleared, i.e. when the team is able to successfully defeat all of the enemies. Existing studies of learning in MMOGs include gaming as a constellation of literacy practices (Steinkuehler, 2007, 2008), scientific argumentation in web forums around game strategies (Steinkuehler & Duncan, 2008), and learning game ethos, strategy, and fact-finding with peers via chat (Nardi, 2007). Yet other research has looked at the development of social skills (Ducheneaut & Moore, 2005) and the build-up and leveraging of social and cultural capital to succeed in game activities (Jakobsson & Taylor, 2003, Malaby, 2006). Previous work on raiding has included a focus on providing an ethnographic account of in-game activity and the realignment work needed after moments of failure (Chen, 2009). Without cross-setting comparisons, however, it is difficult to uncover which aspects of gaming are specific to the game world and which can be thought of as enduring qualities of expert collaborative group practice.
To make cross-setting comparisons, we analyze gameplay video, audio conversations, and text chat data from two popular MMOGs, The Lord of the Rings Online (LOTRO) and World of Warcraft (WoW). Using a participant-observation approach, we examine two semi-stable teams of players who spent several weeks learning to be successful in a raid. In particular, we examine collaborative behavior and communication for two raid battles in each game: one successful battle, and one unsuccessful. The four cases were coded based on adaptations to work team behavior frameworks (Rousseau, et al., 2006), situation awareness measures (Patrick, et al., 2006), and a coding system used in examining differences between problem-solving youth groups (Baron, 2003). Informed by theories on the relational networks of human and nonhuman actors (Latour, 1988, 2005), which includes considering the distribution of cognitive work within ecological settings (Hutchins, 1995a, 1995b), and the assemblage of such systems as applied to games (Taylor, forthcoming), our analyses focus on one aspect of practice, the communication of expert players. This communication includes voice and text chat, and the patterns that emerge when looking across game sessions. By comparing two games with different designs (e.g. team size, player abilities, and scripting of battles) and cultures (e.g. roles, expectations, preferred mode of communication, and use of external tools), we can discover what is common about these collaborative activities, giving us an insight into what is common about teamwork and collaboration in virtual tasks that require a high degree of technical skill and coordinated effort. Themes emerge concerning situational awareness, psychological safety (Edmonson, 1999, 2003), problem solving (Barron, 2003; Roschelle, 1992), and critical communicative practices necessary for success. Results are discussed in relation to collaboration research in other non-virtual settings.
Also:
Unlimited data but only 400 texts… Think that’ll be enough texts?
Twitter and gmail all in a continuous stream now… maybe that’s a bad thing…
So, last Thursday I ordered us some new phones from T-Mobile (a G1 and a Behold) via online cellphone store Wirefly.
They’re set to arrive tomorrow, 5 days after order. Transferring phone numbers to the new carrier was also supposed to happen about 5 days later, but it happened today instead. No phones for us!
That wouldn’t be so bad, but look at the status update from the FedEx tracking system below… Left from Maryland, checked in Indiana, arrived in Seattle, and sent *back* to Indiana??
๐ ๐
Last week and this week I’m in the SF Bay Area, visiting family and working with some Stanford folks.
The LIFE (Learning in Informal and Formal Environments) Center is a collaboraiton between some profs at UW and Stanford and some researchers at SRI. As a student of the Center, I applied for a one week exchange thing they have for students at one uni to visit a student at the other uni.
Anyway, I’ve been working with Sarah Walter who is looking at collaboration in Lord of the Rings Online while raiding, which is basically the same thing I’m doing except that I frame mine more as activity system description and I look at World of Warcraft.
We’re pretty much dealing with the same data, though, from two different games, so it made sense to collaborate on a paper and some conference presentations. Yay!
It’s slow going, and technically, LIFE is paying for like 5 days of working but we’ve been at it off and on for a week and half now. Got a todo list now, and looking forward to get back to Seattle with new direction.
Today, my bro and I are meeting another Stanford student, Sarah Lewis, to go visit the California Academy of Science. Fun!
Later tonight, we’re going to Chris’s to play Battlestar Galactica the boardgame that Grey got. Last weekend, we met and played some boardgames, too. Ghost Stories and Cuba.
Yesterday, I met up with TL Taylor and Casey O’Donnel for lunch. That was cool. This week, GDC is happening in SF. Tomorrow, I’ll probably be meeting some guildies for dinner.
Robin was here with me last week, and our first two meals were at In-n-Out and Pizza Chicago. ๐
Was getting a little excessive I think…
Hmmm. Maybe I can create a page of my google reader feed and people can subscribe to it if they want…
Also, my glasses broke today. That kind of sucks. But I’ve got a pair of sunglasses that work in a pinch. Now, should I get $30 cheapies again or actually go to some brick-n-mortar glasses store and pay more for a pair that might last longer than 1.5 years?
Recently, someone asked a question of the Association of Internet Researchers mailing list regarding the use of actor-network theory (ANT) with the analysis of why (WoW) gamers have a negative stereotype.
A flurry of activity occurred commenting about the use of ANT. It’s not a method but a framework, for example.
I was excited because I am thinking of using ANT to look at WoW raiding practice, and since I wanted to get feedback, too, I posted the following:
Hey all!
Fascinating discussion.
I’ve recently starting reading about ANT and have been toying with the idea of analyzing how a raid in WoW works through an ANT lens, though I am unsure what it’ll get me more than using distributed cognition (Hutchins) or just simply describing the learning arrangement between various humans and nonhumans to get the job done.
I guess my problem with ANT is that it seems boundless in terms of macro vs. micro analysis. As has been mentioned, an actor network can be made up of actor networks. Where does one start?
So, for example, I have a 40 person raid group that learns to kill a boss over several weeks. It seems like each person should be considered an actor that had to be translated into the network. We’ve also collectively used certain addons and tools within the game to help us manage cognitive load and to make transparent some of the underworkings of the game. Does each of these addons get counted? Does each iteration of an addon get counted (40 people running the same addon in slightly different ways, positioned on the screen differently, paying attention to different parts of the addon, etc.)? Do specific functions of the addon get separated as individual actors? Do different elements of the UI get separated? To back up, do specific people get broken down to mind-body-fingers?
Latour (writing as Johnson) briefly mentions that a door closer, an actor that’s been delegated the task of making a hole back into a wall, can be further broken down into the mechanisms in the whole object (egs. a spring, a metal cylinder). Is it completely arbitrary where a researcher draws the line?
In Reassembling the Social, Latour emphasizes tracing associations, which is possibly an answer to my above questions. I could concentrate on describing practice in the raid activity as I see it (which is pretty much what I’ve been doing for a while now), but pay particular attention to describing the functions of specific things as they relate to other things. Do this as they come up. In turn, these associations lead to other things that come up. Is that no longer considered ANT but after-ANT?
Is it more useful to describe cognition and memory and material resources within an entity a la dcog than use ANT? (Though my prob with dcog is more that it seems like a snapshot-in-time where I am trying to document the change in practice. ANT seems like it inherently considers instability and change through the act of translation.) Is ANT reserved for bigger arguments about societal relationships? About translation being the leveraging or convincing of other actors to share tasks? Or maybe a dcog analysis is the way to use an ANT lens using my ethnographic mehod…
Lots of questions. Maybe better suited to a blog post, as I’m just throwing ideas out there without much experience with ANT and such… But I thought I’d throw them out since it seems to that me the fastest way to learn something is to make transparent what you don’t know. And my digital ears perked up when I saw Tamara’s first message in this thread. ANT and MMOGs!
thanks,
mark
NO ONE replied except Bonnie Nardi off list! ๐
And even then, she gave me some good pointers to articles I should read without any editorial comments of her own. Gah, more reading! :p
Was it not clear enough? I don’t explain distributed cognition at all. I don’t explain ANT at all because I assume the people who were talking about it know more about it than I do. I don’t explain WoW raiding, either, but I thought they’d all know what I was talking about. Also, I didn’t want to make the email even longer than it was…
Ah well… I guess I’ll keep reading.
So, should I be converting batches of my twitter updates and google reader shared items into daily or weekly blog posts on this site, or would that be too spammy?
Are you all (all 2 of you) interested in that at all, or should I restrict my posts to original thoughts and writings and items of particular significance? (And we all know that means I only post about once a week…)
On Tuesday, I watched the inauguration at a local cafe (The Aster Coffee Lounge) with some friends. Robin commented afterwards that it was amazing how many different forms of media were present.
We had a live stream of the event from the web being projected onto an inflatable screen. This was their workaround for a USB antenna thing that wasn’t working. The stream kept stuttering, though, with periodic stops for buffering. So we turned off the audio and were listening to the NPR live coverage while watching the video stream. But the video lagged about 5 seconds behind the audio, so that was kind of odd, especially when Roberts and Obama had their repair moment during the swearing in.
There was at least one live blogger at the event, at least one twitterer, and people texting and calling each other on their cell phones.
King 5 news, a local TV station, was there, as was print media in the form of Ballard News Tribune. Since I ordered one of the Aster’s special Inauguration Waffles, King 5 shot me taking a bite, and Ballard News took a photo, too. Here’s a photo Erik took:
After the inauguration ceremony, King 5 interviewed me really quickly. (Maybe because I was the only Asian guy in the place… They also interviewed the only Black guy in the place…) I said something like it was prophetic to have happened the day after MLK, Jr. Day and that I hoped that the nation took seriously Obama’s call for collective responsibility and action.
And, of course, there were the multiple sub-groups of people interacting with each other through verbal talk.
hit with about 90 spam comments in under an hour on Wednesday… Not sure why, but I deleted them…