A new study has found that anger and aggression are significant predictors of toxic behaviour in multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA) games. The research, conducted by Bastian Kordyaka, Samuli Laato, and Bjoern Niehaves, offers insights into the psychological factors behind toxic interactions in popular games like “League of Legends” and “Defense of the Ancients 2” (Dota 2). The findings were published in the journal CEUR Workshop Proceedings.
A growing concern has been the phenomenon of toxic behavior in online gaming, which includes actions like insulting, criticizing, or stealing resources from teammates. Such behaviour not only affects the gaming experience but also contributes to player churn, negatively impacting the game’s community and revenue. Previous studies have explored various aspects of this issue, but there remains a gap in understanding the role of individual psychological dispositions in fostering such behaviour.
The researchers employed a cross-sectional survey design, collecting data from 216 players of “League of Legends” and “Dota 2”. Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire that included measures of authoritarianism, anger, and aggression, as well as their experiences with toxic behaviour in the games. The study used structural equation modelling to analyse the relationships between these variables.
The study’s findings support the hypothesis that both anger and aggression significantly predict toxic behaviour in MOBA games. Players who reported higher levels of anger and aggression were more likely to engage in toxic interactions with their teammates and opponents. This aligns with the frustration-aggression theory, which suggests that frustration can lead to emotional arousal, resulting in aggressive behaviour.
Interestingly, the study found that authoritarianism, while initially hypothesised to be a direct predictor of toxic behaviour, did not have a significant direct effect. Instead, authoritarianism influenced toxic behaviour indirectly by increasing levels of anger and aggression. This suggests that individuals with authoritarian tendencies might experience heightened emotional responses when their rigid expectations about game behaviour are challenged.
These findings have practical implications for game developers and community managers. Understanding that anger and aggression are key drivers of toxic behaviour can help in developing targeted interventions to mitigate these emotional responses. For example, in-game features that promote positive reinforcement and provide mechanisms for players to manage their frustration could reduce the incidence of toxic behaviour.
The indirect role of authoritarianism suggests that fostering a more inclusive and flexible gaming culture could help reduce toxicity. Educational programmes that promote awareness about the impact of rigid behavioural expectations and encourage a more collaborative and forgiving approach to gameplay could be beneficial.
The researchers acknowledge several limitations in their study. The sample was drawn from Amazon Mechanical Turk, which might not fully represent the broader gaming community. Furthermore, the study’s cross-sectional design means that it cannot establish causality definitively. Future research could explore longitudinal approaches to better understand the dynamics of toxic behaviour over time.
Another area for future investigation is the exploration of other personality traits and emotional states that might contribute to toxic behaviour. Given the complex nature of human psychology, it is likely that multiple factors interplay in contributing to such behaviour in online gaming environments.
