Extending the Gamer’s Dilemma: empirically investigating the paradox of fictionally going too far across media

IF 1.4 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Philosophical Psychology Pub Date : 2024-05-19 DOI:10.1080/09515089.2024.2354432
Thomas Montefiore, Paul Formosa, V. Polito
{"title":"Extending the Gamer’s Dilemma: empirically investigating the paradox of fictionally going too far across media","authors":"Thomas Montefiore, Paul Formosa, V. Polito","doi":"10.1080/09515089.2024.2354432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Gamer’s Dilemma is based on the intuitions that in single-player video games fictional acts of murder are seen as morally acceptable whereas fictional acts of sexual assault are seen as morally unacceptable. Recently, it has been suggested that these intuitions may apply across different forms of media as part of a broader Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far. This study aims to empirically explore this issue by determining whether fictional murder is seen as more morally acceptable than fictional sexual assault across different media types, and whether audio-visuality and the degree of agency afforded by the medium influences these judgments. An experimental survey study was developed where participants responded to imaginary fictional scenarios as part of a 2 (engages with fictional murder or fictional sexual assault) X 2 (in a high or low agency) X 2 (audio-visual or non-audio-visual medium) factorial design. It was found that fic-tional murder was seen to be more morally acceptable than fictional sexual assault across all media types, providing empirical support for the Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far. It was also found that the audio-visuality and degree of agency influenced judgments of moral acceptability.","PeriodicalId":47485,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2024.2354432","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Gamer’s Dilemma is based on the intuitions that in single-player video games fictional acts of murder are seen as morally acceptable whereas fictional acts of sexual assault are seen as morally unacceptable. Recently, it has been suggested that these intuitions may apply across different forms of media as part of a broader Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far. This study aims to empirically explore this issue by determining whether fictional murder is seen as more morally acceptable than fictional sexual assault across different media types, and whether audio-visuality and the degree of agency afforded by the medium influences these judgments. An experimental survey study was developed where participants responded to imaginary fictional scenarios as part of a 2 (engages with fictional murder or fictional sexual assault) X 2 (in a high or low agency) X 2 (audio-visual or non-audio-visual medium) factorial design. It was found that fic-tional murder was seen to be more morally acceptable than fictional sexual assault across all media types, providing empirical support for the Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far. It was also found that the audio-visuality and degree of agency influenced judgments of moral acceptability.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
扩展游戏玩家的窘境:从经验角度研究跨媒体虚构过度的悖论
玩家困境 "基于这样一种直觉:在单人电子游戏中,虚构的谋杀行为被视为道德上可接受的行为,而虚构的性侵犯行为则被视为道德上不可接受的行为。最近,有人提出,这些直觉可能适用于不同形式的媒体,是更广泛的 "虚构过头悖论 "的一部分。本研究旨在通过实证探讨这一问题,确定在不同类型的媒体中,虚构的谋杀行为是否比虚构的性侵犯行为在道德上更容易被接受,以及媒体的视听效果和代理程度是否会影响这些判断。我们开展了一项实验性调查研究,参与者在 2(参与虚构的谋杀或虚构的性侵犯)X 2(高代理度或低代理度)X 2(视听媒体或非视听媒体)因子设计中对想象中的虚构场景做出反应。研究发现,在所有媒体类型中,虚构谋杀比虚构性攻击在道德上更容易被接受,这为 "虚构太过分悖论 "提供了实证支持。研究还发现,视听效果和代理程度会影响对道德可接受性的判断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
14.30%
发文量
120
期刊介绍: Philosophical Psychology is an international journal devoted to developing and strengthening the links between philosophy and the psychological sciences, both as basic sciences and as employed in applied settings, by publishing original, peer-refereed contributions to this expanding field of study and research. Published articles deal with issues that arise in the cognitive and brain sciences, and in areas of applied psychology.
期刊最新文献
The future of phenomenological psychopathology Mental fictionalism: a new approach to understanding the nature of the mind Dissolving the moral-conventional distinction Disrupted self, therapy, and the limits of conversational AI Type-R physicalism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1