Computers in Human Behavior Reports 4 (2021) 100136

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior Reports

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/computers-in-human-behavior-reports

Comparing video game engagement measures as related to individual and

relational well-being in a community sample of adult gamers☆
Benjamin Burke a, *, Mallory Lucier-Greer b
a
School of Human Sciences, Mississippi State University, USA
b
Department of Human Development and Family Science, Auburn University, USA

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The relationships between video games and well-being have been the subject of empirical investigation for
Video game decades. However, this research has largely focused on younger samples, adverse outcomes, and limited mea­
Adult sures of game engagement. The current study compared multiple game engagement measures (i.e., time spent
Individual well-being
playing, social context of play, content rating of favorite video game, and motivations for play) and their as­
Relational well-being
Game engagement
sociations with psychosocial well-being (i.e., depressive symptoms, stress, loneliness, relationship satisfaction,
and social support) in a community sample of 223 adult gamers. When examined separately, time spent playing,
playing games for diversion, and more solo play were related to poorer individual well-being. When examining
game engagement measures simultaneously, only diversion and fantasy motivations were related to poorer well-
being, while more social play was related to lower loneliness. This suggests that gaming motivations and social
context are more salient predictors of adult well-being than the often-examined measures of time spent playing or
video game content. The results align with the Basic Psychological Needs theoretical approach to gaming, which
states that adults play games to feel competent, autonomous, and socially related, and indicate that research and
interventions may better serve adult gamers by focusing on motivations for play and social context.

Video games are a nearly ubiquitous leisure activity for adolescents
with some estimates suggesting that 98% of American youth between
the ages of 12 and 18 years old play video games of some kind (Lenhart
et al., 2008). Perhaps surprising to some, population-based research also
demonstrates that adults are frequent video game players (hereafter
referred to as “adult gamers”), such that 65% of American adults
(average age 33 years old) report to be gamers (Entertainment Software
Association, 2019). Given the widespread use of video games as a leisure
activity, it is no surprise that extensive research has been conducted on
the associations between gaming and individual and relational
well-being; yet, to date, the primary focus has been on adolescent
samples and the potential adverse outcomes of gaming (e.g., Calvert
et al., 2017; Lopez-Fernandez et al., 2019). This study advances the
gaming literature by examining the prospective beneficial and detri­
mental associations between video game engagement and individual
and relational well-being in a community sample of adult gamers.
Furthermore, this study is positioned to compare multiple video game
engagement measurement approaches to provide insight into which
aspects of gaming are associated with well-being. The results are
positioned to help researchers and practitioners better understand the
role that video games play in adult gamers’ lives and speak to the
methods through which these behaviors are empirically explored.
Theory, game engagement, and psychosocial well-being
Social learning theory
Two broad theoretical categories have been applied to explain how
gaming influences psychosocial well-being. The first category is rooted
in social learning theory (Bandura et al., 1961, 1963) and focuses on the
ability of games to teach those who engage with them (for review, see
Buckley & Anderson, 2006). According to these perspectives, repeated
exposure to gaming content (e.g., violence) and process (e.g., active
engagement) teaches gamers about what behaviors are appropriate
and/or expected in certain situations. These perspectives are typically
the foundation of studies linking violent video game content and violent
or aggressive behavior in real life. Several studies identify associations
between greater exposure to video game violence and real life violent or

☆
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
* Corresponding author. 255 Tracy Drive Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA.
E-mail address: bmb888@msstate.edu (B. Burke).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100136
Received 4 February 2021; Received in revised form 22 June 2021; Accepted 17 August 2021
Available online 18 August 2021
2451-9588/© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
B. Burke and M. Lucier-Greer
aggressive behaviors (e.g., Calvert et al., 2017). Additionally, several
studies have linked gaming with improvements in cognitive and
learning outcomes in children, adolescents, and adults (Adachi & Wil­
loughby, 2013, 2015; Anguera et al., 2013; Jackson et al., 2012). As a
result, a core message from this theoretical perspective is that games
influence well-being, negatively and positively, through repeated
exposure and cognitive training. Accordingly, studies rooted in this
theoretical perspective tend to focus on measuring time spent playing and
the content found within video games.
The time spent playing video games and the level of mature content
found in games (e.g., violence, sexuality) are frequently combined in
empirical studies, despite being separate constructs (DeCamp & Fergu­
son, 2017; Teng et al., 2019). The associations between time spent
playing, video game content, and well-being are mixed. Some evidence
indicates that more exposure to violent content in games leads to greater
real-life aggression in child, adolescent, and adult gamers (e.g., Calvert
et al., 2017). Other evidence suggests that time spent playing violent
video games is not associated with aggression and violence in children
and adolescents (Ferguson & Wang, 2019; Przybylski & Weinstein,
2019), and violence is better explained by other indicators, such as
aggressive personality, lack of support from family members or peers,
and depression (Ferguson et al., 2009, 2014).
Additionally, time spent playing appears to be related to both posi­
tive and negative social outcomes in adults (e.g., more online, but less
offline, social benefits; Collins & Freeman, 2013; Shen & Williams,
2011). Coyne et al. (2012) found that more arguments about the time
spent playing and the content of games mediated the relationship be­
tween men’s playtime and couple aggression. Przybylski et al. (2009)
also found that more time spent playing (regardless of content) was
negatively correlated with life satisfaction and physical and mental
health. However, time spent playing was only related to poorer out­
comes when combined with a poorer quality play experience and
incomplete internalized motivation. In other words, when players felt
compelled to play, more time spent playing was related to worse out­
comes. This compulsion is likely related to addictive gaming behavior
which is also associated with time spent playing (e.g., Cudo et al., 2019).
This finding indicates that other game engagement factors, namely
motivations to play, could play a key role in determining psychosocial
outcomes from game play, indicating a need to examine gaming from a
different theoretical approach.
Basic psychological needs theory
The application of basic psychological needs theory (Ryan & Deci,
2000) provides a complementary approach to studying the relationship
between gaming and well-being, such that the focus shifts to examine
how gaming is chosen in the pursuit of motivational satisfaction. Basic
psychological needs theory posits that well-being is a function of how
well the basic needs for competence (i.e., a belief in one’s ability to
address challenges), autonomy (i.e., a belief in one’s sense of personal
agency in the world), and relatedness (i.e., one’s sense of connection to
other people or broader society) have been satisfied. Accordingly, when
gamers feel their basic needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness
are met through gaming, their psychological health tends to benefit
(Przybilski et al., 2010; Ryan et al., 2006). Conversely, gaming that
thwarts basic needs likely results in poorer outcomes (Przybilski et al.,
2014). As this theoretical perspective is more concerned with how
gaming facilitates basic need satisfaction, gaming motivations and social
context of play become more salient aspects and, in turn, measurements
of gaming engagement.
Motivations to play video games vary among gamers and include the
desire for competition, challenge, social interaction, diversion, fantasy,
and/or arousal; the supposition is that these motivations may be sys­
tematically related to basic psychological needs (Sherry et al., 2006). For
example, playing video games to accomplish a challenge or foster
competition could satisfy the needs for competence or autonomy.
2
Computers in Human Behavior Reports 4 (2021) 100136
Conversely, playing games as a diversionary tactic may inhibit these
needs if real-life challenges are perceived as too difficult to manage or
out of their control. Melodia and colleagues (2020) reviewed several
studies linking diversion, also referred to as escapist motivations, with
problematic or addictive game play. Diversion motivation has also been
implicated in greater depressive symptoms (Hagström & Kaldo, 2014).
Other gaming motivations, such as social interaction, may be salient
indicators of the need for relatedness. Shen and Williams (2011) found
that social and immersive motivations were simultaneously related to
positive and negative social outcomes in adult gamers, specifically more
loneliness but enhanced online community connections.
Beyond motivation, evaluating the social context of gaming (i.e., the
amount of time spent playing with others) could also affect the need for
relatedness, in line with basic psychological needs theory. The social
context of play is a relatively understudied measure in gaming research
regarding individual and relational well-being, despite the fact that
gaming is often a social activity (e.g., Griffiths et al., 2003; 2004; Yee,
2006). Video games seem to be helpful mediums to facilitate social in­
teractions (Yee, 2006), but whether they facilitate the need for relat­
edness (Ryan & Deci, 2000) is unclear. Some evidence suggests that
video games displace “real life” relationships in favor of gaming oppor­
tunities (Griffiths et al., 2004; Nie, 2001; Shen & Williams, 2011),
resulting in poorer social outcomes (e.g., worsened social support in
adolescents; Kowert et al., 2014). Conversely, the augmentation
perspective suggests that gaming can be a vehicle for online social
relationship formation and maintenance (Shen & Williams, 2011;
Smyth, 2007). Furthermore, social play has been linked to social benefits
(Reer & Krämer, 2014) and pro-social behaviors (Jin & Li, 2017). Our
knowledge about the social context of play is limited because this is not a
readily assessed dimension of game engagement, and those that have
included it have largely overlooked associations with individual and
relational well-being (e.g., Griffiths et al., 2003, 2004).
Advancing the current knowledge on gaming and psychosocial
well-being
Empirical evidence seems to convey a connection between game
engagement and psychosocial well-being, but it is less clear which
theoretical perspective is best suited to guide these examinations. This
study is positioned to test differences between the two theoretical per­
spectives described above by comparing measures of game engagement
that align with social learning theory (specifically, time spent playing
and content rating) with those that align with basic psychological needs
theories (specifically, motivations for play and social context of play) in
relation to psychosocial outcomes.
Beyond comparing theoretical perspectives, this study is also well
suited to address limitations in video game research by exploring the
potential for both beneficial and problematic outcomes associated with
game play in an understudied group of gamers, a community sample of
adults. Empirical investigations on gaming tend to utilize a problem-
focused lens by focusing on outcomes such as real-life aggression or
violence (e.g., Willoughby et al., 2012), attention deficit issues (Swing
et al., 2010), and problematic video game usage (akin to “addictive”
play; Lopez-Fernandez et al., 2019; Przybylski et al., 2009). Limiting
focus on negative effects of gaming is problematic as emerging evidence
has demonstrated links between gaming and beneficial outcomes, such
as physical and cognitive functioning in adolescents (e.g., Adachi &
Willoughby, 2013; 2015) and older adults (e.g., Anguera et al., 2013),
and qualitative reports that video games serve as excellent mediums for
establishing and maintaining relationships for both adolescents and
adults (e.g., Yee, 2006). These results indicate key gaps in the research
on video games that warrant consideration, especially approaching the
measurement of video game engagement in a way that allows both
positive and negative outcomes to emerge.
B. Burke and M. Lucier-Greer Computers in Human Behavior Reports 4 (2021) 100136

The current study Table 1

Descriptive Statistics and Reliability Coefficients of Study Variables.
This study advances to the gaming literature by comparing how Variable Name Range Mean (SD) α
diverse video game engagement measures are associated with individual
Independent Variables
and relational well-being in a community sample of adult video game Time spent playing games (hours per year) 3–3285 625.79 (631.45)
players. Specifically, we address these research questions (RQ): Content rating of favorite game 1–5 2.44 (1.05)
RQ1) How are diverse game engagement measurements — specif­ Motivations
ically, the time spent playing games, content rating of favorite video Social 1–7 4.20 (2.13) .88
Competition 1–6.5 3.35 (1.39) .80
game, motivations for play, and social context of play — associated with Challenge 2.5–7 5.60 (.93) .64
individual well-being (i.e., depressive symptoms, perceived stress, and Diversion 1–7 4.37 (1.77) .90
loneliness)? Fantasy 1–7 4.63 (1.47) .86
RQ2) How are these game engagement measurements associated Arousal 1–7 4.75 (1.22) .79
Psychological recovery via game play 1–5 3.18 (.79) .84
with relational well-being (i.e., social support and romantic relationship
Social context of play 0%– 42.37%
satisfaction)? 100% (34.49%)
RQ3) Are any of these indicators more strongly associated with in­ Dependent Variables
dividual and relational outcomes? Depressive symptoms 1–10 3.03 (2.51) .78
Perceived stress 1–3.75 2.19 (.66) .80
Loneliness 1–3 1.61 (.56) .79
Method Relationship satisfaction 1–6.25 4.93 (1.12) .94
Social support 1–7 5.55 (1.12) .92
Procedure

A confidential online survey of 132 questions was distributed via
Qualtrics between November 2019 and January 2020 to capture data on
demographics, video game play, and individual and relational well-
being. Twitter and Facebook were the primary avenues of survey dis­
tribution. Posts were made to these social media sites with a brief
description of the purpose of the data collection and potential to win one
of four $25.00 Amazon gift cards. Because these social media posts were
sharable with others, snowball sampling occurred when respondents
shared the survey through their own social media channels. Respondents
had the option to provide an email address to participate in the gift card
drawing, and these addresses were kept separate from the data. The
project was approved by the University’s Institutional Review Board.
Participants
The total number of original respondents was 248. Participants were
removed if they did not respond to enough information for analyses (n =
21) or if it was clear the respondents were providing purposefully false
answers (e.g., listing Fortnite as the participant’s age; n = 1), resulting in
an analytic sample of 226 adult gamers. The sample was almost half men
(45.1%) and women (54.4%), and one respondent identified as non-
binary. The average age of the participants was 32.6 years old (SD =
8.79). The majority of the participants identified as White (78.3%), but
some identified as African American/Black (4%), Asian American
(4.4%), Asian/Pacific Islander (4%), Hispanic/LatinX (3.1%), Native-
American (0.9%), and Other (1.3%). The majority of the sample had
completed at least a four degree or more (65.9%). The sample was
mostly employed full-time (59.3%) and had an individual income of
$30,000 – $59,999 over the previous 12 months (29.2%). Most of the
sample was married (49.1%) or dating (23.5%), although several iden­
tified as single (23.5%). For those who were married or dating, the
average length of the relationship was 9.45 years (SD = 7.24). Partici­
pants reported playing video games for an average of 21.36 years (SD =
8.6) over the course of their lives. Most respondents played video games
on their cell phones/tablets (n = 186), followed by consoles (e.g., Xbox
One; n = 155), then PCs (n = 116), and portable systems (e.g., Nintendo
3DS; n = 69); notably, most participants (n = 170; 75.2%) reported
playing on 2 or more platforms.
Measures
Detailed information about each measure is presented below. Means,
standard deviations, ranges, and Chronbach’s α of the variables (when
appropriate) are presented in Table 1.
Video game measurement approaches
Four video game engagement measurements were assessed as inde­
pendent variables. They include measures that reflect a social learning
lens (time spent playing video games and content rating) and measures
that reflect a basic psychological needs lens (motivations for play and
the social context of play).
Time Spent Playing. A modified version of the Family Leisure Ac­
tivity Profile (FLAP; Zabriskie & McCormick, 2001) was used to measure
the time spent playing games. Participants noted how frequently they
engaged in game play by themselves or with family members, friends, or
romantic partners (whether physically present or through
Internet-mediated communication channels) on a scale from at least
daily (1) to at least annually (4). This item was reverse scored so that
higher numbers indicated more frequent discrete gaming sessions. Then,
this variable was recoded to reflect the frequency of discrete game play
sessions per year. Therefore, a rating of at least daily (4) was recoded to
365, at least weekly (3) was recoded to 52, and so on. Participants also
indicated the general length of each play session when playing by
themselves or with family members, friends, or romantic partners on a
scale from less than 1 hour (1) to 8 + hours (5). The frequency of discrete
gaming sessions was multiplied by the general length of each gaming
session for each social context (solo or with others). Finally, the scores
for time spent playing in each social context were added together to get
an approximation of the total time spent playing video games (i.e., hours
per year) with higher numbers indicating more time spent playing.
Content Rating. Subjective and objective information were used to
measure content rating of a participant’s favorite video game. Partici­
pants listed their favorite video game and the platform on which they
played (e.g., console, PC). The content rating for the selected game was
ascertained from an objective third party, the established rating system
from the Entertainment Software Review Board (Entertainment Soft­
ware Review Board, 2020). The Google Play Store uses the same rating
scheme as the ESRB. Thus, all mobile game maturity ratings were ac­
quired from the Google Play Store. Maturity ratings were coded with a
numerical value corresponding to the ratings provided by the ESRB (see
Table 2 for ratings, descriptions, and assigned numerical values).
Twenty responses were not coded because they were left blank, partic­
ipants only provided information on the platform, or participants listed
games for which maturity ratings could not be ascertained. For most
participants, their favorite game was rated Teen, Everyone +10, or
Everyone (81.6%).
Motivations for Playing. Gaming motivations were captured by
two measures. The first was the Video Game Uses and Gratifications
Instrument (VGUGI; Sherry et al., 2006), a 20-item scale that asks

3
B. Burke and M. Lucier-Greer
Table 2
Content Ratings and Descriptions from the Entertainment Software Review
Board.
Rating Value Full Name of Rating and Description
E 1 Everyone. Content is generally suitable for all ages. May contain
minimal cartoon, fantasy, or mild violence and/or infrequent use
of mild language
E10+ 2 Everyone 10+. Content is generally suitable for ages 10 and up.
May contain more cartoon, fantasy, or mild violence, mild
language and/or minimal suggestive themes.
T 3 Teen. Content is generally suitable for ages 13 and up. May
contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal
blood, simulated gambling and/or infrequent use of strong
language.
M 4 Mature 17+. Content is generally suitable for ages 17 and up. May
contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or
strong language
AO 5 Adults Only. Content suitable only for adults ages 18 and up. May
include prolonged scenes of intense violence, graphic sexual
content, and/or gambling with real currency
participants to rate their agreement with reasons for video game play on
a scale of strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). This scale is made up
of six subscales, each measuring a different motivation for play
including competition, challenge, social interaction, diversion, fantasy,
and arousal. Scores for each subscale were averaged with higher scores
indicating more agreement with each motivation. According to Sherry
et al. (2006), the VGUGI is a valid predictor of game engagement, and
the subscales demonstrate good reliability.
The second measure was a six-item psychological recovery (i.e., the
process of renewing and refueling emotional and psychological systems
that have been drained through stressors; Reinecke, 2009) scale. Par­
ticipants rated how frequently they played video games during stressful
circumstances on a scale from never (1) to very frequently (5). The ratings
were averaged with higher scores indicating more frequent use of video
games for recovery purposes.
Social Context of Play. Social context of play was derived from the
time spent playing measure described above and reflects the percentage
of total time spent playing video games with family members, friends,
and/or romantic partners (i.e., physically present and/or connected via
the Internet). The scores ranged from no social playtime (0%) to all social
playtime (100%). The average percentage of time spent playing in a
social context was 42.37% (SD = 34.49%), indicating that these gamers,
on average, spent a little less than half of their time playing with others
and the remainder of the time playing alone.
Individual well-being
Three measures of individual well-being were assessed as dependent
variables.
Depressive Symptoms. Depressive symptoms were measured using
the 10-item Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D)
Scale Short Form (Irwin et al., 1999). Participants responded with either
a yes (1) or no (0) to indicate the presence or absence of depressive
symptoms over the previous week. Two items were reversed scored
because they contraindicated depressive symptoms. These were sum­
med with higher values indicating more depressive symptoms. This
measure has demonstrated good criterion validity and appears to be
comparably valid to the larger version of the scale (Irwin et al., 1999).
Perceived Stress. Participants responded to the Perceived Stress
Scale Short Form (PSS-4; Warttig et al., 2013) to indicate how frequently
they experienced stressful circumstances in the previous month on a
scale of never (1) to very often (4). Two items were reverse coded because
they contraindicated stressful experiences. Responses were averaged
and higher values indicated more stress. The PSS-4 has demonstrated
adequate reliability (α = 0.77; Warttig et al., 2013) and has been rec­
ommended for studies where respondent burden prohibits the use of
4
Computers in Human Behavior Reports 4 (2021) 100136
longer scales (Leung et al., 2010).
Loneliness. Loneliness was measured using the Three-Item Loneli­
ness Scale (Hughes et al., 2004). Participants rated how frequently they
experienced loneliness on a scale from hardly ever (1) to often (3). Re­
sponses were averaged and higher values indicated more loneliness. This
scale has demonstrated both convergent and discriminant validity
(Hughes et al., 2004).
Relational well-being
Two measures of relational well-being were assessed as dependent
variables.
Relationship Satisfaction. Romantic relationship satisfaction was
measured using the four-item Couple Satisfaction Index (Funk & Rogge,
2007). Participants indicated how much they perceived their relation­
ship as comfortable, happy, rewarding, and satisfying. Regarding the
comfortable, reward, and satisfaction subscales, answers ranged on a
scale from a lack of agreement (1) to total agreement (6). Happiness in the
relationship was rated on a unique scale of extremely unhappy (1) to
perfect (7). The responses were averaged and higher values indicated
greater relationship satisfaction. This scale has demonstrated good
construct and convergent validity (Funk & Rogge, 2007).
Perceived Social Support. Participants responded to the 12-item
Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (Zimet et al.,
1988) and rated their agreement with statements related to their
perception of support received from friends, family members, and sig­
nificant others on a scale from very strongly disagree (1) to very strongly
agree (7). Responses were averaged to create a mean score for overall
perceived social support with high values indicating more social sup­
port. This scale has demonstrated moderate construct validity.
Control variables
Participants responded to demographic questions including sex, in­
come, and romantic relationship length, and these variables were
assessed as potential controls. Income was on a scale from less than
$10,000 (1) to $100,000 or more (5). Romantic relationship length was
measured in years for the current study. There is some evidence for sex
and gender differences in psychosocial well-being, with women more
likely to report psychological symptoms (e.g., Brougham et al., 2009).
Additionally, greater income is often associated with better psychosocial
outcomes (e.g., Diener et al., 1993). Lastly, relationship duration is
linked to relationship satisfaction, but the association may be different
depending on gender (e.g., women reported lower satisfaction in longer
relationships; Heiman et al., 2011).
Analytical plan
In SPSS 24, descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations were
examined. These correlations were used to determine covariations be­
tween independent and control variables in the regression analyses;
uncorrelated variables were constrained from co-varying to preserve
power. Missingness analyses were conducted to verify if data were
missing at random.
Then, path models were fit in Mplus Version 8.4 (Muthén & Muthén,
2017) to examine associations between diverse measures of video game
engagement and individual and relational well-being. Missing data were
addressed using maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard
errors. Good model fit was determined by a non-significant χ 2 p-value (p
> .05), a RMSEA value of ≤ 0.06, and a TLI and CFI value greater than
0.95 (Hooper et al., 2008). Paths between variables and variance
explained in the dependent variables (R2) were interpreted for models
with acceptable fit.
More specifically, to address RQ1 and RQ2, separate path models
were fit for each measure of video game engagement to examine asso­
ciations with individual and relational well-being. For example, a path
B. Burke and M. Lucier-Greer Computers in Human Behavior Reports 4 (2021) 100136

model was fit to analyze the relationships between time spent playing

1.00

5.55
1.12
video games (predictor) and depressive symptoms, perceived stress,

17
loneliness, and perceived social support (outcomes) with previously
mentioned control variables. Because a subset of the sample was not in a

.48***
romantic relationship, a separate path model was fit to examine the

1.00

4.93
1.12
16
associations between time spent playing video games and relationship
satisfaction utilizing only the participants that were in a romantic
relationship (n = 166) with associated control variables. Then, similar

-.44***
-.51***
1.00

1.61
steps were taken to examine the associations between the other three

.56
15
video game engagement measures and individual and relational well-
being, respectively.

-.36***
.53***
To address RQ3 and examine the strength of the associations be­

-.27**
1.00

2.19
.66
tween video game engagement measures collectively with individual

14
and relational well-being, the four engagement measures were simul­
taneously examined in two separate models. To clarify, time spent

-.34***
-.42***
.54***
.53***
playing video games, content rating of favorite game, motivations for

1.00

3.03
2.51
13
play, and social context of play were simultaneously examined in a path

Note. Rel. = Relationship. Social Play % = Ratio of time spent playing with others to total playtime. Mot. = Motivation. Psy. = Psychological. Dep. = Depressive.
model with depressive symptoms, perceived stress, loneliness, and

-.21**
perceived social support as outcomes with associated control variables.

1.00
.11
.03

.03
.06

.42
.34
12
Then, the four engagement measures were simultaneously examined in
another path model utilizing the subset of participants who were in a
romantic relationship to determine associations with relationship

.21**
.22**
-.16*

-.14*
1.00

3.18
.14*

-.05

.79
satisfaction alongside associated control variables. Strength of associa­

11
tion was examined by whether the variables retained significance at the
p < .05 level when examined together. Though the independent vari­

.34***
1.00

4.75
1.22
.14*
.15*
ables are not inherently comparable, standardized beta coefficients

.11y
.12y

-.06
.02
10
provided a common base for comparison.

.53***
.37***
Results

1.00

4.63
1.47
.18*

.17*
-.05

-.05
.11

.04
9

Descriptive statistics and preliminary analyses

.31***
.41***

.39***
.24***
-.18**
.20**

.22**

-.15*
1.00

4.37
1.77
-.09
Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations can be found in
8

Table 3. Missingness analyses were conducted on each outcome vari­

able, and the results indicated that the data were missing completely at
Means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations of control, independent, and dependent variables.

.27***
.46***
.55***
.40***

.18**
random for every outcome except that participants with missing data on
1.00

5.60
.15*
-.07

-.07
.08

.03

.93
7

depressive symptoms reported higher Arousal Motivations for Play, t

(13) = − 2.38, p = .028.
.46***
.25***

.52***
.24***
Regarding control variables, sex was not significantly correlated with
.23**
1.00

3.35
1.39
.13y
.13y

-.05
.10
.05

.09
any outcome variable. Income was significantly correlated with stress (r
6

= − 0.16, p = .021) and loneliness (r = − 0.19, p = .006), such that in­

dividuals with higher incomes reported lower levels of both. Relation­
.39***
.33***

.30***
.53***
.25***
.39***

.22**
1.00

4.20
2.13
.14*
.13y

ship duration was correlated with relationship satisfaction (r = − 0.20, p -.00

.09

.07
5

= .017); those who reported longer relationship duration also reported

lower relationship satisfaction. Correlations between independent and
.22**

.19**
1.00

2.44
1.05
.17*

dependent variables were used to guide the inclusion of covariates in the

-.06

-.06

-.08
-.10
.06

.08

.05

.00
.04
.01
4

path models. For example, because sex was uncorrelated with all
outcome variables, it was not included in any path model as a control.
625.79
631.45
.21**

.23**
.18**
-.13y
1.00

.14*

.15*
.12y

-.03

-.02
.05
.10

.04

.01

.02

Game engagement measures and individual well-being

3

Model fit indices, standardized regression coefficients, significance

-.36***
-.28***

-.21**

-.15*

-.20*
-.13y

values, and effect sizes are presented in Table 4. All models on individual
1.00

9.45
7.24
-.14

-.02
-.08

-.09
-.06
-.13
.08

.00

.07

†p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
2

well-being included income as a control variable and demonstrated good

fit (see Table 4). To answer RQ1, the first four path models were fit. In
.26***

-.19**

the first model, time spent playing games was significantly related to
-.16*

-.16*
-.12y
-.13y
1.00

2.88
1.23
.13y
-.03
-.02

-.11
-.12
-.11

-.11
-.01
-.10

-.09

higher depressive symptoms, β = 0.15, p = .045. The second model

1

indicated that content rating was not significantly associated with any
outcome. The third model suggested that diversion motivation was
Competition Mot.

Rel. Satisfaction
Dep. Symptoms
Challenge Mot.
Content Rating

Diversion Mot.

significantly related to greater depressive symptoms, β = 0.20, p = .009,

Social Support
Psy. Recovery
Social Play %
Fantasy Mot.
Arousal Mot.
Rel. Length
Time Spent

Social Mot.

perceived stress, β = 0.37, p < .001, and loneliness, β = 0.17, p = .048.

Standard Deviation
Loneliness

Additionally, being motivated by fantasy was marginally related to

Income

Stress

greater depressive symptoms, β = 0.13, p = .096. In the fourth path

model, more time spent in social play was significantly related to lower
Variable
Table 3

Mean

loneliness, β = − 0.20, p = .004, and was marginally related to greater

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

depressive symptoms, β = 0.11, p = .096. No independent variables in

5
B. Burke and M. Lucier-Greer
Table 4
Model fit indices, standardized regression coefficients, significance values, and effects sizes for models on individual well-being.
any model were significantly related to perceived social support.
To partially answer RQ3, the fifth model was fit, and all the inde­
pendent variables were included simultaneously. Because content rating
was not significantly related to any outcomes, this predictor was left out
of the fifth model to promote parsimony and preserve power. In this
model, time spent playing video games was no longer significantly
associated with depressive symptoms. However, playing video games for
diversion remained significantly associated with higher depressive
symptoms, β = 0.22, p = .006, and perceived stress, β = 0.38, p < .001,
but not loneliness. Additionally, playing video games for fantasy became
significantly associated with higher depressive symptoms, β = 0.15, p =
.033. Finally, more time spent in social play remained significantly
associated with lower reports of loneliness, β = − 0.18, p = .042, and
became significantly associated with greater depressive symptoms, β =
0.19, p = .024.
6
Computers in Human Behavior Reports 4 (2021) 100136
Game engagement measures and relational well-being
The next four models were fit to address RQ2 and examined rela­
tionship satisfaction as the outcome using the subsample of participants
that indicated they were in romantic relationships (n = 166). These
models included relationship duration as a control variable. The first
model examining time spent playing as an independent variable indi­
cated good fit, χ2 = 0.46(1), p = .498, RMSEA = 0.00, CFI = 1.00, TLI =
1.00. Longer relationship duration was significantly associated with
lower relationship satisfaction (β = − 0.19, p = .016), but time spent
playing was not significantly related to relationship satisfaction (β =
0.04, p = .723). Most of the remaining models demonstrated poor model
fit, and therefore, the regression results were not interpreted. For the
second model using content rating as the independent variable, model fit
was χ2 = 3.38, p = .066, RMSEA = 0.12, CFI = 0.52, TLI = 0.04. The
third model examined associations between motivations for play and
B. Burke and M. Lucier-Greer
relationship satisfaction, and the fit was χ2 = 143.82(17), p = .000,
RMSEA = 0.21, CFI = 0.00, TLI = 0.00. For the fourth model utilizing
the ratio of time spent playing in a social context as the independent
variable; because social context of play was correlated with relationship
length (r = − 0.15, p = .041), these variables were allowed to covary in
the path analysis. As such, the model was fully saturated, and fit could
not be interpreted. Social context of play was not significantly associated
with relationship satisfaction (β = 0.12, p = .371). Finally, to address the
second part of RQ3, the fifth model included all the previous indepen­
dent variables simultaneously (χ2 = 207.67(31), p = .000, RMSEA =
0.19, CFI = 0.00, TLI = 0.00). Because model fit was also poor, the
model was not interpreted.
Discussion
This study expands the scope of knowledge on adult gamers in
several notable ways. First, theoretical perspectives on the associations
between gaming and psychosocial well-being (e.g., Buckley & Anderson,
2006; Ryan et al., 2006) were tested through the direct comparison of a
variety of game engagement measures. Second, several positive and
negative aspects of individual and relational well-being were analyzed
as outcomes to apply a balanced examination of game play. Finally, this
study utilized a community sample of adult gamers, a comparatively
understudied population. The results highlight the importance of using
multiple measures of engagement to better understand the role of
gaming in adult well-being and draw attention to how some measures
more consistently emerged as salient factors, namely diversion and
fantasy motivations for game play and the social context of play.
Notably, both measures reflect and align with the application of basic
psychological needs theory in understanding the relationships between
gaming engagement and well-being, particularly individual well-being.
The importance of examining different measures of game engagement
When examined as the sole measures of game engagement, more time
spent playing was related to greater depressive symptoms. There is evi­
dence that excessive playtime is associated with higher depression
(Maras et al., 2015). However, other studies indicate that problematic or
addictive play, not the actual amount of time spent playing, is related to
depression (Valadez & Ferguson, 2012). More research is needed to
tease apart the related, but distinct, constructs of time spent playing and
addictive game play and their effects on individual well-being.
Interestingly, content rating was not related to any measures of in­
dividual well-being. This seems counter-intuitive given the amount of
public discourse and academic attention given to the topic of violent
content and real life violent or aggressive cognitions, emotions, and
behaviors (for review, see Calvert et al., 2017). It may be that the psy­
chosocial outcomes of the current study do not capture the dimensions
of well-being that are related to video game content (e.g., aggressive
cognitions or affect). However, if video game content is a predictor of
aggression or violence, it is reasonable to suspect that game content
would be related to other predictors of aggression, such as depression (e.
g., Fazel et al., 2015; Ferguson et al., 2009). It is also possible that
gaming content is a more salient factor among adolescent gamers who
are still developing their identity and understanding of the world.
However, the current findings indicate that the content rating of games
may not be as important for examining psychosocial well-being in a
community-sample of adults as other measures of engagement, such as
motivations for play.
When examining motivations for play alone, playing games for
diversion was related to greater depressive symptoms, stress, and lone­
liness. Evidence on procrastination may explain why playing games for
diversion was consistently related to stress and depressive symptoms.
Procrastination is the tendency to avoid tasks that need to be completed
and is often practiced by individuals who feel incompetent, and expe­
rience depression, stress, and poor self-concept (for review, see Flett
7
Computers in Human Behavior Reports 4 (2021) 100136
et al., 1995). Those who deal with depressive symptoms and the
perception that they are incompetent may use video games to divert
themselves from tasks and manage negative emotions. Gaming may be a
particularly effective diversion because they can foster a sense of
accomplishment and competence (Ryan et al., 2006). In this way, games
would serve as an avoidant coping mechanism. However, procrastina­
tion and other avoidance-based coping behaviors are related to increases
in depressive symptoms in adolescents and adults over time (Dunkley
et al., 2006; Seiffge-Krenke & Klessinger, 2000). Applied to the gaming
context, those who play video games for diversion may experience more
depressive symptoms and stress through using games as an
avoidant-coping mechanism. More investigation is needed to test the
relationship between playing games for diversion and psychosocial
well-being by examining avoidant coping as a mediator.
Finally, more social play was related to lower loneliness in gamers.
There is mixed evidence on whether video game play is predictive of
loneliness (Kowert et al., 2014, 2015) and more investigation is needed
to understand the social outcomes of play. However, the current findings
indicate that social context of play and gaming motivations are salient
predictors of psychosocial outcomes, supporting a basic psychological
needs theoretical perspective.
A return to theory: basic psychological needs
When simultaneously examining multiple measures of engagement, only
motivations for play and social context remained significantly associ­
ated with well-being. Playing video games for diversion and fantasy
were related to greater depressive symptoms, playing video games for
diversion was related to greater perceived stress, and more social play
was related to lower loneliness, but greater depressive symptoms. The
explanation for why fantasy motivation was significantly associated
with depressive symptoms may also be related to diversion, procrasti­
nation, and avoidance-based coping. To avoid feelings of incompetence
or fear of failure (Flett et al., 1995), gamers may choose to play games
because they provide a fantasy of competence (Ryan et al., 2006) and
success above what they feel they can accomplish. Although more evi­
dence is needed to understand the relationships between gaming and
individual well-being, these findings more closely align with the
perspective that gaming influences psychosocial outcomes from a basic
psychological needs theoretical lens (Ryan et al., 2006; Przybylski et al.,
2010) rather than the more commonly utilized social learning theory
viewpoint (Bandura 1961; 1963; Buckley & Anderson, 2006).
Basic psychological needs theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000) posits that
psychosocial well-being varies as a function of how well the needs for
competence, autonomy, and relatedness are met. The links between
playing games for diversion from reality and the desire to engage in
fantasy experiences with individual functioning seem to map onto the
basic need of competence, as discussed above. The links between social
play and well-being also seem to support this theoretical perspective
when examining the basic need for relatedness. More social play was
linked with greater depressive symptoms but also lower loneliness,
regardless of the amount of time spent playing overall. These findings
reflect previous research suggesting that social play is associated with
beneficial and detrimental outcomes (e.g., Kowert et al., 2014; Reer &
Krämer, 2014). Regarding the association with lower loneliness, the
augmentation perspective suggests that the distinctions between social
relationships in game and in “real life” are arbitrary and that games
augment opportunities for meaningful social interaction (Shen & Wil­
liams, 2011; Wellman, 2001). Gamers in the current study who spent
more time in social play may have facilitated social interactions, thereby
satisfying the need for relatedness, which could have resulted in lower
loneliness. Therefore, gaming may be related to better well-being in
adults when used in a manner conducive to meeting basic psychological
needs. However, the mixed nature of the current findings suggests that
more investigation is needed to understand the links between social play
and differential psychosocial outcomes.
B. Burke and M. Lucier-Greer
Gaming and relational well-being: the value of relational processes
It should also be noted that most of the models on relational satis­
faction did not fit the data well enough to interpret any results in the
current study. In a study on couples, Coyne et al. (2012) found that
arguments about playtime and content of games mediated the rela­
tionship between time spent playing and couple-level aggression. Family
systems theory (Whitchurch & Constantine, 1993) indicates that indi­
vidual and relational outcomes result from a complex interplay between
a variety of factors, including relational interactions. Therefore, video
game engagement may be associated with relationship quality through
relationship processes (e.g., communication), which were not examined
in the current study. Future work would benefit from collecting dyadic
data on couple processes and game engagement to better understand
how this popular leisure activity is related to relationship satisfaction
and functioning.
Limitations and future directions
Although this study contributes to the literature on gaming and
psychosocial well-being in several notable ways, there are some key
limitations to consider when interpreting the results. First, although the
sample is of an understudied population, a community sample of young-
to-middle aged adult gamers with a relatively equal distribution of men
and women, it is also comparatively small and homogeneous. Most of
the sample was White and well-educated. More research is needed to
understand how gaming is related to well-being in more diverse sam­
ples. Second, though time and content rating were included as game
engagement measures, these measures were not combined to create a
content exposure variable similar to other methodological approaches.
This novel approach was intentionally chosen to compare the unique
associations between different measures of engagement, but it may be
that time and content only predict psychosocial well-being when com­
bined. Future work that includes a composite measure of time and
content alongside measures of motivations and social play may provide
a better contrast of theoretical approaches to understanding gaming and
well-being. Third, the current study is cross-sectional, and as a result,
cannot address causal considerations. Fourth and related to the previous
limitation, though the measure for time spent playing in the current
study does capture nuances about social context and number of play
sessions and length, it is still a retrospective account of playtime. Future
studies would benefit from “real-time” measures (e.g., daily diary
method) to more accurately capture time spent playing games. This type
of measurement method, in combination with a longitudinal design,
would provide more detailed information on the associations between
gaming and well-being over time with a more valid measure of game
engagement.
Implications and conclusion
This study attempted to address several limitations in the gaming
literature to bolster theoretical understanding and practical implica­
tions. One such implication is the need to discuss motivations for play
and social context in adult gamers. Interventions may more effectively
address poor psychosocial well-being in adult gamers by discussing
maladaptive motivations for play, rather than attempting to alter the
time spent playing a game or video game content. Additionally, in­
terventionists may reduce loneliness in adult gamers by encouraging
balanced playtime with “real life” social opportunities or more propor­
tional playtime with friends, family members, and/or romantic partners.
In conclusion, gaming is an incredibly popular leisure activity that
occupies the daily lives of many adolescents and adults (ESA, 2019). As
gaming continues to be an important source for entertainment, leisure,
and social connection, it is vital to understand how games influence
well-being to improve research, interventions, educational programs,
and social discourse around this leisure activity.
8
Computers in Human Behavior Reports 4 (2021) 100136
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
Adachi, P. J. C., & Willoughby, T. (2013). More than just fun and games: The longitudinal
relationships between strategic video games, self-reported problem solving skills,
and academic grades. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(7), 1041–1052. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-9913-9.
Adachi, P. J. C., & Willoughby, T. (2015). From the couch to the sports field: The
longitudinal associations between sports video game play, self-esteem, and
involvement in sports. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 4(4), 329–341. https://
doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000042.
Anguera, J. A., Boccanfuso, J., Rintoul, J. L., Al-Hashimi, O., Faraji, F., Janowich, J.,
Kong, E., Larraburo, Y., Rolle, C., Johnston, E., & Gazzaley, A. (2013). Video game
training enhances cognitive control in older adults. Nature, 501(7465), 97–101.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12486.
Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation
of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63(3), 575–582.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045925.
Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/
h0048687.
Brougham, R. R., Zail, C. M., Mendoza, C. M., & Miller, J. R. (2009). Stress, sex
differences, and coping strategies among college students. Current Psychology, 28(2),
85–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-009-9047-0.
Buckley, K. E., & Anderson, C. A. (2006). A theoretical model of the effects and
consequences of playing video games. In P. Vorderer, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Playing video
games: Motives, responses, and consequences (pp. 363–378). Routledge.
Calvert, S. L., Appelbaum, M., Dodge, K. A., Graham, S., Nagayama Hall, G. C.,
Hamby, S., Fasig-Caldwell, L. G., Citkowicz, M., Galloway, D. P., & Hedges, L. V.
(2017). The American Psychological Association task force assessment of violent
video games: Science in the service of public interest. American Psychologist, 72(2),
126–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040413.
Collins, E., & Freeman, J. (2013). Do problematic and non-problematic video game
players differ in extraversion, trait empathy, social capital and prosocial tendencies?
Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5), 1933–1940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2013.03.002.
Coyne, S. M., Busby, D., Bushman, B. J., Gentile, D. A., Ridge, R., & Stockdale, L. (2012).
Gaming in the game of love: Effects of video games on conflict in couples. Family
Relations, 61(3), 388–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2012.00712.x.
Cudo, A., Kopiś, N., & Zabielska-Mendyk, E. (2019). Personal distress as a mediator
between self-esteem, self-efficacy, loneliness and problematic video gaming in
female and male emerging adult gamers. PloS One, 14(12), Article e0226213.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226213.
DeCamp, W., & Ferguson, C. J. (2017). The impact of degree of exposure to violent video
games, family background, and other factors on youth violence. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 46(2), 388–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0561-8.
Diener, E., Sandvik, E., Seidlitz, L., & Diener, M. (1993). The relationship between
income and subjective well-being: Relative or absolute? Social Indicators Research, 28
(3), 195–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01079018.
Dunkley, D. M., Sanislow, C. A., Grilo, C. M., & McGlashan, T. H. (2006). Perfectionism
and depressive symptoms 3 years later: Negative social interactions, avoidant
coping, and perceived social support as mediators. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 47(2),
106–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2005.06.003.
Entertainment Software Association. (2019). Essential facts about the computer and video
game industry. https://www.theesa.com/esa-research/2019-essential-facts-about-
the-computer-and-video-game-industry/.
Entertainment Software Review Board. (2020). Ratings guide. ESRB. https://www.esrb.
org/ratings-guide/.
Fazel, S., Wolf, A., Chang, Z., Larsson, H., Goodwin, G. M., & Lichtenstein, P. (2015).
Depression and violence: A Swedish population study. The Lancet Psychiatry, 2(3),
224–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(14)00128-X.
Ferguson, C. J., Olson, C. K., Kutner, L. A., & Warner, D. E. (2014). Violent video games,
catharsis seeking, bullying, and delinquency: A multivariate analysis of effects. Crime
& Delinquency, 60(5), 764–784. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128710362201.
Ferguson, C. J., San Miguel, C., & Hartley, R. D. (2009). A multivariate analysis of youth
violence and aggression: The influence of family, peers, depression, and media
violence. The Journal of Pediatrics, 155(6), 904–908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpeds.2009.06.021. e3.
Ferguson, C. J., & Wang, J. C. K. (2019). Aggressive video games are not a risk factor for
future aggression in youth: A longitudinal study. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48
(8), 1439–1451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01069-0.
Flett, G. L., Blankstein, K. R., & Martin, T. R. (1995). Procrastination, negative self-
evaluation, and stress in depression and anxiety. In J. R. Ferrari, J. L. Johnson, &
W. G. McCown (Eds.), Procrastination and task avoidance: Theory, research, and
treatment (pp. 137–167). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0227-6_
7.
Funk, J. L., & Rogge, R. D. (2007). Testing the ruler with item response theory: Increasing
precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the Couples Satisfaction
B. Burke and M. Lucier-Greer
Index. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(4), 572–583. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-
3200.21.4.572.
Griffiths, M. D., Davies, M. N. O., & Chappell, D. (2003). Breaking the stereotype: The
case of online gaming. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 6(1), 81–91. https://doi.org/
10.1089/109493103321167992.
Griffiths, M. D., Davies, M. N. O., & Chappell, D. (2004). Online computer gaming: A
comparison of adolescent and adult gamers. Journal of Adolescence, 27(1), 87–96.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2003.10.007.
Hagström, David, & Kaldo, Viktor (2014). Escapism among players of
MMORPGs—Conceptual clarification, its relation to mental health factors, and
development of a new measure. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17
(1), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0222.
Heiman, J. R., Long, J. S., Smith, S. N., Fisher, W. A., Sand, M. S., & Rosen, R. C. (2011).
Sexual satisfaction and relationship happiness in midlife and older couples in five
countries. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(4), 741–753. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10508-010-9703-3.
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modeling: Guidelines
for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6, 53–60.
Hughes, M. E., Waite, L. J., Hawkley, L. C., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2004). A short scale for
measuring loneliness in large surveys: Results from two population-based studies.
Research on Aging, 26(6), 655–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027504268574.
Irwin, M., Artin, K. H., & Oxman, M. N. (1999). Screening for depression in the older
adult: Criterion validity of the 10-item Center for Epidemiological Studies depression
scale (CES-D). Archives of Internal Medicine, 159(15), 1701–1704. https://doi.org/
10.1001/archinte.159.15.1701.
Jackson, L. A., Witt, E. A., Games, A. I., Fitzgerald, H. E., von Eye, A., & Zhao, Y. (2012).
Information technology use and creativity: Findings from the children and
technology project. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 370–376. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2011.10.006.
Jin, Y., & Li, J. (2017). When newbies and veterans play together: The effect of video
game content, context and experience on cooperation. Computers in Human Behavior,
68, 556–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.059.
Kowert, R., Domahidi, E., Festl, R., & Quandt, T. (2014). Social gaming, lonely life? The
impact of digital game play on adolescents’ social circles. Computers in Human
Behavior, 36, 385–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.003.
Kowert, R., Vogelgesang, J., Festl, R., & Quandt, T. (2015). Psychosocial causes and
consequences of online video game play. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 51–58.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.074.
Lenhart, A., Kahne, J., Middaugh, E., Macgill, A. R., Evans, C., & Vitak, J. (2008). Teens’
gaming experiences are diverse and include significant social interaction and civic
engagement. Pew Internet and American Life Project. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/
ED525058.pdf.
Leung, D. Y., Lam, T., & Chan, S. S. (2010). Three versions of Perceived Stress Scale:
Validation in a sample of Chinese cardiac patients who smoke. BMC Public Health, 10
(1), 513. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-513.
Lopez-Fernandez, O., Williams, A. J., & Kuss, D. J. (2019). Measuring female gaming:
Gamer profile, predictors, prevalence, and characteristics from psychological and
gender perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 898. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2019.0089.
Maras, D., Flament, M. F., Murray, M., Buchholz, A., Henderson, K. A., Obeid, N., &
Goldfield, G. S. (2015). Screen time is associated with depression and anxiety in
Canadian youth. Preventive Medicine, 73, 133–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ypmed.2015.01.029.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Los Angeles,
CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Nie, N. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the internet: Reconciling
conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 420–435. https://doi.org/
10.1177/00027640121957277.
Przybylski, A. K., Deci, E. L., Rigby, C. S., & Ryan, R. M. (2014). Competence-impeding
electronic games and players’ aggressive feelings, thoughts, and behaviors. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(3), 441–457. https://doi.org/10.1037/
a0034820.
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. https://doi.org/
10.1037/a0019440.
Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2019). Violent video game engagement is not
associated with adolescents’ aggressive behaviour: Evidence from a registered
Computers in Human Behavior Reports 4 (2021) 100136
report. Royal Society Open Science, 6(2), 171474. https://doi.org/10.1098/
rsos.171474.
Przybylski, A. K., Weinstein, N., Ryan, R. M., & Rigby, C. S. (2009). Having to versus
wanting to play: Background and consequences of harmonious versus obsessive
engagement in video games. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 12(5), 485–492. https://
doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2009.0083.
Reer, F., & Krämer, N. C. (2014). Underlying factors of social capital acquisition in the
context of online-gaming: Comparing World of Warcraft and Counter-Strike.
Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 179–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2014.03.057.
Reinecke, L. (2009). Games and recovery: The use of video and computer games to
recuperate from stress and strain. Journal of Media Psychology, 21(3), 126–142.
https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105.21.3.126.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55
(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68.
Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S., & Przybylski, A. (2006). The motivational pull of video games:
A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion, 30(4), 344–360.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8.
Seiffge-Krenke, I., & Klessinger, N. (2000). Long-term effects of avoidant coping on
adolescents’ depressive symptoms. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29(6), 617–630.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026440304695.
Shen, C., & Williams, D. (2011). Unpacking time online: Connecting internet and
massively multiplayer online game use with psychosocial well-being. Communication
Research, 38(1), 123–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210377196.
Sherry, J. L., Lucas, K., Greenberg, B. S., & Lachlan, K. (2006). Video game uses and
gratifications as predictors of use and game preference. In P. Vorderer, & J. Bryant
(Eds.), Playing video games: Motives, responses, and consequences (pp. 213–224).
Routledge.
Smyth, J. M. (2007). Beyond self-selection in video game play: An experimental
examination of the consequences of massively multiplayer online role-playing game
play. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 10(5), 717–721. https://doi.org/10.1089/
cpb.2007.9963.
Swing, E. L., Gentile, D. A., Anderson, C. A., & Walsh, D. A. (2010). Television and video
game exposure and the development of attention problems. Pediatrics, 126(2),
214–221. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2009-1508.
Teng, Z., Nie, Q., Guo, C., Zhang, Q., Liu, Y., & Bushman, B. J. (2019). A longitudinal
study of link between exposure to violent video games and aggression in Chinese
adolescents: The mediating role of moral disengagement. Developmental Psychology,
55(1), 184–195. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000624.
Valadez, J. J., & Ferguson, C. J. (2012). Just a game after all: Violent video game
exposure and time spent playing effects on hostile feelings, depression, and
visuospatial cognition. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 608–616. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.006.
Warttig, S. L., Forshaw, M. J., South, J., & White, A. K. (2013). New, normative, English-
sample data for the short form perceived stress scale (PSS-4). Journal of Health
Psychology, 18(12), 1617–1628. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105313508346.
Wellman, B. (2001). Computer networks as social networks. Science, 293(5537),
2031–2034. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1065547.
Whitchurch, G. G., & Constantine, L. L. (1993). Systems theory. In P. G. Boss,
W. J. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of
family theories and methods: A contextual approach (p. 325-352). Plenum Press.
Willoughby, T., Adachi, P. J. C., & Good, M. (2012). A longitudinal study of the
association between violent video game play and aggression among adolescents.
Developmental Psychology, 48(4), 1044–1057. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026046.
Yee, N. (2006). The psychology of massively multi-user online role-playing games:
Motivations, emotional investment, relationships and problematic usage. In
R. Schroeder, & A.-S. Axelsson (Eds.), Avatars at work and play (pp. 187–207).
Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3898-4_9.
Zabriskie, R. B., & McCormick, B. P. (2001). The influences of family leisure patterns on
perceptions of family functioning. Family Relations, 50(3), 281–289. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1741-3729.2001.00281.x.
Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley, G. K. (1988). The multidimensional
scale of perceived social support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30–41.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2.