IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0293583.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Individual differences in cooperative and competitive play strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Theresa C Hauge
  • Daniel P Ferris
  • Rachael D Seidler

Abstract

Introduction: Cooperation and competition are common in social interactions. It is not clear how individual differences in personality may predict performance strategies under these two contexts. We evaluated whether instructions to play cooperatively and competitively would differentially affect dyads playing a Pong video game. We hypothesized that instructions to play cooperatively would result in lower overall points scored and differences in paddle control kinematics relative to when participants were instructed to play competitively. We also predicted that higher scores in prosociality and Sportspersonship would be related to better performance during cooperative than competitive conditions. Methods: Pairs of participants played a Pong video game under cooperative and competitive instructions. During competitive trials, participants were instructed to score more points against one another to win the game. During the cooperative trials, participants were instructed to work together to score as few points against one another as possible. After game play, each participant completed surveys so we could measure their trait prosociality and Sportspersonship. Results: Condition was a significant predictor of where along the paddle participants hit the ball, which controlled ball exit angles. Specifically, during cooperation participants concentrated ball contacts on the paddle towards the center to produce more consistent rebound angles. We found a significant correlation of Sex and the average points scored by participants during cooperative games, competitive games, and across all trials. Sex was also significantly correlated with paddle kinematics during cooperative games. The overall scores on the prosociality and Sportspersonship surveys were not significantly correlated with the performance outcomes in cooperative and competitive games. The dimension of prosociality assessing empathic concern was significantly correlated with performance outcomes during cooperative video game play. Discussion: No Sportspersonship survey score was able to predict cooperative or competitive game performance, suggesting that Sportspersonship personality assessments are not reliable predictors of cooperative or competitive behaviors translated to a virtual game setting. Survey items and dimensions probing broader empathic concern may be more effective predictors of cooperative and competitive performance during interactive video game play. Further testing is encouraged to assess the efficacy of prosocial personality traits as predictors of cooperative and competitive video game behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Theresa C Hauge & Daniel P Ferris & Rachael D Seidler, 2023. "Individual differences in cooperative and competitive play strategies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(11), pages 1-23, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0293583
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293583
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0293583
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0293583&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0293583?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0293583. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.