Section 3 of Pearce’s book focuses on her research methodology and the reasons behind it. She states that the purpose for this chapter was to present her methods for review and to encourage other researchers to do the same. She felt that there was a need for a more open discussion of research methodology. She also explains her use of “crystallization” method rather than “triangulation” (200). She feels that when observing social behavior, it is impossible to assign it a fixed point, and therefore you need to be able to analyze “data from different angles, different subjectivities, and at different scales” (200). She described, in detail, her fieldwork including group interviews, individual interviews, screen shots, and videos. It was interesting to learn that some MMOW’s automatically save chat logs into a file for you. She also explained her need for “native assistance” and how she employed this person in data collection and providing research leads. Pearce explained that her choices regarding methodology had been selected from her examinations of other social behavior studies. She also explained her need to increase her “participant engagement” in order to more fully study and understand the group dynamics.
I found Section 4 to be the most interesting section so far. Pearce begins by writing through (“as”) Artemesia to explain the importance of the avatar to the study of MMOW’s and the groups that inhabit them. She explains that the avatar is not solely created by the individual player, but is, over time, “socially constructed” by the members of the group (216). She also explains that “as the avatar has been socially constructed, so has the person” (216). We are then presented with an “ethnographic memoir” of her experiences “consist{ing} of journal entries taken while the research was under way” (215). The journal entries chronicle some of the more pivotal moments from her fieldwork.
Real World Article= Virtual World Scandal
I was especially interested in two specific events. The first involves the publication of the newspaper article about the group and her research. The journalist, who is not named, writes an offensive article based on one interview and on watching Pearce conduct fieldwork one evening. In this article the journalist describes the group’s activities as “crazy” and the group assumes the comment is a direct quotation or reflection of Pearce’s true feelings. With this in mind, they openly shun Artemesia in-world, and begin a thread in the forum composed almost entirely of “flaming” posts. This immediate and strong reaction is due in part to the protective nature of the players toward their group. Pearce must then regain the trust of the group and uses individual contacts and eventually a post to the group on the forum. This experience requires a major change in her research methods because it exposes the group’s belief that she is not really part of them and that this causes her understanding of them to be skewed. This entire sequence of events was quite intriguing to me. It was interesting to see how the group reacted in a near unanimous and impassioned way. Yet, the players were still willing to give her a chance to explain and tell her side of the story. Gender Representation
The second event that I found most fascinating was the revelation that Raena’s real life avi was a man. After reading accounts of two other “true gender confessions” and hearing Raena’s reactions to them, I was surprised to learn that she was a man in real life. Pearce describes the avatar of Raena as being a normal woman, not overly sexualized (as is common when men create female avatars), and that her voice was feminine. Pearce also describes Raena as her best friend in-world and that she has a hard time seeing her as anything other than a woman. After posting a confession on the forum, which was the new custom, Raena becomes Raenen complete with masculine voice. The description of the difficulty “Steve” had with using a masculine voice in-world surprised me. I had not considered the idea that since his entire experience in these virtual worlds had been as a woman, he would have difficulty representing himself as a man or using his normal masculine voice. The description of this experience clearly illustrates the players’ level of commitment to their avatars. I was also somewhat surprised at the reaction of the group to his confession. Their willingness to support whatever decision he made regarding choice of avatar showed their acceptance of “Steve” in either form. Although all three cross gender representations were the result of different motivations, all of them were accepted and supported.
Discussion Questions
1. Does the use of an opposite gender avatar allow for the player to express less evident aspects of themselves or does it force the creation of a “new” self?
2. Are the intimate relationships created in virtual worlds likely to translate well to the real world?
3. Why is it so much easier to be open and honest in a virtual world, and not in the real world?
No comments:
Post a Comment