2015
Stenros, Jaakko
Playfulness, play, and games: A constructionist ludology approaches Väitöskirja
Informaatiotutkimus ja interaktiivinen media, Tampereen yliopisto, 2015, ISBN: 978-951-44-9788-9.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Avainsanat: constructionist ludology, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, game, grief play, playfulness
@phdthesis{Stenros2015,
title = {Playfulness, play, and games: A constructionist ludology approaches},
author = {Jaakko Stenros},
url = {https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-44-9788-9},
isbn = {978-951-44-9788-9},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-01-01},
school = {Informaatiotutkimus ja interaktiivinen media, Tampereen yliopisto},
abstract = {This dissertation presents a framework for understanding playfulness, play, and games. The framework presented is developed for the needs of a constructionist ludology, rooted in realist social constructionism. The work is situated in the field of game studies. The contribution of this work is threefold: firstly, it presents a foundational theoretical framework for understanding and separating playfulness, play, and games. Secondly, contributions to mid-level theory as models for understanding social play are presented. Thirdly, with the help of these tools, more practical insights are examined, in three substudies.
The primary contribution in this dissertation is the presented framework. A very wide spectrum of play is considered, from animal play to human play, and from the play of children to the play of adults. The starting point is very inclusive, considering all activities that are performed for their own sake, regardless of how they are culturally valued. Thus the framework tackles ‘good’ and ‘bad’ play: play that is positive and widely considered as desirable, as well as play that is transgressive or destructive. The framework is also used to understand games, both digital and non-digital, in a larger context of play, and there is even room in the framework for enacting play with a goal-oriented mindset. The framework postulates a boundary between play and non-play, but play is not considered to be exceptional or fundamentally detached from everyday life. The framework is not designer-centric, and can handle games both as artefacts and activities.
In the framework playfulness as a mindset and play as an activity are separated. Through these two are connected, and in practice intertwined, analytically they can be separated. Both are rooted in the biology-based tendencies of humans and other animals. The playfulness of humans and other animals is a realist brute fact, but humans are the subject of the more complicated conceptualisations of play and games as they are aided by the awareness of their own playfulness and affected by social construction.
The framework draws together and builds on earlier research. Much of this earlier work has existed in disconnected pieces. Building bridges between game studies and other fields, as well as positioning the current study of games in relation to other research efforts into games and play during the last century, is an important part of this work. The framework presented is an original synthesis that extends and elaborates earlier attempts. The constructionist ludology framework presented provides a theoretical grounding that delimits playfulness, play, and games without disconnecting them from the world around them. The boundaries surrounding play are also untangled. The secondary contribution of the dissertation is the presentation of more specific models relating to social play. One of these is for the categorisation of game playing based on the number of participants. All game playing is to some degree social, even single-player games. Another model is presented for navigating the juxtaposition of mindset and context. This tool shows the usefulness of separating playfulness as a mindset, and playing as a socially recognised activity.
The tertiary contribution takes the form of substudies, which bring the framework and models to bear on three particular topics. Firstly, an analysis of grief play and trolling shows a side of play that is often seen as negative, or even as not-play. The analysis helps explain the creativity and enjoyment of acts of griefing without profiling the participant. Secondly, the challenges faced by gamification and other serious games are reframed in the analysis as stemming from the confusion between game as a cultural artefact, and playfulness as a mindset that need not be connected to it. Thirdly, the challenge of lacking explicit rules of play – as well as having divergent player expectations regarding how to play a game – are analysed in relation to the pervasive game Conspiracy For Good.},
keywords = {constructionist ludology, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, game, grief play, playfulness},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {phdthesis}
}
This dissertation presents a framework for understanding playfulness, play, and games. The framework presented is developed for the needs of a constructionist ludology, rooted in realist social constructionism. The work is situated in the field of game studies. The contribution of this work is threefold: firstly, it presents a foundational theoretical framework for understanding and separating playfulness, play, and games. Secondly, contributions to mid-level theory as models for understanding social play are presented. Thirdly, with the help of these tools, more practical insights are examined, in three substudies.
The primary contribution in this dissertation is the presented framework. A very wide spectrum of play is considered, from animal play to human play, and from the play of children to the play of adults. The starting point is very inclusive, considering all activities that are performed for their own sake, regardless of how they are culturally valued. Thus the framework tackles ‘good’ and ‘bad’ play: play that is positive and widely considered as desirable, as well as play that is transgressive or destructive. The framework is also used to understand games, both digital and non-digital, in a larger context of play, and there is even room in the framework for enacting play with a goal-oriented mindset. The framework postulates a boundary between play and non-play, but play is not considered to be exceptional or fundamentally detached from everyday life. The framework is not designer-centric, and can handle games both as artefacts and activities.
In the framework playfulness as a mindset and play as an activity are separated. Through these two are connected, and in practice intertwined, analytically they can be separated. Both are rooted in the biology-based tendencies of humans and other animals. The playfulness of humans and other animals is a realist brute fact, but humans are the subject of the more complicated conceptualisations of play and games as they are aided by the awareness of their own playfulness and affected by social construction.
The framework draws together and builds on earlier research. Much of this earlier work has existed in disconnected pieces. Building bridges between game studies and other fields, as well as positioning the current study of games in relation to other research efforts into games and play during the last century, is an important part of this work. The framework presented is an original synthesis that extends and elaborates earlier attempts. The constructionist ludology framework presented provides a theoretical grounding that delimits playfulness, play, and games without disconnecting them from the world around them. The boundaries surrounding play are also untangled. The secondary contribution of the dissertation is the presentation of more specific models relating to social play. One of these is for the categorisation of game playing based on the number of participants. All game playing is to some degree social, even single-player games. Another model is presented for navigating the juxtaposition of mindset and context. This tool shows the usefulness of separating playfulness as a mindset, and playing as a socially recognised activity.
The tertiary contribution takes the form of substudies, which bring the framework and models to bear on three particular topics. Firstly, an analysis of grief play and trolling shows a side of play that is often seen as negative, or even as not-play. The analysis helps explain the creativity and enjoyment of acts of griefing without profiling the participant. Secondly, the challenges faced by gamification and other serious games are reframed in the analysis as stemming from the confusion between game as a cultural artefact, and playfulness as a mindset that need not be connected to it. Thirdly, the challenge of lacking explicit rules of play – as well as having divergent player expectations regarding how to play a game – are analysed in relation to the pervasive game Conspiracy For Good.
The primary contribution in this dissertation is the presented framework. A very wide spectrum of play is considered, from animal play to human play, and from the play of children to the play of adults. The starting point is very inclusive, considering all activities that are performed for their own sake, regardless of how they are culturally valued. Thus the framework tackles ‘good’ and ‘bad’ play: play that is positive and widely considered as desirable, as well as play that is transgressive or destructive. The framework is also used to understand games, both digital and non-digital, in a larger context of play, and there is even room in the framework for enacting play with a goal-oriented mindset. The framework postulates a boundary between play and non-play, but play is not considered to be exceptional or fundamentally detached from everyday life. The framework is not designer-centric, and can handle games both as artefacts and activities.
In the framework playfulness as a mindset and play as an activity are separated. Through these two are connected, and in practice intertwined, analytically they can be separated. Both are rooted in the biology-based tendencies of humans and other animals. The playfulness of humans and other animals is a realist brute fact, but humans are the subject of the more complicated conceptualisations of play and games as they are aided by the awareness of their own playfulness and affected by social construction.
The framework draws together and builds on earlier research. Much of this earlier work has existed in disconnected pieces. Building bridges between game studies and other fields, as well as positioning the current study of games in relation to other research efforts into games and play during the last century, is an important part of this work. The framework presented is an original synthesis that extends and elaborates earlier attempts. The constructionist ludology framework presented provides a theoretical grounding that delimits playfulness, play, and games without disconnecting them from the world around them. The boundaries surrounding play are also untangled. The secondary contribution of the dissertation is the presentation of more specific models relating to social play. One of these is for the categorisation of game playing based on the number of participants. All game playing is to some degree social, even single-player games. Another model is presented for navigating the juxtaposition of mindset and context. This tool shows the usefulness of separating playfulness as a mindset, and playing as a socially recognised activity.
The tertiary contribution takes the form of substudies, which bring the framework and models to bear on three particular topics. Firstly, an analysis of grief play and trolling shows a side of play that is often seen as negative, or even as not-play. The analysis helps explain the creativity and enjoyment of acts of griefing without profiling the participant. Secondly, the challenges faced by gamification and other serious games are reframed in the analysis as stemming from the confusion between game as a cultural artefact, and playfulness as a mindset that need not be connected to it. Thirdly, the challenge of lacking explicit rules of play – as well as having divergent player expectations regarding how to play a game – are analysed in relation to the pervasive game Conspiracy For Good.