In Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for
The Comprehensive Examinations for
The Department of
Psycho-educational Processes
Temple University
Committee Members:
Dr. J. Allender & Dr. Larry Krafft
03/21/95
1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1.
2. Statement Of Purpose ............................................................................................................ 5.
3. The Psycho/Social Aspect of the MU*: A General Context ......................................................... 5.
4. Psycho/Social Phenomena In MU* Environments: Specific Findings ............................................. 8.
Disinhibition ................................................................................................................. 8.5. Conclusions And Implications .................................................................................................. 14.Gender Differences ....................................................................................................... 9.
Gender Swapping ......................................................................................................... 10.
Multiple Identities ......................................................................................................... 11.
MU* Addiction .............................................................................................................. 12.
Friendliness .................................................................................................................. 12.
6. Glossary Of Terms .................................................................................................................. 18.
7. Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 21.
The evolution of humanity can be viewed in terms of its invention and sociological assimilation of new technologies (Burke, 1985). The most overtly influential technological advances seem to be those that directly effect our means of communication (Bagdikian, 1983; Cutler, 1994). Indeed, one does not have to possess a Ph.D. in the social sciences to recognize the magnitude of psychological and sociological change that has been brought about by inventions such as radio, television, and the VCR. In many ways we are a telecommunications culture (Anderson, 1990).
At this point in history, it appears that we are again about to embrace a new and globally pervasive information technology; one that can be considered as a quantum leap beyond its predecessors in many respects. This new technology comes in the form of an international computing/telecommunications network known as the INTERNET, and it may potentially have as significant an impact upon human culture as did the invention of the printing press (Dertouzos, 1991; Stock, 1993).
The precursor to the INTERNET was created in 1969 by an arm of the Defense Department called the Defense Advanced Research Program Agency (DARPA). This computer network, which eventually came to be known as ARPANET, was primarily designed as a means for Defense-sponsered researchers to operate different computers at a distance (Rheingold, 1993; Cantor & Siegal, 1994); the computer conferencing capabilities and subsequent social aspects of the network emerged as a byproduct of its operation (Rheingold, 1993; Metz, 1994). The network was purposefully intended to be decentralized so that, in the event of a nuclear attack, it would be practically impossible to shut down (Rheingold, 1993; LaQuey & Ryer, 1993). It is due to this design that the present day INTERNET is said to be beyond the control of any particular agency; no one has the power to censor or shut down its operation (Rheingold, 1993; Elmer-Dewitt, 1994).
Initially there were only four sites connected via the network. By 1971 there were about 24, and by 1981 there were more than 200 sites on-line (LaQuey & Ryer, 1993; Bordia, 1994). Today it is estimated that there are over 30 million people connected to the INTERNET, with usage increasing approximately 10% per month, and the number of new applications and services growing almost as quickly (LaQuay & Ryer, 1993). Along with this explosion there is emerging a new set of subcultural phenomena which is loosely referred to as cyberculture (Rucker, Sirius & Mu, 1992; Elmer-Dewitt, 1993; Hamit, 1993; Barlow, 1995). Though some research has been conducted concerning the nature of this emergent culture, the main stream of social scientists has paid it little attention, or failed to notice its arrival altogether (Roush, 1993; Rheingold, 1993). Most of the existing literature centers on issues pertaining to computer conferencing (Metz, 1994; Bordia 1994; Brown, 1995). However, computer conferencing is merely one aspect of computer mediated communication (CMC). One such neglected domain of CMC, though argued by some to be the most indicative of cyberculture (Bruckman, 1992; Carlstrom, 1992; Roush, 1993; Cherney, 1994, Reid, 1994, Snell, 1994, Odegard, 1995) is that known as the Multi-User Dimension (MUD).
A MUD is a network-accessable, multi-participant, user-extensible virtual reality which is primarily text-based ( Bruckman, 1992; Curtis, 1993, Cassidy, 1994). Typically, the term "virtual reality" refers to computer simulated environments which possess varying degrees of audio/visual interface, and although some experimental MUDs do offer AV components, this form of virtual reality is essentially text-based. As Elizabeth Reid describes:
Using a MUD does not require any of the paraphernalia commonly associated with virtual reality. There is no special hardware to sense the position and orientation of the user's real-world body, and no special clothes allowing users to see the virtual world through goggles and touch it through 'datagloves'...... Instead of using sophisticated tools to see, touch and hear the virtual environment, users of MUD systems are presented with textual descriptions of virtual locations. Technically, a MUD software program consists of a database of 'rooms', 'exits' and other objects. The program accepts connections from users on a computer network, and provides each user with access to that database.... Within each of these systems users can interact with each other and with the virtual environment which the MUD presents to them. (Reid, 1994)
The name "MUD" first appeared in 1978 when a student named Roy Trubshaw at the University of Essex, England, created a program that he called a "Multi-User Dungeon" (Reid, 1994). It was a multi-user adventure game loosely based upon the popular game known as "Dungeons and Dragons". In this fantasy adventure, players were encouraged to compete with each other for points by going on quests to slay monsters or find treasure. All players started out on an equal footing, but after having accumulated a certain number of points a player could advance his rank, thus granting him access to new and greater powers. This eventually lead to a sort of social hierarchy which spanned from "Newbies" (new players) though various intermediate levels, and culminating in attainment of the title "Wizard", with all the special powers and privileges of such rank.
From this fantasy-adventure based beginning, MUDs have since proliferated and diversified so that at present one can find hundreds of MUDs throughout the INTERNET, many of which have been put to uses other than merely recreation. To reflect this evolution, the acronym MUD has come to stand for Multi-User Dimension or Multi-User Domain as well as the original Multi-User Dungeon. Additionally, the term MUD has recently differentiated into various sub-types such as MOO, MUSH, MUSE, MUCK, DUM, etc.... Each of these acronyms is intended to indicate, though with quite a degree of overlap, the multiple environmental conditions and purposes of each community (Carlstrom, 1992; Rosenburg, 1992; Reid, 1994). The abbreviation "MU*" is often used as an overarching reference indicating all such virtual environments (Bruckman, 1992).
One virtual space, created by Amy Bruckman of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab, is called the MediaMOO (MOO designating MUD-Object Oriented). This environment provides a virtual meeting place for students and academics working in the area of media and communications. Community members are encouraged to build onto this virtual world by creating new objects, rooms, and features via a MOO programming language (Bruckman, 1992).
Another example of creative use of the MU* concept is the very popular LamdaMOO maintained by Xerox corporation. It is a social MU* organized around the metaphor of a large, rambling house (Bruckman, 1992). Its uses are as varied as that of any large social space, with members engaging in activities such as poetry readings, support groups, chess matches, and even virtual sex (Curtis, 1993).
Other MU* environments have been created to serve such diverse purposes and populations as: NASA/JPL astronomers (Astro-VR), biology researchers (BioMOO), K-12 student education (MicroMUSE), virtual university campus (DU-MOO), star trek fantasy role playing (TrekMUSE), literary and cultural theorists (PmcMOO), and hundreds of others. At present, the number of and potential uses for MU*s appears to be far from exhausted. Though exact statistics concerning the number of existing MU*s and MU* populations are unavailable, it is estimated that the current number of sites is between 200 and 300, with a population that seems to be growing exponentially (Rheingold, 1993; Burka, 1993).
It is this researcher's opinion, as well as the opinion of many that are intimately involved with the evolution of the INTERNET, that MU*s constitute a rapidly growing and increasingly vital aspect of cybercultural phenomena. The purpose of this paper is to to review the literature pertaining to the psychological and social aspects of MU*s in an attempt to ascertain the current state of knowledge on this subject and hopefully determine some possibilities for new research directions.
As stated previously, not all MU*s are alike, but they do share certain overarching characteristics. Before delving into the specific psycho/social issues pertaining to these environments, It may be useful to first attempt a clarification of the context in which such phenomena occur.
It is generally speculated that computers and computer networks will transform (are transforming) the ways in which society functions (Burke, 1985; Brand, 1987; Dertouzos, 1991, Wilson, 1992; Miller, 1992). These changes are occurring on multiple levels, effecting our modes of production (Canter & Siegal, 1994; Cortese, Verity, Mitchell & Brandt, 1995), our modes of learning, (Ehlers, 1994; Kinslow & Sempsey, 1995), and even the ways in which we socialize (Rheingold, 1993; Kennedy, 1994). There is even evidence to suggest that use of interactive multimedia actually alters ones neurological configuration (Gardner, 1985; Simpson, 1994), and a preliminary draft of the DSM-V includes a section delineating newly emerging "Cyber Disorders" (Zenhausen, 1995). All of this becomes pertinent to the study of MU*s when one considers the unique situation in which MU* occupants find themselves. They are literally in two places at once, the "real-world" and the "virtual world". Where the boundaries and influences of one begins and the other ends is not at all clear cut. As Elizabeth Reid reports:
Within this ambivalent virtual space, notions of human identity and existence are problematised. MUD characters have no actuality, only virtuality. They are never immutable. MUD characters are not fixed, and they are always in the process of redefinition. They are cyborgs - entities made up of ones and zeroes and imagination, without bodies and without physical restrictions in the virtuality they inhabit. ....The objects in MUD universes are treated as if they had the properties of the everyday counterparts. Houses are lived in, roses are smelt, food can be eaten and other players can be kissed. ...Such technology is a device which mediates between the physical and the imagined. It is an interface between the imagined world and the world of the body. ...It is in the spaces between the body and the self that cyborgs exist (Reid, 1994).To further complicate matters, there are often great distinctions between various MU* environments. In the real-world one does have to contend with different types of social and environmental conditions to an extent, but at least one can be fairly certain of a multitude of constants (for instance, there are no dragons in the real-world and the laws of gravity are always in effect). But as Eve-Lise Carlstrom points out:
...on entering a new MUD for the first time, it is reasonable to ask about what commands can be used, how objects are defined, what one can change about one's character, etc. This is roughly equivalent to arriving in a new country and inquiring about the laws of physics. It is commonly said that speakers of a language construct reality by doing so. In a MUD it is literally true that "reality" is created through language both by the actions of the players and through the code used by the programmers (Carlstrom, 1992).However, there are certain characteristics of MU*s that can be said to remain constant and help to distinguish them from both real-life and other forms of computer simulations. Pavel Curtis has identified three major factors that help to clarify the differences between MU*s and Adventure-style computer games:
1) A MUD is not goal oriented; it has no beginning or end, no 'score', and no notion of 'winning' or 'success'. In short, even though users of MUDs are are commonly called players, a MUD really isn't a game at all.2) A MUD is extensible from within; a user can add new objects to the database such as rooms, exits, 'things', and notes. Certain MUDs, including the one I run, even support an embedded programming language in which a user can describe whole new kinds of behavior for the objects they create.
3) A MUD generally has more than one user connected at a time. All of the connected users are browsing and manipulating the same database and can encounter the new objects created by others. The multiple users on a MUD can communicate with each other in real time (Curtis, 1993).
Concerning the factors which are unique to MU* environments - as opposed to real life - the following can be said to be generally characteristic of them all:
1) They are primarily text-based. Although some MU*s contain a certain degree of visual elements (such as ASCII maps) and a very few support some form of graphic user interface, they are all more or less dependent upon the written word (Bruckman, 1992; Curtis, 1993; Barret & Wallace, 1994).2) There is no physicality in a MU*. One may possess a virtual body, but it and everything else in the MU* exists as a mere description (Sepentelli, 1993; Escobar, 1994).
3) The proximics are undetermined. Due to the lack of physicality, there can be no true spacing of characters in a MU* room. Everyone is simply present, and there can be no limit to the number of people inside of a given space. Proximics may however, be implied by the use of emote commands (e.g. Fred sits next to Joe) or through use of furniture or other objects (e.g. Fred stands on the coffee table) (Carlstrom, 1992).
4) Users can indulge in multiple yet simultaneous activities and conversations. Due to the nature of the medium there is a varying amount of lag time between player's responses. Therefore, they will often indulge in, and be able to keep track of several separate conversations at a time without the confusion and noise that would normally result from such activity in the real world (Carlstrom, 1992; Curtis, 1993).
The above list is not meant to be exhaustive; there are many more distinctions to be made between MU* and real life environments. Likewise, it can be said that MU*s share many more characteristics than those I've identified. However, this list should serve as a framework within which to consider the more detailed findings concerning the psycho/social aspects of MU*s.