I think the two moral dilemmas at the end of the questionnaire aren't really moral dilemmas. All I could think is "who the heck would stand still on a train track? If you're that dumb then you deserve to die".
Sorry, but I just couldn't immerse myself in those "moral dilemmas", so my answers for those two dilemmas will be no good to you as I just filled in whatever I felt like.
I also find your hypothesis which you explain at the end of your survey a bit worrying. It has been proven time and time again that in-game behavior has no correlation or effect on real-world behavior. Violence in games does not translate to violence in real life. This is a known fact, so I don't understand why you expect our in-game choices and in-game morality to be linked to our real-life choices and morality. I for one think I'm a pretty moral and decent human being in real-life, yet I prefer to play a ruthless renegade basterd in Mass Effect.
Games are fun because they allow us to be who we can't be in real-life. They allow us to do things we will never be able to do in real-life. Most people understand this and I expect all people who played renegade in Mass Effect to be people who understand this.
Hey there! Thank you for your feedback!
The cool thing about psychological research is that it takes things we think we know for sure, and then tests them using scientific method. It may sound logical to you that there is no link between real life morality/personality or game morality/personality, but we can't know this for sure until we actually go in and test it. (There are quite a few examples of this in psychology, the Milgram experiment is one of the more well known experiments that proved our human instinct or basic asumptions wrong.)
And maybe there is indeed no link! But we can't say this with certainty until we do research on it (also, beginning research on this topic suggests that there is a link, see for example Klimmt, et al. 2009, however this link is not causal but correlational and complex.)
I also think you may have missed the point that I tried to get across on my debriefing page! I would like to try to explain it further for you.
I never said that video game violence = real life violence. I simply wanted people to take note that a lot of the research on video games has been on that topic, namely whether or not people who play violent video games are more likely to be violent in real life. I want to move my research to a more "positive" or neutral topic, which is game morality (basically what I'm trying to say is that this research is not the average "shooters bad, shooters make people shoot people" clickbait article you see on your local newsite). Therefore, although a lot of the research has been on the link between game violence and real life violence (and you're right, most research says there is not direct causation), the current research wants to move away from that topic and the automatically negative connotation it comes with! Also, it's not because there is no link between games and one topic, that there won't be a link between games and another topic, see first paragraph.
I then also actually really like what you are saying on how you're a morally decent person yet like to play as renegade in ME2. Of course we did not assume that all people who play as renegade are morally "bad" people, rather, we are trying to figure out why some people play as renegades or as paragon (and of course we are assuming that renegades don't actually punch everyone in the face in real life). We are looking at which personality traits predict which moral pathway. Are people who score high on trait agreeableness more likely to play as paragon than renegade, since renegade is the "path less taken" (note, you can be a great person regardless of whether you're high or low on trait agreeableness, so there's no "good" or "bad" person talk involved!)?
We are NOT assuming that people who play as renegade are bad people or morally less than paragon players (this would be a ridiculous assumption, so just so it's clear, that is NOT our point), actually this type of thought leads back to the whole "people who play violent video games are violent in real life" stereotype that I rejected earlier.
And of course video games let us explore different selves than our actual self, so thank you for noting that. That's really the point of our research; do video game selves differ from our real selves (of course they do), in what way, are certain people more likely to explore a certain game self than others, etc ... That's what we are looking at.
The moral dilemmas then, are classic examples used in philosophy and psychology to determine whether or not people hold a utilitarian or deontological viewpoint. I respect that you think they aren't good examples of dilemmas, but they were chosen because of their history and use in previous research and academics, so hopefully that answers that comment 
I hope this was an answer to your comments, let me know if you want to talk about it more. I do apologize for the wall of text but wanted to make sure I was clear!
Retour en haut
