Online competitive practice of video games has recently known a significant worldwide expansion. However, this practice can be associated to problematic use and deterioration of quality of life depending on multiple determinants, among which motivation is central. The purpose of this study was to identify motivational clusters and to compare them regarding quality of life, problematic use of video game, and personality traits.
Participants (N = 256) in this cross-sectional study were recruited through specialized websites to complete self-reported questionnaires assessing motivation to play online (MOGQ), personality (BFI-Fr), quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF), and problematic gaming (IGD-Scale). A hierarchical clustering analysis and intergroup comparative analyses were conducted.
Three motivational clusters were identified ("recreational", "competitive" and "escapers"). "Competitive" and "escapers" players reported higher IGD scores than the "recreational" players (p <.001). However, "escapers" players had lower psychological health scores (p <.001), were more neurotic (p <.001), and less extroverted (p <.001) than the others. Based on IGD scores, "competitive" and "escapers" players were considered as problematic albeit only "escapers" exhibited a functional impairment. Therefore, engaged and problematic players cannot be differentiated with IGD scores.
IGD scores were insufficient to differentiate between players at risk of evolution toward pathological states (i.e., "escapers" players) and those whose strong engagement is not detrimental to their quality of life (i.e., "competitive" players). Consequently, considering both psychological health and motivation is necessary to assess the problematic nature of competitive videogame practice. Better definitions and assessment tools are essential in order to avoid over-diagnosis of non-pathological gaming behavior.