International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction

ISSN: 1044-7318 (Print) 1532-7590 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hihc20

Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer

Game Narrative

Hua Qin , Pei-Luen Patrick Rau & Gavriel Salvendy

To cite this article: Hua Qin , Pei-Luen Patrick Rau & Gavriel Salvendy (2009) Measuring Player
Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative, International Journal of Human-Computer
Interaction, 25:2, 107-133, DOI: 10.1080/10447310802546732

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10447310802546732

Published online: 05 Feb 2009.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 918

View related articles

Citing articles: 33 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hihc20

Download by: [Tsinghua University] Date: 17 February 2016, At: 22:58

 INTL. JOURNAL OF HUMAN–COMPUTER INTERACTION, 25(2), 107–133, 2009
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1044-7318 print / 1532-7590 online
DOI: 10.1080/10447310802546732

Measuring Player Immersion

1532-7590
1044-7318
HIHC
Intl. Journal of Human–Computer Interaction,
Interaction Vol. 25, No. 1, December 2008: pp. 1–59

in the Computer Game Narrative

Qin, Rau, and
Measuring Salvendy
Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative

Hua Qin1, Pei-Luen Patrick Rau1, and Gavriel Salvendy1,2

1
Department of Industrial Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
2
School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

In order to measure player immersion in the computer game narrative, this study
explores and analyzes factors of the computer game narrative that influence players
who are immersed in the game story world. Originally a questionnaire consisting of
six dimensions—Curiosity, Concentration, Challenge, Control, Comprehension, and
Empathy—was proposed. To evaluate the questionnaire, two surveys were con-
ducted on the Internet, and data were collected from 734 respondents. After explor-
atory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis, the dimensions were modified
to Curiosity, Concentration, Challenge and Skills, Control, Comprehension, Empathy,
and Familiarity.

1. INTRODUCTION

The computer game industry is growing and expanding presently. The industry
now rivals even the movie and recording industries in the United States based on
sales in recent years (Entertainment Software Association [ESA], 2006; Motion
Picture Association of America [MPAA], 2006; Recording Industry Association of
America [RIAA], 2006). With the development of computer games, genres are
diverse, and many popular games are based on the stories. Without narrative, the
existence of the game world and characters is meaningless (Taylor, 2002).
Computer games are developing toward more exciting game play and more fasci-
nating stories.
Narrative is the basis or framework for the computer games. Narrative puts the
games into a logical series. Unlike traditional stories, game stories have their own
unique characteristics. The first characteristic is interactivity; the players are able
to interact with the stories. Second, the structure of the computer game narrative
is nonlinear and is usually not fixed. Another characteristic is that the game play
is set in the progress of the story. In contrast, traditional narratives involving nov-
els, movies, or television are linear and fixed. Nearly all of those stories are
designed by authors. The audience scarcely ever interacts with stories unlike

Correspondence should be addressed to Hua Qin Department of Industrial Engineering, Tsinghua

University, Beijing 100084, China. E-mail: qinh03@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn
 108 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

players exploring stories actively. And traditional narratives commonly involve

stories without other elements like game narrative used for computer games.
Therefore, the two kinds of narrative are significantly different in structure, pre-
sentation style of stories, and area of narrative. Thus, most measurements for tradi-
tional narrative are not adequate for analyzing the computer game narrative.
Measurements for usability, enjoyment, or playability (Clanton, 1998; Desurvire,
Caplan, & Toth, 2004; Federoff, 2002; Sweetser & Wyeth, 2005) of games can eval-
uate mechanics, game play, and performance. However, for game narrative, most
measurements paid little attention to the new characteristics like interactivity.
Plus, these studies only slightly systematically evaluated the player’s perception
of game narrative. And yet the narrative as a framework for computer games
needs a systematic model for measurement. This study uses immersion as the
structural foundation for synthesizing items forming the game narrative litera-
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

ture into a model of player experience.

The aim of this study was to explore and analyze factors of the computer game
narrative influencing player immersion into the game story world. The method
involves refining and extending the elements of immersion in the computer game
narrative based on the immersion, user experience, and narrative literature.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The general distinction between a computer game and a video game is that a com-
puter game is played on a personal computer and a video game is played on a
computer or another console. However, the terms video games and computer games
are usually used interchangeably because in both the game is viewed through a
screen and an input device such as a joystick, keyboard, or a keypad is used to
play (Kirriemuir, 2002).
At present, computer games are generally and popularly categorized into vari-
ous genres (Table 1). These genres are classified according to the content of the
games (Apperley, 2006; Wolf, 2001).

2.1. Narrative of Computer Games

Stories have long been used as structures to give order and meaning to the world
(Neitzel, 2005), not only in literature but also in films, drama, history, and even
painting. Some researchers merely take stories at their face value, but other
researchers define the narrative as the methods by which a story is demonstrated
to an audience (see Table 2).
As for the narrative of computer games, some studies assume that linear and
fixed structures are characteristic of a narrative, so they believe that the term nar-
rative is not appropriate to describe the stories that are followed in computer
games (Juul, 1999). One reason is that the framework of the games is interactive. A
linear structure would limit the player’s freedom of action and control. Of course,
the fixed structure of the narrative also conflicts with the concept of interactivity.
Prewritten stories also restrict the players in their control of the development of
the game story (Heibach, 1999). Majewski (2003) considers that the narrative was
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 109

Table 1: Genres of Computer Games

Genres Description Extension Examples

Action Action games are char- Fighting Soul Edge and Soul Calibur
acterized by an Brawler Double Dragon; Final Fight
emphasis on actions First-person Doom; Metal Gear Solid
that the player must shooter (FPS)
perform in real time Action adventure Legend of Zelda series
Role These types of games Role-playing Baldur’s Gate; Dungeon
playing often place the player games (RPGs) Siege; The Legend of
in a prewritten Swordman Fairy; Sword
storyline. Most of Emperor Xuanyuan
of these games Massively multi- EverQuest; Final Fantasy
have the player player online XI; Lineage; World of
acting a role role-playing games Warcraft
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

(MMORPGs)
Simulation Simulators Simulators are often Flight Falcon 4.0
serious simulators Military Abrams; Silent Hunter
Space Free Space; Orbiter
Train Microsoft Train Simulator
Directorial These games often Economic Railroad Tycoon; SimCity
games do not have goals simulation games
requiring players
to win the games
God games The Sims; SimAnt,
SimEarth
Sports Sports games often Football Manager;
emulate traditional Championship Man-
physical sports ager; Winning Eleven
Racing Racing games often The Dakar Rally;
place the player in Need for Speed; GT
the driver’s seat and
allow them to race
against other drivers
Strategy Strategy games often Strategy war games; StarCraft; Sid Meier’s
emphasize the Civilization
resources of Real-time strategy Age of Empires; Heroes
planning and and turn-based of Might and Magic;
management in strategy games; Sangokushi
order to win the Real-time tactical Warhammer: Dark Omen;
games and turn-based Total War
tactical games

not adapted to all genres of games. For example, fighting games have nearly no
narrative; the story merely consists of a series of bouts strung together to progress
toward an ultimate goal. However, they think that some other genres are depen-
dent on narrative, such as first person shooter (FPS) games, role-playing games
(RPGs), and adventure games. Danskey (2006) considers that there are some
errors in these concepts. These kinds of definitions attempt to reduce the narrative
to the story alone. Danskey (2006) believes that what happens in the game is
the heart of the game narrative. Through the player’s performance and as designers
 110 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

Table 2: Definition of Narrative

Definition Reference

A movement from equilibrium through Todorov (1977)

disequilibrium to a new equilibrium
A communication conduit, and as a particular Bordwell (1985)
representation, structure, and process
A form centering on conflict and trouble Bruner and Lucariello (1989)
The interaction of action, character, conflict, and genre Bielenberg and Carpenter-Smith (1997)
A chain of events in cause–effect relationship Bordwell and Thompson (2001)
occurring in time and space
The methods by which the story materials Danskey (2006)
are demonstrated to the audience.
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

advance the challenges in the game, players create stories. In any case, currently
most available computer games do have some form of narrative.
In this study, the computer game narrative is defined as the methods or styles
used to tell the story of the game. The story includes the plots prewritten by game
writers and developers and created by players in the course of playing the games.
However, as the games form a storyline, the player’s perception and construction
are principal. Therefore, how to narrate a game that can easily be understood by
the players is vital. Although narrative is not a new field, and has long existed in
literature, theater, movies, and oral storytelling, computer game researchers focus
more on technological capabilities. There has been almost no systematic research
evaluating players’ perceptions of the story in computer games. Additionally, this
study did not investigate simple rule narrative games such as board and card
games, mah-jong, and Zuma.

2.2. Characteristics of Computer Game Narrative

Although computer games share some of the characteristics of narrative (character,

plot, setting, events) like traditional media, they are essentially different. The rea-
son is that a game narrative is not based on representation but on simulation
(Frasca, 2000). The aim of computer game narrative is not only to tell something
to the players but also to provide an environment for play. The players actively
participate in the games to explore and construct the stories. Therefore, the players
not only are readers but are also performers and narrators (Majewski, 2003). The
following describes the unique characteristics of the computer game narrative.

Interactivity. Novels, traditional movies, and teleplays are media that are
received passively by the audience. However, computer games are extremely dif-
ferent from these media; they are about player choice and action.
A computer game often deliberately hides certain pieces of information in
order to arouse the player’s curiosity. In order to find the answers, players will be
eager to explore the unknown parts of the game. Therefore, interactivity is a key
dimension of the computer game narrative. The interactivity includes two
aspects. One aspect is that a primary concern in interactive narrative theory is a
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 111

player’s intervention in the progress and outcome of a story. First, the players,
acting as lead characters by communicating with the other characters in the game
world, driving and constructing the whole story. Second, by selecting one of the
solutions for the difficulties of a prewritten narrative, players can control what
happens in the future game world, which means the game has several solutions to
the difficulties. In some kinds of games, such as The Sims and Football Manager,
players even create part of the details of the storyline. Another aspect is that the
players interact with other players in games like massively multiplayer online
role-playing games (MMORPGs) and sports-based computer games. MMORPG
interactions take place via text chat. Usually there are three main chat modes. The
first type is speaking to every player in the game, which means that any player
can see the typed words in the chat window. In the second type, the messages are
sent from one player to another player. The sentences are visible only to the two
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

parties. In the last type, the messages are sent to a subset of players who have
grouped together. Another interaction among players happens through character
trait modification in the game interface.
For players, interaction is a form of participating actively in the narrative. But
these interactions with the game make the whole story become discrete. Salen and
Zimmerman (2004) found that goals, conflict, and the uncertainty of games help
players comprehend the narrative completely. The goals of a game not only help
players find their position in the game but also guide them in understanding the
significance of their actions within a narrative context. When goals are well
designed, they will help players to continuously and consistently comprehend the
narrative. The conflicts provide both the opportunity for narrative events and
narrative contexts. When players overcome these obstacles, they are not only the
audience but the narrators. Salen and Zimmerman (2004) consider that uncer-
tainty is also a narrative concept, for the element of the unknown infuses a game
with dramatic tension. The player’s attitude to the uncertainty affects the trajectory
of a game’s narrative arc.

Structure. According to the conflict-driven model analysis, the game is con-

structed by recursive conflict (Lindley, 2002). For the game players, the game is
composed of continual information, increasingly difficult challenges, fights, puzzles
and decisions, and compounding rewards. In terms of story construction, the
story develops along with the story arc, which is the curve described by the intensity
of the action (Danskey, 2006).
Salen and Zimmerman (2004) identified two broad structures for understanding
the narrative components of a game: the embedded narrative and the emergent
narrative. The embedded narrative is pregenerated narrative content that exists
prior to a player’s interaction with the game. Players experience embedded narra-
tive as context. Emergent narrative arises from the set of rules governing interac-
tion with the game system. This kind of narrative emphasizes the ways that
players interact with a game system to produce a narrative experience unique to
each player. Common digital game design combines embedded and emergent nar-
rative, for which the larger narrative frame is pregenerated. However, most of the
moment-to-moment game outcomes are determined through emergent means.
 112 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

Majewski (2003) summarized four basic models for narrative structure. In the
first model, the player goes through a series of preset events. Between these major
events, the players have freedom to make decisions (Jensen, 2000). In the second
model, the games have a multiplicity of paths, each branching to a different expe-
rience with a possible different conclusion. In this type of structure, the players
experience short, linear story segments. At the end of each segment are small
number choices, each leading to a new linear segment. Sometimes the pathways
go to the same end; other times the ends are different. This kind of narrative
unfolds during the time the game is played. The third type of model emphasizes
the central storyline, and the narrative is fragmented into subplots. The players
have freedom, to some degree, to move from one subplot to another. In this kind
of model, the narrative unfolds spatially. The fourth is an unstructured narrative,
which is generated in the course of playing the games. The players are not only
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

taking on the role of a character within the story but have control over and create
the story.

2.3. Immersion

Involvement in media such as novels, movies, computer games, and virtual real-
ity has been described as an experience of feeling deeply engaged with the
medium. In the research of those fields, many terms have been developed to try to
account for these experiences, such as flow, cognitive absorption (CA), presence, and
immersion (Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000; Brown & Cairns, 2004; Csikszentmihalyi,
1990; McMahan, 2003; Strauss & Corbin, 1998; Witmer & Singer, 1998). Before
accounting for immersion, flow, CA, and presence, these terms are explained
briefly below.
In 1975, Csikszentmihalyi proposed the term flow to express optimal experience
events. Flow describes a state of total absorption or engagement in an activity (Pace,
2004). People in a flow state become absorbed in the activities, and irrelevant
thoughts and perceptions are excluded. The person’s inner experience is occupied
by a sense of discovery (Chen, Wigand, & Nilan 1998). Researchers have studied
the flow experience from several kinds of aspects including human–computer
interaction, psychology, and information systems. Agarwal and Karahanna (2000)
constructed CA as a state of deep involvement with software. The state represents
a situational intrinsic motivator (Vallerand, 1997). The theory of CA is derived
from three closely interrelated fields of research: the personality trait of absorp-
tion, the state of flow, and cognitive engagement. Presence is “a sense of being
there” in a mediated environment including virtual reality (Cairns, Cox,
Berthouze, Dhoparee, & Jennett, 2006). The people perceive themselves to be sur-
rounded by stimuli. Patrick et al. (2000) consider that in addition to the physical
location, the person’s cognitive and perceptual systems are also tricked into believ-
ing they are in a tangible place. Sometimes the term presence, is used synony-
mously with immersion, especially used for 3D computer games (McMahan, 2003).
To be immersed is to be involved in the context, not only physically but also
mentally and emotionally (Brooks, 2003). McMahan (2003) considered that the
most accepted definition of immersion was from Murray (1997). Murray thought
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 113

immersion was a metaphorical term derived from the physical experience of

being submerged in water. In a participatory medium, immersion implies learning
to swim, to do the things that the new environment makes possible. A psycholog-
ically immersive experience means the sensation of being surrounded by a
completely different reality. Witmer and Singer (1998) considered that immersion
is a psychological state characterized by perceiving oneself to be enveloped by
and interacting with an environment that providing continuous stimuli. Coomans
and Timmermans (1997) described immersion as a feeling of being engaged
deeply into a make-believe world similar to a real world. Radford (2000)
described immersion as being related to the ability to enter a game world through
its controls.
Although these terms—flow, cognitive absorption, presence, and immersion—
have some overlap in studies, they are different in some aspects. Witmer and
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

Singer (1998) believed that a virtual environment produced a greater sense of

immersion, which would produce higher levels of presence. In virtual environ-
ments, immersion is like the process of an experience, and presence is conceptual-
ized as the result of immersion to some degree. Therefore, Witmer and Singer
(1998) considered that immersion depends on continuously perceiving oneself as
a part of the virtual environment stimulus. For immersion, there seems to be
strong links with flow. Ermi and Mäyrä (2005) think that in the context of digital
games, flow-like phenomena seem only to be fleeting experiences, which is differ-
ent from flow as traditionally conceived. For CA, it was intended as a state of
deep involvement with software (Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000). Cairns et al.
(2006) considered that CA is better understood as a personality trait rather than
an immersive state because of a limited applied area rather than any particular
experience.
In the game world, players can see, hear, and manipulate the environment, just
as they do in the real world. This provides the player with a strong visceral and
cognitive belief in what is experienced in the virtual context as physical reality.
Ermi and Mäyrä (2005) believe that immersion more clearly refers to the mental
processes involved in the game. In addition, in the computer game industry, the
term immersion is widely used (Brooks, 2003; Brown & Cairns, 2004; Cairns et al.,
2006; Ermi & Mäyrä, 2005; Rouse, 1999). Thus, the use of the term immersion to
describe players totally submerged in their fictional surroundings is appropriate.
The immersion experience is crucial to game enjoyment, but Brown and Cairns
(2004) consider that it is not clear exactly what causes immersion. They propose
that immersion is used to describe the degree of involvement with a game. Barriers
to immersion act to determine the level of involvement with the game. According to
different barriers, three levels of involvement are presented: engagement, engross-
ment, and total immersion. Engagement is the first stage of immersion. In order to
enter this level, the players have to invest time, effort, and attention. If players
become further involved with the game, they will enter into the stage of engross-
ment. The barrier of this stage is game construction. In this stage, the players are
less aware of their surroundings and less self-aware than previously. The highest
level of involvement is total immersion. The barriers of this stage are empathy and
atmosphere. McMahan (2003) has presented three conditions for creating a sense of
immersion in the game world: the conventions of the game must match the user
 114 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

expectations, there must be meaningful things for the players to do, and the con-
ventions of the game world must be consistent, in addition to the physical dimen-
sions of the technology. Narrative and narrative genres are often used as a way of
defining the conventions of a world and to help players align their expectations
with the logic of the world (Douglas & Hargadon, 2000; McMahan, 2003). Addition-
ally, a player acting in the game world requires functionality, usability, or playabil-
ity to make the game progress smoothly (Grodal, 2003; Klimmt, 2003).
Johnson and Wiles (2003) reported that deep but effortless involvement was
commonly reported by game players. Games should induce players to remain in
the game world. Elements such as the narrative of a game are important for drawing
players into a game and keeping them immersed. The narrative tells the players’ sto-
ries, backgrounds, and characters. These make the players feel that they are part
of the story (Sweetser & Johnson, 2004). While experiencing games, players not
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

only are involved in a ready-made game world but also actively participating in
construction of the experiences: investing desires and previous experiences and
anticipating outcomes (Blythe & Hassenzahl, 2003). Cheng and Cairns (2005)
found that players failed to notice what had been determined to be modal inco-
herence while they were in the stage of immersion. That means that once immer-
sion is achieved, some deleterious usability elements may be overcome by it.
Researchers consider immersion, like flow, to be a multidimensional concept
(Brooks, 2003; Brown & Cairns, 2004; Ermi & Mäyrä, 2005). They attempt to inter-
pret the depth or representation of immersion in the field of the game. Table 3
summarizes the dimensions of engagement experience including flow, cognitive
absorption, presence, and immersion.

2.4. Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative

Chen, Wigand, and Nilan (1999) think that dimensions of flow experience can be
categorized into three stages: antecedents, experiences, and effects. In their study,
the antecedent stage is described as the qualifying factors of activities and prereq-
uisites, the experience stage is described as those factors that are perceived in the
course of the flow state, and the effects stage is described as an individual’s inner
experience after entering the flow state. They contend that the three stages should
be the process of a user entering into the involvement experience. This study con-
siders that a comprehensive immersion measurement procedure for a game nar-
rative should also include measures of the antecedent condition, experiences, and
effects.
Like Chen et al. (1999), this study describes challenges as an antecedent condition
of immersion. In the game environment, conflicts and challenges are elements of a
game and the original motivation of designers. Congruent or above-threshold
skills and challenges are the prerequisites for provoking the emergence of the
optimal experience. One of characteristics of playing computer games is that players
actively participate in the games. Thus, arousal of senses and attraction to explore
the games are very important. Pace (2004) believes that curiosity plays a role in
the formation of a user’s goals and subsequent behavior. Curious content helps to
attract users’ attention. Therefore, this study proposes that two primary antecedent
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 115

Table 3: Dimensions of Engaging Experience

Engaging
Author experience Application Dimensions

Csikszentmihalyi Flow Human Focused concentration

(1988) psychology Merging of activity and awareness
Perceived control
Time distortion
Loss of self-consciousness
Hoffman and Flow A computer- Consumer learning
Novak (1996) mediated Perceived behavioral control (or confidence)
environments Exploratory behavior
Positive subjective experiences
Distortion in time perception
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

Chou and Ting Flow Online computer Concentration

(2003) game Playfulness
Distortion in time perception
Telepresence
Exploratory behavior
Skadberg and Flow Browsing Enjoyment
Kimmel (2004) a website Lost track of time
Telepresence
Pace (2004) Flow Web information- Duration
seeking Frequency and intensity
activities Joy of discovery
Reduced awareness of irrelevant factors
Distorted sense of time
Merging of action and awareness
Sense of control
Mental alertness
Telepresence
Sweetser and Flow Game player Concentration
Wyeth (2005) experience Challenge
Skills
Control
Clear goals
Feedback
Immersion
Social interaction
Agarwal, Cognitive Information Control
Sambamarthy, absorption technology Attention focus
and Stair Curiosity
(1997) Intrinsic interest
Computer
Playfulness
Ease of use
Agarwal and Cognitive Information Temporal dissociation
Karahanna absorption technology Focused immersion
(2000) usage Heightened enjoyment
Control
Curiosity

(Continued)
 116 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

Table 3: (Continued)

Engaging
Author experience Application Dimensions

Witmer and Presence and Virtual Presence:

Singer (1998) immersion environment Control
Sensory
Distraction;
Realism
Immersion:
Tendency to become involved in
activities
Tendency to maintain focus on
current activities
Tendency to play video games
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

Brooks (2003) Immersion Narrative in vir- Time

tual reality and Context
other interfaces Participation
Brown and Immersion Game Emotional involvement
Cairns (2004) Transportation to different place
Attention
Control and autonomy
Ermi and Immersion Game play Sensory immersion
Mäyrä (2005) experience Challenge-based immersion
Imaginary immersion

conditions are necessary for the immersion to be experienced: (a) curiosity and (b)
challenges.
The second stage, experiences, is to describe players’ perceptions and cognitions
during immersion. It is comprised of three factors: (a) concentration, (b) control,
and (c) comprehension. The researchers think that concentration plays an important
role in the optimal experience and optimal experience requires focused attention
(Brown & Cairns, 2004; Chen et al., 1999; Pace, 2004). While playing games, the
players commonly control some units such as characters, weapons, or strategies
within the playing area and, subsequently, the optimal experience of users
reported in their study verified that they had a sense of control. Control is the cen-
tral characteristic of defining optimal experience (Chen et al., 1999). Therefore,
measuring players’ sense of control is necessary during immersion. Commonly,
game stories are designed as framework or background. Before and during
immersion into the game world, it is necessary to comprehend the structure and
storyline of the games and characters in the games. So, in this stage, three factors
(a) concentration, (b) control, and (c) comprehension are selected for measuring
immersion.
The final stage, effects, is to represent players’ inner experiences after immer-
sion into the games. After optimal experience, users always reported that they
were cut off from reality and were imagining and empathizing with the charac-
ters (Brown & Cairns, 2004; Chen et al., 1999; Pace, 2004). Therefore, for this
study, the factor “empathy” is chosen for measuring game immersion.
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 117

Based on the three stages of immersion experience previously discussed, a

questionnaire for measuring player immersion in the computer game narrative is
proposed, including six dimensions: (a) curiosity, (b) concentration, (c) control,
(d) challenge, (e) comprehension, and (f) empathy. The questions about the curi-
osity dimension were developed based on a study by Pace (2004). The questions
about the concentration and control dimensions were written on the basis of
Sweetser and Wyeth’s (2005) research about game flow criteria. The questions
about the challenge dimension were developed based on studies by Sweetser and
Wyeth (2005) and Pace (2004). The questions about the other two dimensions—
comprehension and empathy—were written by the researchers.

• Curiosity: Arousal of senses and cognition and attraction to explore game

narrative. Curiosity plays a vital role in the immersion experiences of players
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

(Pace, 2004). Interesting content makes players eager to discover new things
and explore their surroundings because the players believe that interacting
with the game will provide knowledge they need to be good game players.
• Concentration: Ability to concentrate on the game narrative. Like flow expe-
riences, player immersion also requires focused attention, not divided atten-
tion. Pace (2004) believes that interesting content helps to attract and
maintain users’ attention. Therefore, a game should provide an interesting
story to grab the player’s attention quickly and maintain it throughout the
game. Besides interesting content, a proper relative workload for the players’
perceptual, cognitive memory limits is also important (Lazzaro & Keeker,
2004). Brown and Cairns (2004) considered that the more attention and effort
invested, the more immersed a player is in the game.
• Comprehension: Understanding of the structure and content of the storyline.
Comprehending the game story is a precondition of immersion in the game
world. Computer games provide a story world in which the content and
nature must be discovered. Before discovering the world, comprehending
the story is necessary. Comprehending the story is a process of careful obser-
vation, hypothesis formation, and testing of hypotheses. Then players obtain
and understand information, and they can thus make a plan or reason out a
strategy for each step taken in the game. Failure at game play may be based
on a failure to understand the story (Tavinor, 2005).
• Control: Ability to exercise a sense of control over the characters and the
game world. To be immersed, players should be able to translate their strat-
egy and intention into the story world. If players can feel a sense of control
over the character and feel free to play games and solve problems in their
own manner, they will feel they are exploring a real environment (Desurvire
et al., 2004; Federoff, 2002;). Kane (2003) considers that players need to be
given options for what they can be, do, and have in the game in order for
players to become emotionally immersed in the game story.
• Challenge: Some relative difficulty in the game narrative for players. Chal-
lenge is consistently identified as the most important aspect of flow experi-
ence. Challenges are also important factors in the immersion of game players
to help focus the user’s attention (Pace, 2004). Researchers have reported that
the difficulty should have variable levels, increase gradually, and advance at
 118 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

an appropriate pace (Desurvire et al., 2004; Federoff, 2002; Pagulayan,

Keeker, Wixon, Romero, & Fuller, 2003) so that the players will want to con-
tinue to play the game.
• Empathy: Mentally entering into the imaginary game world. When players
become absorbed in game stories, they begin to feel for and identify with a
game character and the game world (Ermi & Mäyrä, 2005). Players often
have a high level of emotional investment, provided that they are immersed.
If players lack empathy, they will not feel total immersion in the story world
(Brown & Cairns, 2004). Immersive narratives make the players feel that they
are part of the story (Sweetser & Johnson, 2004).

One of the characteristics that makes the computer game narrative different
from traditional narratives is interactivity. Interaction is a form of participating
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

actively in the narrative. Therefore, gamers are not only the audience but also
players and narrators. They have intense subjective experience in listening,
watching, and acting. Another characteristic of the computer game narrative is its
nonlinear structure. The relationship between independent events is causality, not
a fixed sequence. These characteristics determine that players will have different
experiences. Because the genres of computer games are diversiform and narra-
tives differ in thousands of ways, it is difficult to find a general measurement
from the design aspects. However, it is feasible to find a universal method from
player experience to evaluate computer game narratives. This study considers
that the degree of player immersion in the story could reflect the computer game
narrative. Therefore, six dimensions based on players’ perceptions, cognitions,
motions, and emotions at the beginning of, in the course of, and after playing the
games were proposed to measure player immersion. In order to examine the reli-
ability and validity of the questions, a survey was conducted on a Web site.

3. SURVEY AND METHOD

3.1. Design of the Questionnaire

Originally, the questionnaire to measure player immersion in the computer game

narrative was constructed of 33 questions or items. First, the researcher inspected the
relativity between the questions and their dimensions and the comparability of the
33 questions. Next, three graduate students in the specialty of human–computer
interaction and computer games from the Department of Industrial Engineering,
Tsinghua University, were invited to examine the questions because they are
familiar with questionnaire design. They inspected the following aspects of the
questionnaire: the relativity between and the dimension of the questions; redundant
questions; understandability of each question; and consistency of phrasing and style.
Then, five students from Tsinghua University who often play computer games
participated in the pretest. They answered the questions in terms of a computer
game that was oriented to a story they had played. After finishing the questionnaire,
they were asked whether there were questions that had been difficult for them to
comprehend or that did not describe the player experience in the game narrative.
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 119

Based on the suggestions from evaluators and players, the questionnaire was
revised. Lastly, a questionnaire for player immersion in the computer game narra-
tive with 30 questions or items (Appendix A) was formed, from which three
redundant questions were deleted. The three statements were (a) I can be
involved in the game world quickly and easily. (b) Some events have an unex-
pected outcome. (c) I feel the game play and narrative is integrated harmoniously.

3.2. Procedure

For this study, two surveys were conducted on a Web site. The first survey was
performed in March 2007 for exploratory factor analysis of the original question-
naire, which included 30 questions. After it was analyzed, the questionnaire was
modified into 27 questions. Then the second survey was conducted in December
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

2007 using the modified questionnaire. In order to prevent one subject from par-
ticipating in two surveys, the researchers eliminated the repeating respondents
according to key information, which was affiliation filled in on the questionnaire.
Also, before participants began to answer the questions in the second survey, they
read information we posted about not participating in the second survey if they
had already participated in the first survey. Almost the same method was used
for both surveys. At the beginning of the questionnaire the aim was introduced,
and participants were assured of the confidentiality and anonymity of their
responses. After that, the participants supplied their personal information and
brief information about their experience with computer games. Then the partici-
pants were asked to imagine a familiar game with a story frame while answering
the questions about player immersion in the computer game narrative. For the
questions, a 7-point Likert scale was adopted, in which 7 represented strongly
agree and 1 represented strongly disagree. Before replying to the questions, partici-
pants were notified that they could leave their contact information to be entered
in a lottery. After completing questions, participants submitted their answers.

3.3. Participants

In China, the data from the 2005 China Game Industry Annals show that about
61.7% of computer game players are young people from 19 to 25 years old. It is
also reports that 38.9% of online game users are students. Therefore, college
students can be seen as our target subjects. Consequently, a message to recruit
participants was posted on the game forum and part-time job forum on the Tsinghua
University BBS.
In the first survey, there were 340 participants who answered the questions
and 309 of the respondents were valid. About 70% of the respondents were stu-
dents. The ages of 93.85% of the subjects were from 20 to 30, and 95.47% had
higher than undergraduate education levels. Only 36% of the participants had
played games no more than 5 years and 30.10% participants had played games for
more than 10 years. About 80% of the participants played games no more than 3
hours per day. In the second survey, there were 354 respondents and 325 were
effective; 57.06% were students and 15.03% were technicians. The ages of 97.24%
 120 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

of the participants were from 20 to 30 and 98.16% had higher than undergraduate
education levels. About 34.67% of the respondents had played games no more
than 5 years, whereas 38.96% of participants had played games more than
10 years and 87.12% played games no more than 3 hours per day.

4. RESULTS

4.1. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

An EFA was performed to find and confirm the structural characteristics of the
questionnaire. The following steps were adopted for the EFA in this study. The
first step was to analyze if the items or questions had enough common information
using the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO). The second step was to extract factors. An
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

eigenvalue of not less than 1 was adopted in this study. After that, a component
matrix was worked out. Then, in order to further interpret these extracted factors,
the component matrix was rotated relative to the orthogonal rotation.
The extracted model should represent a good and simple structure, so it should
be examined for the following criteria. (a) The communalities of most of the vari-
ables should not be less than 0.5. (b) The model should explain the total variance
well. (c) The factor loadings of an item in the rotated component matrix should
not be less than 0.45 for all factors or greater than 0.45 for two or more common
factors. (d) Each two factors extracted should not be correlated, as interpreted by
the component score covariance matrix (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1995;
Lattin, Carroll, & Green, 2003; Smith, CapUti, & Rawstorne, 2007). If the criteria
were not satisfied, we eliminated single-item factors or items with factor loadings
less than 0.5 on all factors or greater than 0.5 on two or more factors (Hair et al.
1995, Stiggelbout et al., 2004).
In the first survey there were 309 available responses for EFA. Tables 4–7 show
the results of the analysis. For the 30 items, an EFA is appropriate because the
KMO was 0.86, more than 0.7. However, the communalities of three items (2, 7,
and 9) were less than 0.5. Also found were two items (7, 29) for which eight factor
loadings of each item were less than 0.45 and two items’ (21 and 22) factor load-
ings were all greater than 0.45 for two common factors. Then items 2, 7, 9, 21, 22,
and 29 were eliminated tentatively for a new EFA. After a series of EFAs were
implemented, three items, 21, 28, and 29, were eliminated. Those 27 preserved
items were classified into seven factors or dimensions. In this structure model,
58% of total variance could be explained. All of the factor loadings were more
than 0.45. In the 27 items, 7 items in one factor originally were transferred into
another factor. Items 1 and 4 compose a new dimension. Table 8 shows a descrip-
tion of the new structure of the instrument.

4.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

With the exploratory factor analysis, the factor structure and the interpretation of
the original model were adjusted. The approach of CFA is to test the goodness of
fit of the adjusted model. At present, two widely used measurements are the
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 121

Table 4: Total Variance Explained (30 items)

Extraction sums of squared Rotation sums of squared

Initial eigenvalues loadings loadings

Item Total % of var. Cumulative % Total % of Var. Cumulative % Total % of Var. Cumulative %

1 7.817 26.057 26.057 7.817 26.057 26.057 3.543 11.810 11.810

2 2.264 7.546 33.603 2.264 7.546 33.603 2.523 8.411 20.221
3 1.802 6.007 39.609 1.802 6.007 39.609 2.395 7.984 28.205
4 1.565 5.216 44.825 1.565 5.216 44.825 2.387 7.957 36.162
5 1.286 4.285 49.110 1.286 4.285 49.110 2.104 7.014 43.176
6 1.148 3.827 52.937 1.148 3.827 52.937 1.929 6.429 49.604
7 1.059 3.531 56.468 1.059 3.531 56.468 1.801 6.002 55.606
8 1.046 3.487 59.955 1.046 3.487 59.955 1.304 4.348 59.955
9 0.936 3.121 63.075
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

10 0.899 2.996 66.071

11 0.802 2.672 68.744
12 0.777 2.590 71.334
13 0.738 2.460 73.794
14 0.730 2.434 76.228
15 0.711 2.371 78.600
16 0.660 2.200 80.800
17 0.615 2.049 82.848
18 0.580 1.932 84.780
19 0.522 1.741 86.521
20 0.507 1.691 88.212
21 0.486 1.621 89.833
22 0.441 1.470 91.302
23 0.420 1.401 92.703
24 0.401 1.336 94.039
25 0.354 1.178 95.218
26 0.331 1.105 96.322
27 0.318 1.058 97.380
28 0.305 1.015 98.396
29 0.257 0.857 99.253
30 0.224 0.747 100.000

goodness-of-index (GFI) and the adjusted goodness-of-index (AGFI) for large size
samples. Commonly, one rule is that a model with an acceptable fit should have a
value of GFI greater than 0.90 and an AGFI value exceeding 0.80 (Lattin et al.,
2003). Some other researchers consider that a GFI above 0.80 is marginally accept-
able (Gefen, Straub, & Boundreau, 2000; Jiang, Klein, & Carr, 2002).
The CFA was performed using the 325 responses in the second survey. The
results of analysis showed that the AGFI of the model was 0.82 and the GFI was
0.86, which is acceptable. The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)
was 0.067, less than 0.08 (Lattin et al., 2003). Lattin et al. (2003) considered that a
simple model was a better selection in the optimum models. In order to determine
whether the seven-correlated-factor model was simple enough to be an optimum
model, the model was compared with other models including the seven-uncorre-
lated-factor model, one-factor model, and 21 six-correlated-factor models. In the
uncorrelated-factor model, it is assumed that the relation of the factors is
 122 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

Table 5: Rotated Component Matrix (30 Items)

Component

Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 0.606
3 0.515
4 0.575
5 0.475
10 0.671
11 0.582
13 0.738
19 0.585
9 0.584
24 0.741
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

30 0.523
22 0.468 0.489
25 0.790
26 0.771
27 0.628
6 0.512
14 0.686
15 0.620
20 0.725
21 0.494 0.519
23 0.572
8 0.682
12 0.609
28 0.493
2 0.576
17 0.674
18 0.722
16 0.841

uncorrelated, and in the six-factor model it is assumed that the correlation coeffi-
cient of two factors from the seven-factor model is 1, which means that the two
factors are combined into one factor. The comparison of these models is presented
in Table 9. The results indicate that the seven-correlated-factor model is the best.
Although the goodness of fit of some six-factor models (the AGFI and GFI of the
models were more than 0.8 and the RMSEA was about 0.07) was also acceptable,
their total variances were only approximately 54% in the EFA.

4.3. Reliability and Validity

The reliability of an instrument is defined as the extent to which an instrument

yields the same results on repeated measurements (Carmines & Zeller, 1990).
There are several methods to establish reliability. These include test–retest
method, equivalent forms, split-halves method, and internal consistency method.
Split-halves and internal consistency methods are adopted in this study. For internal
consistency, Cronbach’s alpha (Cronbach, 1951) is widely used. An alpha (a)
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 123

Table 6: Total Variance Explained (27 items)

Extraction sums of squared Rotation sums of squared

Initial eigenvalues loadings loadings

Item Total % of Var. Cumulative % Total % of Var. Cumulative % Total % of Var. Cumulative %

1 7.127 26.397 26.397 7.127 26.397 26.397 3.174 11.754 11.754

2 2.173 8.047 34.444 2.173 8.047 34.444 2.937 10.876 22.630
3 1.663 6.160 40.604 1.663 6.160 40.604 2.158 7.994 30.624
4 1.313 4.862 45.466 1.313 4.862 45.466 2.113 7.828 38.452
5 1.258 4.661 50.127 1.258 4.661 50.127 1.960 7.260 45.712
6 1.144 4.239 54.366 1.144 4.239 54.366 1.823 6.751 52.463
7 1.042 3.860 58.226 1.042 3.860 58.226 1.556 5.763 58.226
8 0.973 3.604 61.829
9 0.896 3.319 65.148
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

10 0.811 3.005 68.153

11 0.764 2.829 70.982
12 0.741 2.745 73.726
13 0.714 2.644 76.371
14 0.701 2.596 78.967
15 0.641 2.373 81.340
16 0.610 2.259 83.599
17 0.571 2.113 85.712
18 0.535 1.983 87.695
19 0.501 1.856 89.551
20 0.459 1.700 91.250
21 0.429 1.590 92.841
22 0.404 1.495 94.336
23 0.352 1.304 95.640
24 0.344 1.275 96.915
25 0.324 1.199 98.113
26 0.273 1.013 99.126
27 0.236 0.874 100.000

value of 0.70 or above is considered to indicate strong internal consistency (Nun-

nally, 1978). For exploratory research, an alpha value of 0.60 or above is also con-
sidered significant (Hair et al., 1995). The result of this measuring instrument is
0.877. The item total correlation coefficients are from 0.50 to 0.70, and the p values
are all significant (see Table 10). Therefore, the 27 items in the instrument could be
retained without any being added or deleted. For split-halves method, the alpha
value of part 1 is 0.84 and the value of part 2 is 0.75. The Cronbach’s alpha values
of each dimension in the instrument are nearly more than 0.70 except familiarity
and control, which are about 0.60. These results indicate that the reliability of the
instrument is acceptable.
Whereas reliability is concerned with the stability of the actual measuring
instrument, validity is concerned with the study’s success at measuring what the
researchers want to measure. Validity of the instrument is approached in three
ways: content validity, construct validity, and criterion-referenced validity
(Thorndike, 1996). This study tested construct validity and content validity.
The validity of a questionnaire’s construction is described as the extent to
which the instrument measures the concept it is presumed to measure (Carmines
 124 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

Table 7: Rotated Component Matrix (27 Items)

Component

Item Curiosity Comprehension Challenge and skill Empathy Concentration Control Familiarity

3 0.515
5 0.661
6 0.619
7 0.558
19 0.571
24 0.586
10 0.736
11 0.722
13 0.504
14 0.460
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

15 0.642
16 0.458
20 0.741
22 0.562
23 0.640
25 0.761
26 0.793
27 0.683
8 0.743
9 0.472
12 0.470
30 0.627
2 0.596
17 0.659
18 0.736
1 0.668
4 0.474

& Zeller, 1990). The seven factors accounted for 58% of the total variance and factor
loadings ranged from 0.46 to 0.7. So the construct validity of the instrument was
confirmed.
The content validity of an instrument refers to the extent to which it provides an
adequate description of the conceptual domain that it is designed to cover (Hair
et al., 1995). Three graduate students in the specialty of human–computer interac-
tion and computer games inspected the content of the instrument. Statistical
validity analysis was conducted for content validity in this study. The method was
to test the correlation between an item and the total items for the original instru-
ment. If the correlation is significant, it indicates that the item does measure the
concept. According to the results, all the correlations were significant at the 0.01
level. These results indicate that the validity of the instrument was satisfactory.

5. DISCUSSION

The surveys were conducted on the Web site and recruiting messages were also
posted on the game forums and part-time job forum on the Tsinghua University
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 125

Table 8: Description of the New Factors

Variance
Factor (item) Item Mean Std. dev. Loading explained

Curiosity 5. I want to know the rest of the storyline 5.78 1.24 0.66 3.17
(CR) in the course of playing. (11.75%)
6. The avatar in the game is attractive. 5.80 1.29 0.62
24. I feel successful when I overcome the 5.89 1.03 0.59
obstacles, tasks or opponents in the game.
19. I explore actively what I want to in the 6.03 1.03 0.57
game story.
7. I concentrate on the story for a long time. 5.56 1.49 0.56
3. The story quickly grabs my attention 5.69 1.21 0.52
at the beginning.
Comprehension 10. I can make sense of the relationship 5.58 1.28 0.74 2.94
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

(CP) between events. (10.88%)

11. I think the position of the events in 5.49 1.27 0.72
the whole story’s progress is clear.
15. I can make sense of the relationship 5.78 1.18 0.64
between the characters in the game story.
13. I can comprehend the game story clearly. 5.89 1.09 0.50
14. The avatar can be located in the interface 5.49 1.50 0.46
easily.
16. The obstacles or tasks do not influence 5.14 1.43 0.46
my comprehension of the game story.
Challenge and 20. Parts of the story are formed by me 5.21 1.50 0.74 2.16
skills (CS) in the course of playing the game. (7.99%)
23. I like the tasks or conflicts, which 5.88 1.15 0.64
are difficult in the game story.
22. Some tasks or conflicts in the game 5.46 1.41 0.56
story are stimulating and suspenseful.
Empathy (EP) 26. My emotion often varies with the 4.91 1.54 0.79 2.11
story’s progress. (7.83%)
25. Sometimes I think I really am the avatar 4.83 1.80 0.76
in the game.
27. After finishing the game, it takes a long 3.56 1.64 0.68
time for me to return to the real word
psychologically and emotionally.
Concentration 8. I become less aware of the real world and 5.14 1.60 0.74 1.96
(CC) unhappy things around me when I concen- (7.26%)
trate on the progress of the game story.
30. I discuss my experiences in the game 5.71 1.25 0.63
story with other players.
9. When I enter into the game story world, 5.81 1.13 0.47
time always flies quickly.
12. I know my next goal while finishing 5.13 1.37 0.47
an event every time.
Control (CT) 18. I can control the game interface. 5.55 1.73 0.74 1.82
17. I can control the character to move 5.61 1.49 0.66 (6.75%)
according to my arrangement.
2. I am interested in the style of the 5.91 1.21 0.60
game interface.
Familiarity (FL) 1. I am familiar with the cultural background. 5.61 1.41 0.67 1.56
4. Many events in the game story are novel. 5.47 1.28 0.47 (5.76%)
 126 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

Table 9: Index of Model Goodness of Fit

Model GFI AGFI RMSEA

Seven factors (correlated) 0.855 0.819 0.067

Seven factors (uncorrelated) 0.692 0.642 0.124
Six factors (CR-CC combination) 0.850 0.817 0.067
Six factors (CR-CP combination) 0.836 0.800 0.074
Six factors (CR-CT combination) 0.850 0.817 0.067
Six factors (CR-CS combination) 0.850 0.816 0.068
Six factors (CR-EP combination) 0.831 0.794 0.076
Six factors (CR-FL combination) 0.849 0.815 0.069
Six factors (CC-CP combination) 0.839 0.804 0.073
Six factors (CC-CT combination) 0.850 0.817 0.067
Six factors (CC-CS combination) 0.850 0.817 0.067
Six factors (CC-EP combination) 0.840 0.805 0.072
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

Six factors (CC-FL combination) 0.847 0.813 0.069

Six factors (CP-CT combination) 0.852 0.818 0.067
Six factors (CP-CS combination) 0.838 0.802 0.073
Six factors (CP-EP combination) 0.815 0.773 0.083
Six factors (CP-FL combination) 0.852 0.818 0.067
Six factors (CT-CS combination) 0.850 0.817 0.068
Six factors (CT-EP combination) 0.834 0.797 0.075
Six factors (CT-FL combination) 0.852 0.818 0.067
Six factors (CS-EP combination) 0.847 0.813 0.069
Six factors (CS-FL combination) 0.843 0.808 0.071
Six factors (EP-FL combination) 0.821 0.781 0.080
One factor 0.795 0.761 0.088

Note. CR: Curiosity; CC: Concentration; CP: Comprehension; CT: Control;

CS: Challenge and skills; EP: Empathy; FL: Familiarity.

BBS, so many participants were Web site users and students. In China, Tsinghua
University BBS is a popular Web site. The average concurrent users have been
about 14,000 and the peak concurrent users have been about 20,000. These users
commonly post and/or view topics on various forums every day. Therefore, as a
collective group, the data from the respondents in this study reflects players’
game forum user characteristics. The data from 2005 China Game Industry
Annals show that about 61.7% of the players are youth from 19 years to 25 years,
38.9% of the users are students and about 26% of the Web users are online game
players. Therefore, the survey completed on the Web introduced bias since the
respondents represented typical players.
The final instrument consisted of 27 items. Compared with the original instru-
ment, a new dimension was added, namely, familiarity, consisting of two items
from the original curiosity dimension. The two items ascertained if the players
knew the background of the games and events in the game story. The new dimen-
sion indicated at what degree players familiar with game playing had different
experiences.
Another two dimensions (concentration and curiosity) were modified to some
degree. The original concentration dimension focused on the player’s attention
while playing the game. In the new definition, the game has already occupied the
player’s mind. Players not only concentrate on the stories while playing but think
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 127

Table 10: Instrument Item Statistics

Item Item total correlation Cronbach’s alpha if item deleted

1 0.558 0.869
2 0.539 0.869
3 0.527 0.869
4 0.468 0.871
5 0.601 0.869
6 0.556 0.872
7 0.518 0.870
8 0.549 0.869
9 0.567 0.869
10 0.556 0.874
11 0.519 0.870
12 0.547 0.876
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

13 0.700 0.873
14 0.523 0.872
15 0.587 0.871
16 0.598 0.873
17 0.537 0.872
18 0.539 0.861
19 0.586 0.873
20 0.503 0.872
21 0.551 0.871
22 0.507 0.870
23 0.549 0.874
24 0.582 0.873
25 0.562 0.874
26 0.577 0.876
27 0.577 0.868

about them while not playing the game. As for the item “I know my next goal
while finishing an event every time,” there are two explanations for this item.
First, players often read the game walkthrough before playing if they want to
play the game without stopping. They search the information to solve the prob-
lems in the games. Second, the item indicates that the players always notice the
details of the games. Therefore, the item also represents the player’s long-term
attention span on the game narrative. The new curiosity dimension added three
items taken from other dimensions. The three items mainly describe the players’
activity and inner experience while the players had strong desire to explore
unknown parts. So the items also represent the player’s curiosity about the game.
The other three dimensions (control, challenge and skills, and comprehension)
had no change or were only altered a little compared with the original dimen-
sions. Consequently, the meanings of the seven dimensions were modified as fol-
lows according to results of EFA and CFA:

• Curiosity: Arousal of senses and cognition and attraction to explore game

narrative.
• Concentration: Ability to concentrate long-term on the game narrative.
• Challenge and skills: Some relative difficulty in the game narrative for players
and corresponding players’ skills.
 128 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

• Control: Ability to exercise a sense of control over game narrative.

• Comprehension: Understanding the structure and content of the storyline.
• Empathy: Mentally entering into the imaginary game world while playing
the game.
• Familiarity: Being familiar with the game story.

In this instrument, the three dimensions comprehension, empathy, and famil-

iarity were first used as a measure of user immersion. Commonly, general dimen-
sions of engaging experience mainly include challenge and skills, time distortion,
concentration, control, and loss of self-consciousness (Agarwal, Sambamurthy, &
Stair, 1997; Brooks, 2003; Csikszentmihalyi, 1988; Hoffman & Novak, 1996; Pace,
2004; Witmer & Singer, 1998). As for games, some studies have also focused on
these factors including concentration, playfulness, control, goals, and emotion
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

(Brown & Cairns, 2004; Chou & Ting, 2003; Ermi & Mäyrä, 2005; Rau, Peng, &
Yang, 2006; Sweetser & Wyeth, 2005). Because this study attempts to evaluate
player immersion in the computer game narrative, the researchers consider that
comprehending the structure and content of the story is necessary. Only by
understanding the content and structure of a series of events can the players make
a plan or reason out a strategy for the next steps. Failure to comprehend the story
may lead to failure to play (Tavinor, 2005). Desurvire et al. (2004) also thought
that the players understanding of the story should be examined when evaluating
the playability of games. The empathy dimension reflects the influence on players
after immersion into the story world. Immersive narratives can make the players
feel they are in the story world (Ermi & Mäyrä, 2005; Sweetser & Johnson, 2004).
A high level of emotion is invested into the games while players are immersed
(Tavinor, 2005). Even when players do not play the games, they sometimes think
about episodes of the game. The familiarity dimension indicates that the players’
familiarity with the game story significantly influences their immersion into the
narrative.

6. CONCLUSION

An original six-factor model was modified after EFA. CFA was used to identify
that the seven-correlated-factor model was the optimum and the simplest model.
This kind of cross-validation through EFA and CFA ensures validity of the instru-
ment. This instrument is not limited to a specific game genre. It is applicable to
story-oriented games except for chess and board games. Although this study
focused on the computer game narrative, this model is also able to measure user
immersion in story-oriented virtual reality. Additionally, the dimensions in the
instrument will provide game developers with a better picture of the expectations
of their players.
To measure player immersion in the computer game narrative, an instrument
involving seven dimensions was developed. Through empirical and theoretical anal-
ysis, it was found that the challenge and skills, concentration, and control dimen-
sions in the instrument are needed just like being deeply engaged in other media or
other domains (Agarwal et al., 1997; Brown & Cairns, 2004; Csikszentmihalyi, 1988;
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 129

Hoffman & Novak, 1996; Sweetser & Wyeth, 2005; Witmer & Singer 1998). Pace
(2004), Agarwal et al. (1997), and Agarwal and Karahanna (2000) considered that
curiosity and interest played a vital role in the flow experience of Web users. This
study found that the curiosity of the players also could be extracted as a common
factor influencing player immersion in the story world. In addition, the compre-
hension, empathy, and familiarity dimensions were used as a measurement of
user immersion for the first time in this study.
At present, most studies only consider the computer game narrative as one
aspect of computer games. There are nearly no systematic systems for measuring
the game narrative. This study explores this field through empirical and theoreti-
cal methods. The instrument proposed in this study provides a starting point for
future research.
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

REFERENCES

Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption
and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665–694.
Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V., & Stair, R. (1997). Cognitive absorption and the adoption of new
information technologies. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting,
Boston. August.
Apperley, T. H. (2006). Genre and game studies: Toward a critical approach to video game
genres. Simulation & Gaming, 37(1), 6–23.
Bielenberg, D. R., & Carpenter-Smith, T. (1997). Efficacy of story in multimedia training.
Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 20(2), 151–159.
Blythe, M., & Hassenzahl, M. (2003). The semantics of fun: Differentiating enjoyable experi-
ences. In M. A. Blythe, K. Overbeeke, A. F. Monk, & P. C. Wright (Eds.), Funology: From
usability to enjoyment (pp. 91–100). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Bordwell, D. (1985). Narration in the fiction film. London: Routledge.
Bordwell, D., & Thompson, K. (2001). Film art: An introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Brooks, K. (2003). There is nothing virtual about immersion: Narrative immersion for VR
and other interfaces. Retrieved May 25, 2007, from http://alumni.media.mit.edu/
~brooks/storybiz/immersiveNotVirtual.pdf
Brown, E., & Cairns, P. (2004). A grounded investigation of game immersion. CHI 2004,
ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing, 1297–1300.
Bruner, J., & Lucariello, J. (1989). Monologue as a narrative recreation of the world. In
K. Nelson (Ed.), Narratives from the crib. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
Cairns, P., Cox, A., Berthouze, N., Dhoparee, S., & Jennett, C. (2006). Quantifying the
experience of immersion in games. Cognitive Science of Games and Gameplay workshop at
Cognitive Science 2006.
Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1990). Reliability and validity assessment. Sage: New York, NY.
CGIAC (2006). 2005 China Game Industry Annals. China Games Industry Annual Confer-
ence. China’s General Administration of Press and Publication. Xiamen, P.R. China.
Retrieved May 2007 http://cgiac.17173.com/2005/report.html
Chen, H., Wigand, R. T., & Nilan, M. S. (1998). Optimal flow experience in Web navigation.
Information Resources Management Association International Conference. pp. 633–636.
Chen, H., Wigand, R. T., & Nilan, M. S. (1999). Optimal experience of Web activities.
Computers in Human Behavior, 15, 585–608.
Cheng, K., & Cairns, P. A. (2005). Behavior, realism and immersion in games. CHI 2005.
pp. 1272–1275.
 130 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

Chou, T. J., & Ting, C. C. (2003). The role of flow experience in cyber-game addiction. Cyber
Psychology and Behavior, 6(6), 663–675.
Clanton, C. (1998). An interpreted demonstration of computer game design. Proceedings of
the Conference on CHI 98 Summary, 1–2.
Coomans, M. K. D., & Timmermanns, H. J. P. (1997). Towards a taxonomy of virtual reality
user interfaces. International Conference on Information Visualization. pp. 17–29.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika,
16(3), 297–334.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety: The experience of play in work and
games. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). The flow experience and its significance for human psychology.
In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), Optimal experience: Psychological
studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. pp. 15–350.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper
and Row.
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

Dansky, R. (2006). Introduction to game narrative. In C. Bateman (Ed.), Game writing:

Narrative skills for videogames. Charles River Media: Boston. pp. 1–23.
Desurvire, H., Caplan, M., & Toth, J. A. (2004). Using heuristics to evaluate the playability
of games. In Extended Abstracts of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (pp. 1509–1512). New York: ACM Press.
Douglas, Y., & Hargadon, A. (2000). The pleasure principle: Immersion, engagement, flow.
In Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia (pp. 153–160).
San Antonio: ACM Press.
Entertainment Software Association. (2006). Essential facts about the computer and video
game industry. Retrieved May 25, 2007, from http://www.theesa.com/archives/files/
Essential%20Facts%202006.pdf
Ermi, L., & Mäyrä, F. (2005). Fundamental components of the gameplay experience:
Analyzing immersion. In S. Castell, & J. Jenson (Eds.) Changing views: Worlds in play
(pp. 15–27). Vancouver, Canada.
Federoff, M. A. (2002). Heuristics and usability guidelines for the creation and evaluation of fun in
video games. Unpublished master’s thesis, Department of Telecommunications, Indiana
University, Bloomington.
Frasca, G. (2000). Ludology meets narratology: Similitude and differences between (video)
games and narrative. Retrieved May 25, 2007, from http://www.ludology.org/
index.php and http://www.ludology.org/articles/ludology.htm
Gefen, D., Straub, D. W., & Boundreau, M. C. (2000). Structural equation modeling and
regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the Association for
Information Systems, 4(7), 1–70.
Grodal, T. (2003). Stories for eye, ear, and muscles: Video games, media, and embodied expe-
riences. In M. J. P. Wolf & B. Perron (Eds.), The video game theory reader (pp. 129–155). New
York: Routledge.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E. Jr., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
Heibach, C. (1999). Creamus ergo sumus: Towards a multimedia aesthetics. Retrieved from
http://www.update.ch/beluga/digital/99/heibach.htm (last accessed May 25, 2007)
Hoffman, D. L., & Novak, T. P. (1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated envi-
ronments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 60(7), 50–68.
Jensen, J. (2000). From games to game studies: How to build your own department. In
M. Saltzman (Ed.), Game design: Secrets of the sages (pp. 96–99). Indianapolis, IN: Macmillan.
Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., & Carr, C. L. (2002). Measuring information system service quality:
SERVQUAL from the other side. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), 145–166.
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 131

Johnson, D., & Wiles, J. (2003). Effective affective user interface design in games. Ergonomics,
46(13/14), 1332–1345.
Juul, J. (1999). A clash between game and narrative—A thesis on computer games and
interactive fiction. Retrieved May 25, 2007, from http://www.jesperjuul.dk/thesis
Kane, B. (2003). Postcard from GDC 2003: 34 ways to put emotions into games. Retrieved
May 25, 2007, from http://www.gamasutra.com/gdc2003/features/20030308/kane_
emotion_01.htm
Kirriemuir, J. (2002). Video gaming, education and digital learning technologies. D-Lib
Magazine, 8(2). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/february02/kirriemuir/
02kirriemuir.html (last accessed May 25, 2007)
Klimmt, C. (2003). Dimensions and determinants of the enjoyment of playing digital
games: A three-level model. In C. Copier & J. Raessens (Eds.), Level up: Digital games
research conference (pp. 246–257). Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Lattin, M. J., Carroll, J. D., & Green, P. E. (2003). Analyzing multivariate data. Pacific Grove,
CA: Brooks/Cole, Thomson Learning.
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

Lazzaro, N., & Keeker, K. (2004). What’s my method? A game show on games. In Extended
Abstracts of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1093–1094).
New York: ACM Press.
Lindley, C. A. (2002). Conditioning, learning and creation in games: Narrative, the gameplay
gestalt and generative simulation. Paper presented at the Workshop on Narrative and
Interactive Learning Environments, Edinburgh, Scotland. August.
Majewski, J. (2003). Theorizing video game narrative. Unpublished master’s thesis, Centre for
Film, Television and Interactive Media, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Bond
University, Queensland, Australia.
McMahan, A. (2003). Immersion, engagement, and presence: A method for analyzing 3-D video
games. In M. J. P. Wolf & B. Perron (Eds.), The video game theory reader (pp. 67–86). New York:
Routledge.
Motion Picture Association of America. (2006). Research and statistics. Retrieved May 25,
2007, from http://www.mpaa.org/researchStatistics.asp
Murray, J. (1997). Hamlet on the Holodeck: The future of narrative in cyberspace. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Free Press.
Neitzel, B. (2005). Narrativity in computer games. In J. Raessens & J. Goldstein (Eds.),
Handbook of computer game studies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pace, S. (2004). A grounded theory of the flow experiences of Web users. International Journal
of Human–Computer Studies, 60(3), 327–363.
Pagulayan, R., Keeker, K., Wixon, D., Romero, R., & Fuller, T. (2003). User-centered design in
games. In J. A. Jacko & A. Sears (Eds.), The human–computer interaction handbook: Fundamentals,
evolving techniques and emerging applications (pp. 883–905). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Patrick, E., Cosgrove, D., Slavkovic, A., Rode, J. A., Verratti, T., & Chiselko, G. (2000).
Using a large projection screen as an alternative to head-mounted displays for virtual
environments. CHI Letters, 2(1), 478–485.
Radford, A. (2000). Games and learning about form in architecture. Automation in Construction,
9, 379–385.
Rau, P. P., Peng, S., & Yang, C. (2006). Time distortion for expert and novice online game
players. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(4), 396–403.
Recording Industry Association of America. (2006). 2005 Year-end statistics. Retrieved May
25, 2007, from http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/pdf/2005yrEndStats.pdf
Rouse, R., III (1999). What’s your perspective? ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, 33(3), 9–12.
Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Games as narrative play. In K. Salen & E. Zimmerman
(Eds.), Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. pp. 420–459.
 132 Qin, Rau, and Salvendy

Skadberg, Y. X., & Kimmel, J. R. (2004). Visitors’ flow experience while browsing a Website:
Its measurement, contributing factors and consequences. Computers in Human Behavior,
20(3), 403–422.
Smith, B., CapUti, P., & Rawstorne, P. (2007). The development of a measure of subjective
computer experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 127–145.
Stiggelbout, A. M., Molewijk, A. C., Otten, W., Timmermans, D. R. M., van Bockel, J. H., &
Kievit, J. (2004). Ideals of patient autonomy in clinical decision making: A study on the
development of a scale to assess patients’ and physicians’ views. Journal of Medical
Ethics, 30(3), 268–274.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Sweetser, P., & Johnson, D. (2004). Player-centered game environments: Assessing player
opinions, experiences and issues. In Entertainment Computing—ICEC 2004: Third Interna-
tional Conference (pp. 321–332). M. Rauterberg (Ed.) New York: Springer Verlag.
Sweetser, P., & Wyeth, P. (2005). GameFlow: A model for evaluating player enjoyment in
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

games. Computers in Entertainment, 3(3), 1–24.

Tavinor, G. (2005). Video games, fiction, and emotion. Proceedings of the Second Australasian
Conference on Interactive Entertainment. pp. 201–207.
Taylor, L. (2002). Video games: Perspective, point-of-view, and immersion. Unpublished
master’s thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Thorndike, R. M. (1996). Measurement and evaluation in psychology and education (6th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Todorov, T. (1977). The poetics of prose. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 271–360.
Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J. (1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence
questionnaire. Presence, Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7(3), 225–240.
Wolf, M. J. P. (2001). Genre and the video game. In M. J. P. Wolf (Ed.), The medium of the
video game. Austin: University of Texas Press. pp. 113–134.

APPENDIX

A Questionnaire of Player Immersion in Computer Game Narrative

Curiosity:

1. I am familiar with the cultural background.

2. I am interested in the style of the game interface.
3. The story quickly grabs my attention at the beginning.
4. Many events in the game story are novel.
5. I want to know the rest of the storyline in the course of playing.
6. The avatar in the game is attractive.

Concentration:

7. I concentrate on the story for a long time.

8. I become less aware of the real world and unhappy things around me when
I concentrate on the progress of the game story.
9. When I enter into the game story world, time always flies quickly.
 Measuring Player Immersion in the Computer Game Narrative 133

Comprehension:

10. I can make sense of the relationship between events.

11. I think the position of the events in the whole story’s progress is clear.
12. I know my next goal while finishing an event every time.
13. I can comprehend the game story clearly.
14. The avatar can be located in the interface easily.
15. I can make sense of the relationship between the characters in the game
story.
16. The obstacles or tasks do not influence my comprehension of the game
story.

Control:
Downloaded by [Tsinghua University] at 22:58 17 February 2016

17. I can control the character to move according to my arrangement.

18. I can control the game interface.
19. I explore actively what I want to in the game story.
20. Parts of the story are formed by me in the course of playing the game.
21. I can control the progress of the game story.

Challenge:

22. Some tasks or conflicts in the game story are stimulating and suspenseful.
23. I like the tasks or conflicts, which are difficult in the game story.
24. I feel successful when I overcome the obstacles, tasks, or opponents in the
game.

Empathy:

25. Sometimes I think I really am the avatar in the game.

26. My emotion often varies with the story’s progress.
27. After finishing the game, it takes a long time for me to return to the real
word psychologically and emotionally.
28. I spend time thinking about the storyline sometimes when I am not playing
the game.
29. Sometimes I recollect the characters in the game in my spare time.
30. I discuss my experiences in the game story with other players.