View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Adolescent Social Gaming as a Form of Social Media: A Call for Developmental Science

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Adolescent Social Gaming as a Form of Social Media: A Call for Developmental Science
Language: English
Authors: Anne J. Maheux (ORCID 0000-0003-1308-5798), Shedrick L. Garrett (ORCID 0000-0002-2007-5339), Kara A. Fox, Nathan H. Field (ORCID 0000-0003-0675-6063), Kaitlyn Burnell, Eva H. Telzer (ORCID 0000-0002-2351-6339), Mitchell J. Prinstein (ORCID 0000-0002-7587-8665)
Source: Child Development Perspectives. 2025 19(1):3-13.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 11
Publication Date: 2025
Sponsoring Agency: National Science Foundation (NSF)
Contract Number: 1940700
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Descriptive
Descriptors: Adolescents, Games, Social Media, Play, Adolescent Development, Computer Oriented Programs, Peer Relationship, Self Concept, Neurology, Biology, Individual Differences, Interpersonal Competence
DOI: 10.1111/cdep.12518
ISSN: 1750-8592
1750-8606
Abstract: Social gaming--online gameplay involving digital interactions with others--is a common form of social media use among adolescents. Research on this topic has neglected the social aspect of gaming and the potential role of social gaming in adolescent development. In this article, we define social gaming, drawing on interdisciplinary theories to clarify how it is both similar to and distinct from the app-based social media platforms that have received more research attention. We outline how social gaming may be uniquely rewarding and influential for adolescents, given three key features of adolescent development: peer relationships, identity development, and neurobiological development. We address how individual differences--including those related to social identities, neurobiology, and pre-existing social skills--may shape social gaming experiences and related outcomes. We conclude with a call for more work on how social gaming influences adolescent development and an agenda for researchers.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1460226
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGqzQLq9mVvOU4miKcp2LyoAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDItsP_U9OMACqFLzggIBEICBmyahrZEl-xgRqknATzcS-h6mUgYWnoP1JlHay3gisv1disdycpBDTHCCTkUDwjKfsrn1ETNrQnzU2MpTVERJp8ZKJPFk8hyM_silsSTYwo3K9FbWNxbby0IPsLooz7pMWqPXgeUB_IpxaAiganMdJ89y5Us7VwZXknQGnG1QtDAh23yOSdaczwE0H3TswnihHKLqTns3ibFwB8r6
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0183913190;[30rc]01mar.25;2025Mar24.06:18;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0183913190-1">Adolescent social gaming as a form of social media: A call for developmental science </title> <p>Social gaming—online gameplay involving digital interactions with others—is a common form of social media use among adolescents. Research on this topic has neglected the social aspect of gaming and the potential role of social gaming in adolescent development. In this article, we define social gaming, drawing on interdisciplinary theories to clarify how it is both similar to and distinct from the app‐based social media platforms that have received more research attention. We outline how social gaming may be uniquely rewarding and influential for adolescents, given three key features of adolescent development: peer relationships, identity development, and neurobiological development. We address how individual differences—including those related to social identities, neurobiology, and pre‐existing social skills—may shape social gaming experiences and related outcomes. We conclude with a call for more work on how social gaming influences adolescent development and an agenda for researchers.</p> <p>Keywords: adolescence; gaming; social media</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-2">INTRODUCTION</hd> <p>Social media are nearly ubiquitous among U.S. adolescents. The role of social media in adolescent mental health is of critical concern, as addressed in a recent U.S. Surgeon General Advisory (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, [<reflink idref="bib79" id="ref1">79</reflink>]). Social gaming, or digital gameplay involving interacting online with others, is a common social form of media use among U.S. adolescents (Rideout et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref2">63</reflink>]), yet research on the role of social gaming in adolescent development is nascent. In line with calls to address specific behaviors, experiences, and reactions to diverse forms of digital media (see Granic et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref3">27</reflink>]; Odgers & Jensen, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref4">56</reflink>]; Orben, [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref5">57</reflink>]), researchers must investigate how social gaming serves as a context of and influence on adolescents' lives.</p> <p>Social media are often defined as digital or Internet‐based software or platforms that allow for social interaction, self‐presentation, or the construction of online content (Subrahmanyam & Michikyan, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref6">74</reflink>]). Although social gaming fits within this definition (see Gonçalves et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref7">25</reflink>]), the term <emph>social media</emph> often refers to smartphone app‐based platforms that emphasize public sharing of text, photos, or videos, including Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok (henceforth referred to as <emph>app‐based social media platforms</emph>). Nationally representative data on U.S. adolescents (in terms of region, age, gender, race/ethnicity, and family income) indicate that youth spent more time gaming (defined broadly to include both social gaming and solitary activities) than using app‐based social media (defined as "Snapchat, Instagram, Discord, Reddit, or Facebook"; Rideout et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref8">63</reflink>], p. 51). Specifically, 8‐ to 12‐year‐olds spend on average 2.5 h a day gaming, and 13‐ to 18‐year‐olds spend 3 h a day. In contrast, 8‐ to 12‐year‐olds spend about 1.5 h a day using social media, and 13‐ to 18‐year‐olds spend about 2 h a day (Rideout et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref9">63</reflink>]).</p> <p>Research on adolescents' online gaming has focused primarily on gaming addiction or links between exposure to violent games and aggression. Social gaming may contribute to youth development in numerous unknown ways, both positive and negative. Many positive outcomes of social gaming, such as the development of friendships and identity, have been proposed in theoretical work but underexplored in empirical research (Khoo, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref10">30</reflink>]; Markey et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref11">39</reflink>]). Moreover, in a recent review, of the 263 published articles on social gaming, only 6 focused on adolescents and young adults (Gonçalves et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref12">25</reflink>]). In this article, we focus on the experiences of adolescents (roughly ages 10 to 19), examining empirical studies with adolescents when possible and, when research is limited, leveraging research with adults. (For the sociodemographic characteristics of the studies reviewed herein, see Table S1.)</p> <p>We argue that social gaming is a social form of digital media—albeit a distinct one from app‐based social media platforms—that has been largely neglected in research on social media and that it matters for adolescents' mental health and development. First, we operationalize social gaming, and then we describe the potential interplay between social gaming and key features of adolescence—peer relationships, identity development, and neurobiological development. Next, we discuss individual differences across these experiences based on characteristics such as gender, marginalized status, pre‐existing social skills, neurodivergence, and neural markers. We conclude with a call for more work addressing the role of social gaming in adolescent psychological and neurobiological development and well‐being, and we propose a research agenda.</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-3">WHAT IS SOCIAL GAMING AND WHY DOES IT MATTER?</hd> <p>Social gaming refers to digital gameplay involving online interaction with others. Play is a feature of typical development, existing across cultures and history, with functions including social adaptation and the formation of social bonds (Pellegrini, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref13">58</reflink>]). Although shared digital gameplay can occur in person in the same physical space (sometimes referred to as <emph>couch co‐op</emph>; Consalvo, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref14">9</reflink>]) and adolescents may engage in solitary gaming (i.e., without interacting socially), we consider social gaming distinct from these experiences. Digital technology transforms social interactions (Nesi et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref15">53</reflink>]); thus, social gaming, in which social experiences are mediated by digital gaming platforms, provides opportunities for unique forms of social engagement that are unavailable in person or during solitary gameplay.</p> <p>Table 1 describes some of the social opportunities afforded by digital games. For example, during synchronous multiplayer gameplay, players (via avatars) can simultaneously inhabit the same virtual space and communicate via text, voice, or video chat (e.g., through hardware like built‐in console microphones or via third‐party software like Discord). In these digital worlds, players can cooperate, compete, and interact with others, including friends they know in person, online‐only friends (i.e., friendships that occur entirely online without in‐person interaction), and strangers (see Gehorsam, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref16">23</reflink>]).</p> <p>1 TABLE Social interaction opportunities afforded by social gaming.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left">Social interaction opportunities</th><th align="left">Description</th><th align="left">Popular examples (as of 2024)</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Text chatting</td><td align="left">Text‐based messaging options embedded within games or meta‐gaming ecosystem</td><td align="left">In‐game chat features offer opportunities to share text‐based messages with other players within a game, whereas forums or third‐party apps (e.g., text channels in Discord) offer opportunities to discuss games outside of the gaming platform.</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Voice chatting</td><td align="left">Synchronous voice chatting during gameplay</td><td align="left">Xbox One and PS4 offer a built‐in microphone for voice chat with friends as well as unknown others (e.g., when in proximity of another's avatars in certain online spaces). Voice chat tools and channels are also available through third‐party servers (e.g., Discord) to chat with friends or strangers</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Teamwork/cooperation</td><td align="left">Players engage in structured games with a shared common goal</td><td align="left">Cooperation with team members in team‐based competitive games (e.g., sports games like Rocket League, social deduction puzzle games like Among Us, and shooter/fighting/action games like League of Legends) or cooperation in creation (e.g., via sandbox games like Animal Crossing or Minecraft)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Competition</td><td align="left">Players compete against known or unknown others</td><td align="left">Multiplayer online battle arenas (MOBAs; e.g., League of Legends) offer matches to compete against friends or strangers</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Trading/transaction</td><td align="left">Players use digital resources to buy or trade digital artifacts</td><td align="left">Players interact with others (whether known or unknown) while trading or purchasing virtual goods within digital worlds (e.g., exchange of virtual gold or items in World of Warcraft)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Player‐created content</td><td align="left">Players build digital content</td><td align="left">Sandbox games (e.g., Roblox, Minecraft, and Animal Crossing: New Horizons) allow players to construct digital spaces and structures or accrue and use digital artifacts either in the digital presence of others or within private, shared digital spaces</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Streaming (including spectating and reactions in text‐based chat)</td><td align="left">Players livestream video of their screen while gaming; large public audience observes</td><td align="left">Twitch provides a source for gamers to stream their gameplay and viewers to watch and react with text messages or digital reactions (e.g., emojis and digital emotions)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Leaderboards and rankings</td><td align="left">Virtual scoreboard or accrual of in‐game achievements presented publicly</td><td align="left">Players' scores or achievements within games are made visible to others and players can view the achievements of other players (e.g., "grand master rank") that indicate status within the gaming context</td></tr><tr><td align="left">In‐game events</td><td align="left">Sub‐games, activities, and events within a broader social gaming universe</td><td align="left">The social gaming universe of some games (e.g., Club Penguin and Roblox) contains smaller‐scale multiplayer minigames (e.g., Sled Racing, Dance Contest, and Card‐Jitsu) to play with other players or options to attend live events, such as digital concerts, hosted within gaming worlds (e.g., Fortnite, Minecraft, and Roblox)</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Shared persistent digital world</td><td align="left">Digital worlds remain open and dynamic (whether players are present or absent); digital worlds present specific tasks (e.g., quests) or otherwise offer digital spaces users can inhabit simultaneously</td><td align="left">Massively multiplayer online games (MMOs; e.g., Roblox, the Sims, and Farmville) or massively multiplayer online role‐playing games (MMORPGs; e.g., Final Fantasy XIV) facilitate real‐time digital interaction on a large scale by offering persistent open virtual worlds. The emergence of the metaverse purports to offer digital interaction and a range of gaming opportunities via multimodal immersion into a single persistent virtual world</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Not all social gaming involves direct, reciprocal interactions. Many games offer opportunities to play in the digital presence of others but without direct interaction, potentially fulfilling a desire for community, audience, or a sense of purpose (Beals & Bers, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref17">4</reflink>]). Asynchronous gaming may facilitate social interaction through features such as leaderboards, rankings, turn‐taking, or private digital spaces in <emph>sandbox games</emph> (i.e., games emphasizing players' creativity, construction of virtual elements, and exploration, e.g., Minecraft Realms) in which friends co‐construct shared persistent worlds. Gaming may also facilitate social interactions online that occur outside gaming platforms (e.g., Discord discussions or Twitch video‐streaming, termed <emph>meta‐gaming ecosystems</emph>; Bowman, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref18">6</reflink>]; Du et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref19">17</reflink>]).</p> <p>Unlike traditional media (e.g., TV and magazines), social media provide users agency to curate and construct their digital experiences and contexts. Whereas the effects of traditional media are often conceptualized as unidirectional (e.g., media content directly influences passive consumers), researchers studying social media must consider adolescents as active participants in their digital experiences who select and create content based on individual needs and desires (the <emph>selectivity paradigm</emph> of media effects; Valkenburg, [<reflink idref="bib80" id="ref20">80</reflink>]). Self‐determination theory argues that individuals innately need competence (i.e., feelings of skill mastery), autonomy (i.e., sense of control), and relatedness (i.e., social belonging; Ryan & Deci, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref21">67</reflink>]). Although social gaming can provide entertainment (i.e., satisfy hedonic needs), it may also satisfy meaningful (i.e., eudaimonic) needs by providing opportunities to gain skills and in‐game achievements, control gameplay and select gaming experiences, and feel a sense of connection to individuals or communities (Elson et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref22">19</reflink>]). The mechanics of online games, the narrative embedded within gameplay, and the social context of the game collectively influence the gaming experience (Elson et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref23">19</reflink>]). While these theoretical approaches have been applied to adult gamers, their relevance for adolescent development remains largely unexplored.</p> <p>Social media, including social gaming, may influence adolescent development directly, yet must also be understood as <emph>contexts</emph> of development in which the unique affordances of digital tools shape interactions and subsequent developmental outcomes, including social and emotional well‐being (Subrahmanyam & Michikyan, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref24">74</reflink>]). The transformation framework (Nesi et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref25">53</reflink>]) and related approaches emphasizing affordances (see Moreno & Uhls, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref26">49</reflink>]; Subrahmanyam & Michikyan, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref27">74</reflink>]) propose that several features distinguish digital from in‐person interactions. Specifically, the transformation framework outlines features of social media that vary across platforms (with a focus on app‐based social media platforms) and transform peer experiences: asynchronicity (time lag between interactions), availability (24/7 accessibility of interactions via digital media), permanence (content is hosted online indefinitely), cue absence (nonverbal social cues are absent), publicness (wide audiences and groups are accessible), quantifiability (numerical metrics of peer approval or status, such as "likes"), visualness (emphasis on photos and videos), and algorithms (with stimuli curated by artificial intelligence; Nesi et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref28">53</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref29">55</reflink>]). Table 2 provides an overview and examples of features of digital media that may be most relevant to gaming contexts.</p> <p>2 TABLE Application of social media features and affordances to social gaming.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left">Feature of social media</th><th align="left">Definition</th><th align="left">Example applications to social gaming</th></tr><tr><th align="left">Feature presence: Low</th><th align="left">Feature presence: High</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Availability<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="left">Accessibility of content regardless of time or location</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Games via hardware that are inherently immobile (i.e., computer games, and consoles like PlayStation and Xbox)</p></list-item><list-item><p>Gaming features inaccessible behind a paywall (sometimes via predatory monetization)</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Games via hardware that are inherently mobile (i.e., mobile gaming consoles like Nintendo Switch, and mobile smartphone games)</p></list-item></list></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Asychronicity<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="left">Time lapse between nonconcurrent digital interactions</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Games in which users engage in live voice‐ or video‐based chat during gameplay</p></list-item><list-item><p>Simultaneous parallel gameplay in a shared virtual world (i.e., with direct interactions only via avatars or other gaming content)</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Games in which individuals interact via text communication, engage in asynchronous turn‐taking, or inhabit and construct shared worlds nonconcurrently</p></list-item></list></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Cue absence<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="left">Degree to which social and nonverbal cues are absent</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Games with live voice or video chat, offering social cues of tone, volume, and quality of voice</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Games involving anonymity or solely avatar‐based interactions</p></list-item><list-item><p>Text‐based gaming interactions (lacking live voice‐ or video‐based interpersonal cues)</p></list-item></list></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Permanence and publicness<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="left">Permanent accessibility of content shared online to large audiences</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Live gameplay in private online spaces (where access is restricted to known others and images or videos of gameplay are not stored permanently)</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Leaderboards</p></list-item><list-item><p>Digital artifact or achievement accumulation (e.g., badges)</p></list-item><list-item><p>Construction of digital spaces and worlds</p></list-item><list-item><p>Message boards, forums, and other public posts</p></list-item></list></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Quantifiability<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn2" /></td><td align="left">Opportunity to accrue numerical social metrics</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Creative or building games without quantifiable indicators of success or predefined goals</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Rank, leaderboards, and badges</p></list-item><list-item><p>Number of friends and connections</p></list-item></list></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Shared structured activity</td><td align="left">Opportunity to engage collectively in activities with predetermined, structured rules and goals</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Games that provide access to digital worlds but with few predefined goals (e.g., Second Life)</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Competitive, collaborative, or creative games with predefined goals for players (e.g., quest‐based games and competitions)</p></list-item></list></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Customizability</td><td align="left">Digital content can be altered by the user</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Puzzle, logic, or party games that do not provide opportunities for building or altering avatars</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Avatars, skins, or outfits for avatars, and accessories for avatars</p></list-item><list-item><p>Player‐constructed components in sandbox games (e.g., Minecraft and the Sims)</p></list-item></list></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note</emph>: Examples highlight social gaming experiences where the presence of social media features is low (e.g., when asynchronicity is low, interactions are concurrent) and experiences where the presence of social media features is high (e.g., when asynchronicity is high, time lapses occur between interactions and responses).</p> <p>2 a Features and definitions drawn from the transformation framework (Nesi et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref30">53</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref31">54</reflink>]), which proposed specific features of social media (focusing on app‐based social media platforms) that transform peer interaction experiences.</p> <p>Social gaming provides two experiences that may be unique relative to other forms of social media: <emph>customizability</emph> and the opportunity for <emph>shared activities</emph>. Whereas many app‐based social media platforms emphasize photo or video sharing (Nesi et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref32">53</reflink>]), social gaming is visual via animation and graphics and provides players unique opportunities to customize and personalize their digital profile (e.g., avatar, character appearance, gamertag, and username) and creatively construct digital content (user‐generated content; Thomas, [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref33">78</reflink>]). Additionally, digital experiences can vary from reciprocal (involving direct exchanges) to parallel (occurring in the same digital space but without reciprocity; Subrahmanyam & Michikyan, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref34">74</reflink>]). Social gaming uniquely allows for a blend of reciprocal and parallel activities; for example, players can participate in reciprocal social dialogue while simultaneously engaging in parallel gameplay via their own screens. Among children and adolescents, shared activities and interests can foster peers' collective identity, belonging, and socioemotional development (Rubin et al., [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref35">65</reflink>]). More research is needed to understand how shared gameplay via social gaming may transform peers' experiences and offer similar benefits.</p> <p>Research on app‐based social media platforms suggests that the features of digital media facilitate experiences that are linked with socioemotional well‐being. For example, in a meta‐analysis of 70 studies of adolescents and adults, negative social interactions and social comparison on social networking sites were consistently related to more symptoms of depression and anxiety, whereas positive and supportive online social interactions were linked with fewer internalizing symptoms (Seabrook et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref36">69</reflink>]). In the social gaming context, the quantifiable, public metrics of achievement in online games may encourage social comparison, and cue absence can facilitate inhibition and harassment via online games. In contrast, the availability of social interactions via synchronous or asynchronous online gaming may promote social connection and well‐being. These and other types of novel social interactions via gaming are widespread and likely have implications for well‐being, yet are critically understudied.</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-4">SOCIAL GAMING AND ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0183913190-5">Peer relationships</hd> <p>Peer relationships are a key feature of adolescent development and social gaming may facilitate positive peer interactions. Among a representative sample of U.S. 13‐ to 17‐year‐olds, most gamers (75%), especially boys, played online with friends they knew in person, and 54% reported playing with friends or dating partners they met online (most of whom remained online‐only friends or partners; Lenhart, Smith, & Anderson, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref37">36</reflink>]; Lenhart, Smith, Anderson, Duggan, et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref38">37</reflink>]). Most adolescents reported that social gaming with others makes them feel more connected to friends they already know (78%) and to people they play with online, even if they do not consider them friends (52%; Lenhart, Smith, Anderson, Duggan, et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref39">37</reflink>]). Studies of young adult men and women suggest that peer interactions increase players' satisfaction with social games (Jegers, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref40">29</reflink>]; Sailer et al., [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref41">68</reflink>]). A study of racially/ethnically diverse young adult men and women in the United States suggests that there may be particular benefits when playing with a member of one's established social network (Dalisay et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref42">12</reflink>]). Given the salience of peers during adolescence, these benefits may be amplified among youth (Dahl et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref43">11</reflink>]): playful competition among girls and boys can offer social benefits for children and early adolescents (e.g., improved peer relations; Lobel et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref44">38</reflink>]), and cooperative and interpersonal games may provide opportunities to practice prosocial skills, as shown in a study of middle‐income Israeli 9‐ to 15‐year‐old girls and boys, and a study of Dutch early and mid‐adolescent boys and girls (Shoshani et al., [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref45">71</reflink>]; Verheijen et al., [<reflink idref="bib81" id="ref46">81</reflink>]).</p> <p>Social gaming also presents a novel context for peer group processes. Peer status and influence are transformed on social media, including by providing larger and online‐only peer networks in which to gain status, quantifiable indicators of status and approval, and 24/7 access to peer norms and reinforcement (Nesi et al., [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref47">54</reflink>]). Indicators of peer status within social gaming contexts are not well understood but may include features such as leaderboards, scores, and badges that allow gamers to evaluate their performance in comparison to others. As in the offline world, status in social gaming contexts likely influences adolescents' decision‐making and could encourage positive and prosocial behavior (e.g., among racially/ethnically diverse U.S. adolescents primarily from families with low incomes; Choukas‐Bradley et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref48">8</reflink>]), as well as risky behavior (Gibbons et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref49">24</reflink>]).</p> <p>Dyadic and group‐level peer processes via social gaming may also pose risks to adolescents' well‐being. Preliminary work with Dutch, German, and U.S. adolescents and young adults suggests that frequent social gaming may interfere with in‐person friendships, consistent with the displacement theory of media use, but can strengthen online friendships (Carras et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref50">7</reflink>]; Kowert et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref51">33</reflink>]; Smyth, [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref52">73</reflink>]). Additionally, among racially/ethnically diverse male and female children and adolescents, cyberbullying and harassment are common on some gaming platforms, given anonymity and the normalization of aggression. Specifically, <emph>trash talking, trolling</emph>, or <emph>flaming</emph> (insults or boastfulness that is intended to demoralize opponents; McInroy & Mishna, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref53">47</reflink>]; Nakamura, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref54">51</reflink>]) may be a unique experience of social stress among adolescent gamers.</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-6">Identity development</hd> <p>A defining developmental task of adolescence is identity exploration—asking the question, "Who am I?" (Erikson, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref55">20</reflink>]; Wängqvist & Frisén, [<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref56">83</reflink>]). Digital media provide opportunities for anonymous and low‐risk experimentation with different <emph>possible selves</emph> (see Markus & Nurius, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref57">41</reflink>]), a mechanism supporting identity exploration (Dunkel, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref58">18</reflink>]). Social gaming in particular offers opportunities for youth to explore different personas via affordances like usernames, avatars, and user‐created content. Youth can customize avatars by altering their demographic identities (e.g., gender and race), physical appearance or dress, and traits or skills (Wood & Szymanski, [<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref59">84</reflink>]). Based on these characteristics, users may create avatars to reflect their authentic selves, idealized versions of the self they wish to emulate, or negative possible selves that are feared or disliked (Wood & Szymanski, [<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref60">84</reflink>]). Although some studies with adolescents (including international samples in Asia, North America, and Europe) have indicated that avatar identification is related to poor self‐concept and problematic gaming (Green et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref61">28</reflink>]), avatar identification and observation of how others respond to the avatar can also provide opportunities to build skills in perspective taking, by taking on the viewpoint of different avatars (e.g., as shown in a study of U.S. high school students; Lee & Hoadley, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref62">35</reflink>]), and empathy during gameplay, when gamers have opportunities to act prosocially (e.g., as shown in research in 12 countries on girls in late childhood and early adolescence; Vieira, [<reflink idref="bib82" id="ref63">82</reflink>]).</p> <p>Adolescents' identity development may also be influenced by exposure to norms and expectations within social gaming contexts (see Bandura, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref64">3</reflink>]). Like other forms of digital media, gaming subcultures may develop in which youth can select and be exposed to new and appealing ideas, values, and people (Subrahmanyam & Šmahel, [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref65">75</reflink>]). This exposure can affirm an individual's positive identity characteristics, yet these socialization processes may also be harmful. For example, two case studies of young adolescent boys in Germany suggest that gaming may provide a pipeline to political radicalization and extremism in youth (Koehler et al., [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref66">32</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-7">Neurobiological development</hd> <p>Adolescence is a sensitive period for social processing wherein youth experience rapid pubertal and neurobiological changes that heighten their sensitivity to social feedback (Crone & Konijn, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref67">10</reflink>]; Nelson et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref68">52</reflink>]). Neurobiological research leveraging digital rejection paradigms (e.g., Cyberball, lab‐constructed social media contexts) suggests that rejection may be associated with detriments to adolescents' sense of belonging, sense of control, and self‐esteem, as well as increased feelings of ostracism, depression, and social pain (Crone & Konijn, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref69">10</reflink>]; Martin & Ochsner, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref70">42</reflink>]). In social gaming contexts, adolescents may experience rejection based on immediate feedback on in‐game performance or receive rejecting feedback from teammates or opponents via voice chats during competition. Adolescents, relative to adults, may be uniquely sensitive to flaming or trolling (e.g., insults or provocation) during digital competitions, since some youth may be particularly sensitive to peer rejection (e.g., as suggested in a study of late adolescents in the United States; Downey & Feldman, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref71">16</reflink>]), with potentially negative implications for teenagers' mental health. More research is needed to examine whether and how this sensitivity manifests in social gaming contexts.</p> <p>Adolescents' neural sensitivity to social feedback also increases their sensitivity to peer acceptance. In‐game feedback or peers' comments during gameplay that signal acceptance or status (e.g., game‐based achievements and positive feedback from teammates) may be uniquely rewarding to adolescents. In one study of U.S. male and female teenagers, adolescents showed greater activity in brain regions involved in reward processing, social cognition, and attention when viewing Instagram posts with more (vs. fewer) likes (Sherman et al., [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref72">70</reflink>]). With the diverse digital rewards of social gaming (e.g., quantifiable metrics of friends, badges, and experiential points), youth likely also engage these brain regions to navigate social gaming landscapes and pursue acceptance. Adolescents may be neurobiologically predisposed to conform to peer norms in the gaming context—whether they are adaptive (e.g., regarding cooperation or in‐game prosocial behavior) or risky (e.g., encouraging cyberbullying, disclosure of personal information, or radicalization)—and these could translate to behavior offline.</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-8">INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN GAMING EXPERIENCES</hd> <p>Individual and group‐based differences likely influence adolescents' selection of gaming content and related outcomes. The uses and gratifications theory suggests that individuals select media experiences based on personal preferences and needs, thus limiting which media may ultimately influence the user (Ruggiero, [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref73">66</reflink>]). The differential susceptibility to media effects model, which posits that dispositional, developmental, and social context factors may affect how individuals use and respond to digital media, provides a framework for understanding diverse experiences within gaming platforms (Valkenburg, [<reflink idref="bib80" id="ref74">80</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-9">Gender</hd> <p>Across platforms (e.g., mobile, console, and computer games), in nationally representative studies of U.S. teenagers, boys reported more time using digital games and getting more enjoyment from them than girls (Rideout et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref75">63</reflink>]). Offline, boys also engage in more group interactions and organized play, including sports and rule‐based games (Rose & Rudolph, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref76">64</reflink>]). Social gaming experiences are often interspersed with dyadic conversations about nongaming topics among U.S. adolescents (Lenhart, Smith, Anderson, Duggan, et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref77">37</reflink>]), which may feel more natural or enjoyable for boys' friendships than face‐to‐face dyadic disclosure. Prevalence estimates indicate that many girls—at least in some Western contexts (e.g., the United States and Australia)—<emph>do</emph> play digital games (King & Potenza, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref78">31</reflink>]; Rideout et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref79">63</reflink>]). Perhaps because games and gaming culture are often dominated by boys and men, sexism on gaming platforms may be relatively common among children and adolescents of diverse racial/ethnic groups, but it often goes unnoticed (McInroy & Mishna, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref80">47</reflink>]; Nakamura, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref81">51</reflink>]). This may include stereotypical or dehumanizing portrayals of women (e.g., hypersexualized female characters who are often the victims of violence) or blatant forms of sexual harassment, such as inappropriate sexual remarks or name calling by other players (McInroy & Mishna, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref82">47</reflink>]; Nakamura, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref83">51</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-10">Marginalized adolescents</hd> <p>Broadly, adolescents experiencing marginalization—including marginalization based on gender, race/ethnicity, sexual identity, socioeconomic status, or ability status—may face unique opportunities and challenges in gaming contexts. In studies around the world, adolescents and adults of diverse genders, racial/ethnic groups, and sexual identities reported that identity‐based harassment, such as racism, homophobia, and transphobia, is common on certain platforms (McInroy & Mishna, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref84">47</reflink>]; Thacker & Griffiths, [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref85">77</reflink>]; Zsila et al., [<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref86">85</reflink>]). However, members of marginalized groups may adopt in‐game cultural practices to promote healthy development (Richard & Gray, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref87">61</reflink>]). Adolescents may form supportive communities around shared skills, interests, and identities, which may encourage identity development and self‐expression, confidence, coping, and civic engagement—assets that can extend beyond gaming contexts (American Psychological Association, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref88">1</reflink>]; Di Cesare et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref89">14</reflink>]; Richard & Hoadley, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref90">62</reflink>]). For example, within some games, youth have opportunities to take part in civic engagement and self‐advocacy—such as organizing simulated in‐game political activities or protesting discrimination on gaming platforms—which is linked to interest in offline current events and volunteering among sexual‐ and gender‐diverse youth and nationally representative samples of U.S. adolescents (Di Cesare et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref91">14</reflink>]; Granic et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref92">26</reflink>]). Social gaming environments may also serve as <emph>third places</emph>—settings beyond home and work/school where youth can find community and develop friendships (De Grove et al., [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref93">13</reflink>]; Fishman, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref94">21</reflink>]; Markiewicz, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref95">40</reflink>]; Verheijen et al., [<reflink idref="bib81" id="ref96">81</reflink>]), which may be particularly beneficial to adolescents facing offline harassment, violence, or isolation.</p> <p>Moreover, the opportunities for identity exploration via social gaming may offer unique benefits to teenagers exploring marginalized identities. For example, evidence from studies of U.S. and Australian youth indicates that avatar customization can empower transgender and gender‐diverse adolescents to present a digital representation that feels most authentic with limited negative social repercussions (McKenna et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref97">48</reflink>]; Morgan et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref98">50</reflink>]). In a qualitative study of sexual‐ and gender‐minority adolescents in North America, online communities provided a safe and anonymous space for identity experimentation, validation, and ultimately, self‐acceptance, with some youth reporting that they first came out on digital community platforms (McInroy & Craig, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref99">46</reflink>]). In the United States, and likely in other contexts where racial/ethnic disparities are salient, customization can provide youth of color opportunities to explore and present their positive racial, ethnic, or cultural identities (LeBlanc & Loyd, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref100">34</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-11">Social skills</hd> <p>Pre‐existing social competencies or deficits may also shape gaming experiences in ways that have not yet been identified. Adolescents who struggle offline with social capital or skills may either gain those abilities in gaming contexts where alternative gaming partners (e.g., online‐only friends) or alternative indicators of social status (e.g., high leaderboard rankings) facilitate their social success (the <emph>poor‐get‐richer</emph> or social compensation hypothesis; Pouwels et al., [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref101">59</reflink>]), or they may seek gaming experiences to avoid in‐person interactions, ultimately exacerbating existing social difficulties (the <emph>poor‐get‐poorer</emph> hypothesis; Pouwels et al., [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref102">59</reflink>]). Research on adults from 33 countries suggests that excessive gaming is related to poor social competencies (Gao et al., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref103">22</reflink>]), yet the causal effects are unclear. A narrative review of digital media (including gaming) suggested that online interactions are related to offline social benefits for adolescents (Reich, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref104">60</reflink>]). Digital contexts can provide a less stressful and less threatening context in which to refine social skills, given the potential for anonymity and the absence of social cues online (Bers & Kazakoff, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref105">5</reflink>]). In a study of Italian adolescents and young adults, these benefits were particularly attractive to socially anxious youth (Angelini & Gini, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref106">2</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-12">Neurodiverse adolescents</hd> <p>Social gaming may be uniquely enticing for adolescents with neurodevelopmental conditions. For example, many adolescents on the autism spectrum find gaming very appealing; in fact, in a study of U.S. youth, participants on the autism spectrum spent 2 more hours a day gaming than neurotypical youth (Mazurek & Engelhardt, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref107">44</reflink>]). Qualitative work reveals that U.S. adult gamers on the autism spectrum from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds were attracted to the social connection and stress reduction offered by social gaming (Mazurek et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref108">45</reflink>]). Additionally, social gaming's highly rewarding nature and attention‐grabbing graphics appealed to male and female children and adolescents with attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder, increasing their risk for gaming addiction relative to neurotypical individuals (Masi et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref109">43</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-13">Neural markers</hd> <p>Among adolescent social gamers, diverse neural markers may lead some to more or less risky, rewarding, and emotional social gaming experiences. Individual differences in brain development and neurobiological processes may make some youth more sensitive to online social stimuli—for better or worse—as suggested by evidence from studies of rural U.S. youth from families with low incomes (Do et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref110">15</reflink>]; Telzer et al., [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref111">76</reflink>]). Age‐related differences in brain maturation may also be critical to understanding the role of social gaming in development. For example, a study that used gambling and reward paradigms suggests that mid‐adolescence is a peak time for activity in pleasure and reward brain areas when receiving social rewards (Silverman et al., [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref112">72</reflink>]), and may be a time of acute sensitivity to social rewards (and related potential risks) offered in gaming contexts.</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-14">RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESEARCH</hd> <p>Scholars who study adolescent social gaming have many avenues to pursue. In particular, we suggest that researchers (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref113">1</reflink>) identify the unique features and affordances of social gaming; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref114">2</reflink>) examine the impact of social gaming on developmental outcomes; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref115">3</reflink>) encompass social gaming within existing social media theories while simultaneously considering how it differs from app‐based social media platforms; and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref116">4</reflink>) translate this research to intervention, prevention, and education efforts (see Table 3). Mixed results from the limited research in this area also highlight the need for attention to individual differences, construct clarity, and careful measurement.</p> <p>3 TABLE Recommendations for research on adolescent social gaming.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left">Purpose</th><th align="left">Recommendation</th><th align="left">Suggested method</th><th align="left">Examples of research questions</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Descriptive</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Identify and document the features of social gaming</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Qualitative</p></list-item><list-item><p>Observational</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>What features characterize popular games among youth?</p></list-item><list-item><p>What affordances do social gaming contexts provide that are unavailable in other digital media contexts?</p></list-item><list-item><p>How prevalent are different forms of social gaming interactions?</p></list-item></list></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Inferential</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Examine the impact of social gaming experiences on development</p><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Identify links between gaming and momentary functioning</p></list-item><list-item><p>Identify long‐term developmental trajectories and outcomes</p></list-item></list></list-item><list-item><p>Attend to individual differences and cultural influences</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Survey based</p></list-item><list-item><p>Longitudinal cohort designs</p></list-item><list-item><p>Ecological momentary assessment</p></list-item><list-item><p>Experimental</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Are social gaming experiences linked to immediate changes in affect?</p></list-item><list-item><p>How are distinct social gaming experiences (e.g., cooperation, competition, rejection, and in‐game achievement) associated with developmental outcomes?</p></list-item><list-item><p>What pre‐existing characteristics predispose youth to select different social gaming experiences?</p></list-item><list-item><p>How do offline peer processes (e.g., friendship formation and peer influence) translate to gaming contexts?</p></list-item></list></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Theory building</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Encompass social gaming with social media theories</p></list-item><list-item><p>Theorize how social gaming is distinct from app‐based social media platforms</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Theory development</p></list-item><list-item><p>Meta‐analyses and reviews</p></list-item><list-item><p>Psychometric development</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>How do theories of social media apply to social gaming contexts?</p></list-item><list-item><p>What measures and constructs are ideal for studying diverse social gaming experiences?</p></list-item></list></td></tr><tr><td align="left">Intervention/application</td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Identify and intervene for youth at risk for negative social gaming experiences</p></list-item><list-item><p>Provide prevention and education opportunities to encourage healthy social gaming</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>Randomized controlled trials</p></list-item><list-item><p>Field experiments</p></list-item><list-item><p>Youth participatory action research</p></list-item></list></td><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>What gaming features benefit youth struggling with offline social interactions?</p></list-item><list-item><p>What form of gaming‐related media literacy is most effective and desirable to teenagers?</p></list-item></list></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Researchers should also consider diverse populations. Most studies on gaming have been conducted in Europe, North America, and Asia. Researchers should prioritize diversity in developmental stages, social identities, and social/cultural contexts, with particular attention to marginalized youth who have been underrepresented in studies. Finally, we suggest that researchers adopt a strengths‐based approach that considers how social gaming involves both costs and benefits and that conceptualizes adolescents as active participants in their digital experiences.</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-15">CONCLUSION</hd> <p>Social gaming may have a unique influence on adolescent well‐being given the developmental features of peer relationships, identity formation, and neurobiological development during this period. However, social gaming has been largely neglected in research on adolescent development and social media. Going forward, researchers must investigate social gaming as a context of and influence on adolescent development to understand and promote well‐being among adolescents using these digital social tools.</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-16">ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</hd> <p>We thank the Character Lab Research Network and the CLIPster Interns who provided invaluable feedback on the ideas presented in this article. This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. 1940700 awarded to Anne J. Maheux. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.</p> <hd id="AN0183913190-17">CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT</hd> <p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p> <p>GRAPH: Table S1.</p> <ref id="AN0183913190-18"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref88" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> American Psychological Association. (2023). Health advisory on social media use in adolescence. https://<ulink href="http://www.apa.org/topics/social‐media‐internet/health‐advisory‐adolescent‐social‐media‐use">www.apa.org/topics/social‐media‐internet/health‐advisory‐adolescent‐social‐media‐use</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref106" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Angelini, F., & Gini, G. (2023). Differences in perceived online communication and disclosing e‐motions among adolescents and young adults: The role of specific social media features and social anxiety. Journal of Adolescence, 96, 512 – 525. https://doi.org/10.1002/jad.12256</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref64" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bandura, A. J. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref17" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Beals, L., & Bers, M. U. (2009). A developmental lens for designing virtual worlds for children and youth. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1 (1), 51 – 65. https://doi.org/10.1162/ijlm.2009.0001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref105" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bers, M. U., & Kazakoff, E. R. (2013). Techno‐tykes: Digital technologies in early childhood. In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 197 – 205). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203841198</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref18" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bowman, N. D. (2018). Video games: A medium that demands our attention. Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351235266</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref50" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Carras, M. C., Van Rooij, A. J., Van de Mheen, D., Musci, R., Xue, Q.‐L., & Mendelson, T. (2017). Video gaming in a hyperconnected world: A cross‐sectional study of heavy gaming, problematic gaming symptoms, and online socializing in adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 68 (March), 472 – 479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.060</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref48" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Choukas‐Bradley, S., Giletta, M., Cohen, G. L., & Prinstein, M. J. (2015). Peer influence, peer status, and prosocial behavior: An experimental investigation of peer socialization of adolescents' intentions to volunteer. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44 (12), 2197 – 2210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964‐015‐0373‐2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref14" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Consalvo, M. (2017). Player one, playing with others virtually: What's next in game and player studies. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 34 (1), 84 – 87. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2016.1266682</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crone, E. A., & Konijn, E. A. (2018). Media use and brain development during adolescence. Nature Communications, 9 (1), 1 – 10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467‐018‐03126‐x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dahl, R. E., Allen, N. B., Wilbrecht, L., & Suleiman, A. B. (2018). Importance of investing in adolescence from a developmental science perspective. Nature, 554 (7693), 441 – 450. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25770</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dalisay, F., Kushin, M. J., Yamamoto, M., Liu, Y.‐I., & Skalski, P. (2015). Motivations for game play and the social capital and civic potential of video games. New Media & Society, 17 (9), 1399 – 1417. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814525753</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> De Grove, F., Cauberghe, V., & Van Looy, J. (2014). In pursuit of play: Toward a social cognitive understanding of determinants of digital play. Communication Theory, 24 (2), 205 – 223. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12030</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Di Cesare, D. M., Craig, S. L., Brooks, A. S., & Doll, K. (2023). Setting the game agenda: Reviewing the emerging literature on video gaming and psychological well‐being of sexual and gender diverse youth. Games and Culture, 1 – 21. https://doi.org/10.1177/15554120231178883</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Do, K. T., McCormick, E. M., Prinstein, M. J., Lindquist, K. A., & Telzer, E. H. (2022). Intrinsic connectivity within the affective salience network moderates adolescent susceptibility to negative and positive peer norms. Scientific Reports, 12 (1), 17463. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598‐022‐17780‐1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Downey, G., & Feldman, S. I. (1996). Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70 (6), 1327 – 1343. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022‐3514.70.6.1327</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Du, Y., Grace, T. D., Jagannath, K., & Salen‐Tekinbas, K. (2021). Connected play in virtual worlds: Communication and control mechanisms in virtual worlds for children and adolescents. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 5 (5), 27. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti5050027</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dunkel, C. S. (2000). Possible selves as a mechanism for identity exploration. Journal of Adolescence, 23 (5), 519 – 529. https://doi.org/10.1006/jado.2000.0340</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Elson, M., Breuer, J., Ivory, J. D., & Quandt, T. (2014). More than stories with buttons: Narrative, mechanics, and context as determinants of player experience in digital games. Journal of Communication, 64 (3), 521 – 542. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12096</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity youth and crisis (Vol. 7). W. W. Norton & Company.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fishman, A. (2023, April 3). Why so many teens use video games to meet others. Psychology Today. https://<ulink href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/video‐game‐health/202303/why‐so‐many‐teens‐use‐video‐games‐to‐meet‐others">www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/video‐game‐health/202303/why‐so‐many‐teens‐use‐video‐games‐to‐meet‐others</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gao, Y.‐X., Wang, J.‐Y., & Dong, G.‐H. (2022). The prevalence and possible risk factors of internet gaming disorder among adolescents and young adults: Systematic reviews and meta‐analyses. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 154, 35 – 43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2022.06.049</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gehorsam, R. (2003). The coming revolution in massively multiuser persistent worlds. Computer, 36 (4), 93 – 95. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2003.1193233</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gibbons, F. X., Stock, M. L., & Gerrard, M. (2020). The prototype‐willingness model. In K. Sweeny, M. L. Robbins, & L. M. Cohen (Eds.), The Wiley encyclopedia of health psychology (pp. 517 – 527). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119057840.ch102</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gonçalves, D., Pais, P., Gerling, K., Guerreiro, T., & Rodrigues, A. (2023). Social gaming: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 147 (October), 107851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107851</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Granic, I., Lobel, A., & Engels, R. C. M. E. (2014). The benefits of playing video games. American Psychologist, 69 (1), 66 – 78. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034857</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Granic, I., Morita, H., & Scholten, H. (2020). Beyond screen time: Identity development in the digital age. Psychological Inquiry, 31 (3), 195 – 223. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2020.1820214</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Green, R., Delfabbro, P. H., & King, D. L. (2020). Avatar‐ and self‐related processes and problematic gaming: A systematic review. Addictive Behaviors, 108 (September), 106461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106461</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jegers, K. (2007). Pervasive game flow: Understanding player enjoyment in pervasive gaming. Computers in Entertainment, 5 (1), 9‐es. https://doi.org/10.1145/1236224.1236238</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Khoo, A. (2012). Video games as moral educators? Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 32 (4), 416 – 429. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2012.738638</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> King, D. L., & Potenza, M. N. (2020). Gaming disorder among female adolescents: A hidden problem? Journal of Adolescent Health, 66 (6), 650 – 652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.03.011</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Koehler, D., Fiebig, V., & Jugl, I. (2022). From gaming to hating: Extreme‐right ideological indoctrination and mobilization for violence of children on online gaming platforms. Political Psychology, 44 (2), 419 – 434. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12855</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kowert, R., Domahidi, E., Festl, R., & Quandt, T. (2014). Social gaming, lonely life? The impact of digital game play on adolescents' social circles. Computers in Human Behavior, 36 (July), 385 – 390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LeBlanc, T., & Loyd, A. B. (2022). Freedom dreaming to STEM: A conceptual model for black youth's racial and STEM identity development through social media. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 944207. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.944207</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee, J. J., & Hoadley, C. M. (2007). Leveraging identity to make learning fun: Possible selves and experiential learning in massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs). Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 3 (6), 5. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol3/iss6/5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lenhart, A., Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2015). Teens, technology and romantic relationships. Pew Research Center. https://<ulink href="http://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/10/01/teens‐technology‐and‐romantic‐relationships/">www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/10/01/teens‐technology‐and‐romantic‐relationships/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lenhart, A., Smith, A., Anderson, M., Duggan, M., & Perrin, A. (2015). Teens, technology and friendship. Pew Research Center. <ulink href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/08/06/teens‐technology‐and‐friendships/">http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/08/06/teens‐technology‐and‐friendships/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lobel, A., Engels, R. C. M. E., Stone, L. L., & Granic, I. (2019). Gaining a competitive edge: Longitudinal associations between children's competitive video game playing, conduct problems, peer relations, and prosocial behavior. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 8 (1), 76 – 87. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000159</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Markey, P. M., Ferguson, C. M., & Hopkins, L. L. (2020). Video game play: Myths and benefits. American Journal of Play, 13 (1), 87 – 106. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1304728.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Markiewicz, E. (2020). Third places in the era of virtual communities. Studia Periegetica (Periegetic Studies), 28 (4), 9 – 21. https://doi.org/10.26349/st.per.0028.01</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41 (9), 954 – 969. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003‐066X.41.9.954</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Martin, R. E., & Ochsner, K. N. (2016). The neuroscience of emotion regulation development: Implications for education. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 10 (August), 142 – 148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.06.006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Masi, L., Abadie, P., Herba, C., Emond, M., Gingras, M.‐P., & Amor, L. B. (2021). Video games in ADHD and non‐ADHD children: Modalities of use and association with ADHD symptoms. Frontiers in Pediatrics, 9, 632272. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2021.632272</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mazurek, M. O., & Engelhardt, C. R. (2013). Video game use and problem behaviors in boys with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7 (2), 316 – 324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2012.09.008</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mazurek, M. O., Engelhardt, C. R., & Clark, K. E. (2015). Video games from the perspective of adults with autism spectrum disorder. Computers in Human Behavior, 51 (October), 122 – 130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.062</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McInroy, L. B., & Craig, S. L. (2020). "It's like a safe haven fantasy world": Online fandom communities and the identity development activities of sexual and gender minority youth. Psychology of Popular Media, 9 (2), 236 – 246. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000234</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McInroy, L. B., & Mishna, F. (2017). Cyberbullying on online gaming platforms for children and youth. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 34, 597 – 607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560‐017‐0498‐0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McKenna, J. L., Wang, Y.‐C., Williams, C. R., McGregor, K., & Boskey, E. R. (2022). "You can't be deadnamed in a video game": Transgender and gender diverse adolescents' use of video game avatar creation for gender‐affirmation and exploration. Journal of LGBT Youth, 21 (1), 1 – 21. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2022.2144583</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moreno, M. A., & Uhls, Y. T. (2019). Applying an affordances approach and a developmental lens to approach adolescent social media use. DIGITAL HEALTH, 31 (5), 2055207619826678. https://doi.org/10.1177/2055207619826678</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morgan, H., O'Donovan, A., Almeida, R., Lin, A., & Perry, Y. (2020). The role of the avatar in gaming for trans and gender diverse young people. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17 (22), 8617. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228617</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nakamura, L. (2019). Gender and race in the gaming world. In M. Graham & W. H. Dutton (Eds.), Society and the internet: How networks of information and communication are changing our lives (2nd ed., pp. 127 – 145). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198843498.003.0008</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nelson, E. E., Leibenluft, E., McClure, E. B., & Pine, D. S. (2005). The social re‐orientation of adolescence: A neuroscience perspective on the process and its relation to psychopathology. Psychological Medicine, 35 (2), 163 – 174. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291704003915</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nesi, J., Choukas‐Bradley, S., & Prinstein, M. J. (2018a). Transformation of adolescent peer relations in the social media context: Part 1—A theoretical framework and application to dyadic peer relationships. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 21 (3), 267 – 294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567‐018‐0261‐x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nesi, J., Choukas‐Bradley, S., & Prinstein, M. J. (2018b). Transformation of adolescent peer relations in the social media context: Part 2—Application to peer group processes and future directions for research. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 21 (3), 295 – 319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567‐018‐0262‐9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nesi, J., Dredge, R., Maheux, A. J., Roberts, S. R., Fox, K. A., & Choukas‐Bradley, S. (2023). Peer experiences via social media. In B. Halpern‐Felsher (Ed.), Encyclopedia of child and adolescent health (pp. 182 – 195). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978‐0‐12‐818872‐9.00046‐7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Odgers, C. L., & Jensen, M. R. (2020). Adolescent mental health in the digital age: Facts, fears, and future directions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 61 (3), 336 – 348. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13190</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Orben, A. (2020). Teenagers, screens and social media: A narrative review of reviews and key studies. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 55 (4), 407 – 414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127‐019‐01825‐4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pellegrini, A. D. (2011). The Oxford handbook of the development of play. Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pouwels, J. L., Valkenburg, P. M., Beyens, I., van Driel, I. I., & Keijsers, L. (2021). Some socially poor but also some socially rich adolescents feel closer to their friends after using social media. Nature Scientific Reports, 11, 21176. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598‐021‐99034‐0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reich, S. M. (2017). Connecting offline social competence to online peer interactions. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 6 (4), 291 – 310. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000111</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richard, G. T., & Gray, K. L. (2018). Gendered play, racialized reality: Black cyberfeminism, inclusive communities of practice, and the intersections of learning, socialization, and resilience in online gaming. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 39 (1), 112 – 148. https://doi.org/10.5250/fronjwomestud.39.1.0112</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richard, G. T., & Hoadley, C. (2015). Learning resilience in the face of bias: Online gaming, protective communities and interest‐driven digital learning [Conference proceeding] (Vol. 1). International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc. https://doi.org/10.22318/cscl2015.403</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rideout, V., Peebles, A., Mann, S., & Robb, M. B. (2022). Common sense census: Media use by tweens and teens, 2021. https://<ulink href="http://www.commonsensemedia.org/research/the‐common‐sense‐census‐media‐use‐by‐tweens‐and‐teens‐2021">www.commonsensemedia.org/research/the‐common‐sense‐census‐media‐use‐by‐tweens‐and‐teens‐2021</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rose, A. J., & Rudolph, K. D. (2006). A review of sex differences in peer relationship processes: Potential trade‐offs for the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys. Psychological Bulletin, 132 (1), 98 – 131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033‐2909.132.1.98</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M., & Parker, J. G. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 571 – 645). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0310</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communication and Society, 3 (1), 3 – 37. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0301_02</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self‐determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well‐being. American Psychologist, 55 (1), 68 – 78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003‐066X.55.1.68</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sailer, M., Hense, J. U., Mayr, S. K., & Mandl, H. (2017). How gamification motivates: An experimental study of the effects of specific game design elements on psychological need satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 69 (April), 371 – 380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.033</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seabrook, E. M., Kern, M. L., & Rickard, N. S. (2016). Social networking sites, depression, and anxiety: A systematic review. JMIR Mental Health, 3 (4), e50. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.5842</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sherman, L. E., Payton, A. A., Hernandez, L. M., Greenfield, P. M., & Dapretto, M. (2016). The power of the like in adolescence: Effects of peer influence on neural and behavioral responses to social media. Psychological Science, 27 (7), 1027 – 1035. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616645673</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shoshani, A., Braverman, S., & Meirow, G. (2021). Video games and close relations: Attachment and empathy as predictors of children's and adolescents' video game social play and socio‐emotional functioning. Computers in Human Behavior, 114 (January), 106578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106578</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Silverman, M. H., Jedd, K., & Luciana, M. (2015). Neural networks involved in adolescent reward processing: An activation likelihood estimation meta‐analysis of functional neuroimaging studies. NeuroImage, 122, 427 – 439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.07.083</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smyth, J. M. (2007). Beyond self‐selection in video game play: An experimental examination of the consequences of massively multiplayer online role‐playing game play. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 10 (5), 717 – 721. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.9963</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Subrahmanyam, K., & Michikyan, M. (2022). Methodological and conceptual issues in digital media research. In J. Nesi, E. H. Telzer, & M. J. Prinstein (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent digital media use and mental health (pp. 9 – 38). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108976237.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Subrahmanyam, K., & Šmahel, D. (2010). Digital youth. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐1‐4419‐6278‐2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Telzer, E. H., Jorgensen, N. A., Prinstein, M. J., & Lindquist, K. A. (2021). Neurobiological sensitivity to social rewards and punishments moderates link between peer norms and adolescent risk taking. Child Development, 92 (2), 731 – 745. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13466</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thacker, S., & Griffiths, M. D. (2012). An exploratory study of trolling in online video gaming. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning, 2 (4), 17 – 33. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijcbpl.2012100102</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thomas, A. (2022). Can you play? An analysis of video game user‐generated content policies. CREATe. https://<ulink href="http://www.create.ac.uk/blog/2022/05/24/new‐working‐paper‐can‐you‐play‐an‐analysis‐of‐video‐game‐user‐generated‐content‐policies/">www.create.ac.uk/blog/2022/05/24/new‐working‐paper‐can‐you‐play‐an‐analysis‐of‐video‐game‐user‐generated‐content‐policies/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2023). Surgeon general issues new advisory about effects social media use has on youth mental health. https://<ulink href="http://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2023/05/23/surgeon‐general‐issues‐new‐advisory‐about‐effects‐social‐media‐use‐has‐youth‐mental‐health.html">www.hhs.gov/about/news/2023/05/23/surgeon‐general‐issues‐new‐advisory‐about‐effects‐social‐media‐use‐has‐youth‐mental‐health.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Valkenburg, P. M. (2022). Theoretical foundations of social media uses and effects. In J. Nesi, E. H. Telzer, & M. J. Prinstein (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent digital media use and mental health (pp. 39 – 60). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108976237.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Verheijen, G. P., Stoltz, S. E. M. J., van den Berg, Y. H. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2019). The influence of competitive and cooperative video games on behavior during play and friendship quality in adolescence. Computers in Human Behavior, 91, 297 – 304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.10.023</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vieira, E. T. (2012). The relationships among girls' prosocial video gaming, perspective‐taking, sympathy, and thoughts about violence. Communication Research, 41 (7), 892 – 912. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650212463049</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wängqvist, M., & Frisén, A. (2016). Who am I online? Understanding the meaning of online contexts for identity development. Adolescent Research Review, 1, 139 – 151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894‐016‐0025‐0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wood, S. M., & Szymanski, A. (2020). "The me I want you to see": The use of video game avatars to explore identity in gifted adolescents. Gifted Child Today, 43 (2), 124 – 134. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217519898217</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zsila, Á., Shabahang, R., Aruguete, M. S., & Orosz, G. (2022). Toxic behaviors in online multiplayer games: Prevalence, perception, risk factors of victimization, and psychological consequences. Aggressive Behavior, 48 (3), 356 – 364. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.22023</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Anne J. Maheux; Shedrick L. Garrett; Kara A. Fox; Nathan H. Field; Kaitlyn Burnell; Eva H. Telzer and Mitchell J. Prinstein</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib79" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib80" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib78" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib81" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib83" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib84" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib82" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib77" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib85" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref97"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref101"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl70" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl71" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl72" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref108"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl73" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref109"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl74" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref110"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl75" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref111"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl76" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref112"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1460226
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Adolescent Social Gaming as a Form of Social Media: A Call for Developmental Science
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Anne+J%2E+Maheux%22">Anne J. Maheux</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1308-5798">0000-0003-1308-5798</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Shedrick+L%2E+Garrett%22">Shedrick L. Garrett</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2007-5339">0000-0002-2007-5339</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kara+A%2E+Fox%22">Kara A. Fox</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Nathan+H%2E+Field%22">Nathan H. Field</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0675-6063">0000-0003-0675-6063</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kaitlyn+Burnell%22">Kaitlyn Burnell</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Eva+H%2E+Telzer%22">Eva H. Telzer</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2351-6339">0000-0002-2351-6339</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mitchell+J%2E+Prinstein%22">Mitchell J. Prinstein</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7587-8665">0000-0002-7587-8665</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Child+Development+Perspectives%22"><i>Child Development Perspectives</i></searchLink>. 2025 19(1):3-13.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 11
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: SourceSuprt
  Label: Sponsoring Agency
  Group: SrcSuprt
  Data: National Science Foundation (NSF)
– Name: NumberContract
  Label: Contract Number
  Group: NumCntrct
  Data: 1940700
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adolescents%22">Adolescents</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Games%22">Games</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Media%22">Social Media</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Play%22">Play</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adolescent+Development%22">Adolescent Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Oriented+Programs%22">Computer Oriented Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Peer+Relationship%22">Peer Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Concept%22">Self Concept</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Neurology%22">Neurology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Biology%22">Biology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Individual+Differences%22">Individual Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Competence%22">Interpersonal Competence</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/cdep.12518
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1750-8592<br />1750-8606
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Social gaming--online gameplay involving digital interactions with others--is a common form of social media use among adolescents. Research on this topic has neglected the social aspect of gaming and the potential role of social gaming in adolescent development. In this article, we define social gaming, drawing on interdisciplinary theories to clarify how it is both similar to and distinct from the app-based social media platforms that have received more research attention. We outline how social gaming may be uniquely rewarding and influential for adolescents, given three key features of adolescent development: peer relationships, identity development, and neurobiological development. We address how individual differences--including those related to social identities, neurobiology, and pre-existing social skills--may shape social gaming experiences and related outcomes. We conclude with a call for more work on how social gaming influences adolescent development and an agenda for researchers.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1460226
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1460226
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/cdep.12518
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 11
        StartPage: 3
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Adolescents
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Games
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Media
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Play
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Adolescent Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Oriented Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Peer Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Concept
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Neurology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Biology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Individual Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Competence
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Adolescent Social Gaming as a Form of Social Media: A Call for Developmental Science
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Anne J. Maheux
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Shedrick L. Garrett
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kara A. Fox
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Nathan H. Field
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kaitlyn Burnell
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Eva H. Telzer
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mitchell J. Prinstein
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 03
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1750-8592
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1750-8606
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 19
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Child Development Perspectives
              Type: main
ResultId 1