Attachment to Digital Virtual Possessions in Videogames

Watkins, Rebecca; Molesworth, Mike

doi:10.1108/s0885-2111(2012)0000014012

Cited by 45 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed it may be problematic to consider DCOs to even be the same one when they are stored on different devices and displayed on different screens as the hardware and the decoding and processing software that bring it into being would be completely different, as indeed would the very atoms that hold the zeros and ones in memory. Yet despite this, Watkins and Molesworth (2012) found that whilst exact replicas of DCOs within videogames could easily be produced, participants explained that as they would know that duplicates did not have the same history as their treasured digital virtual possessions, they would be rejected. In the case of DCOs then, singularity is maintained in the mind of the owner and in this respect we might recognize a reversal of how agency has come to be distributed between humans and machines (for example see Denegri-Knott & Molesworth's analysis of wish lists, 2013), and even our understanding of how material objects carry agency in this regard (Epp & Price, 2010).…”

Section: Ontological Multiplicity and Possession Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the case of DCOs then, singularity is maintained in the mind of the owner and in this respect we might recognize a reversal of how agency has come to be distributed between humans and machines (for example see Denegri-Knott & Molesworth's analysis of wish lists, 2013), and even our understanding of how material objects carry agency in this regard (Epp & Price, 2010). Unlike material goods, the singularity of DCOs is not found in physical patina, but rather maintained in 'mental patina', as the accumulation of memories of when DCOs were first acquired, crafted or used and which are evoked each time the object is assembled regardless of hardware involved (Denegri-Knott et al, 2012;Watkins & Molesworth, 2012). Participants' stories of 'my first avatar', 'the armour my friend gave to me or 'the car I created with my girlfriend' illustrate how the process of associating memories with particular DCOs distinguishes them even from an exact digital duplicate (Watkins & Molesworth 2012).…”

Section: Ontological Multiplicity and Possession Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unlike material goods, the singularity of DCOs is not found in physical patina, but rather maintained in 'mental patina', as the accumulation of memories of when DCOs were first acquired, crafted or used and which are evoked each time the object is assembled regardless of hardware involved (Denegri-Knott et al, 2012;Watkins & Molesworth, 2012). Participants' stories of 'my first avatar', 'the armour my friend gave to me or 'the car I created with my girlfriend' illustrate how the process of associating memories with particular DCOs distinguishes them even from an exact digital duplicate (Watkins & Molesworth 2012). Hence, their possession requires on going possession work beyond initial possession rituals that require that consumers engage in or recreate the on going association of DCOs with specific individuals, times or experiences in order to experience them as singular (Watkins & Molesworth 2012).…”

Section: Ontological Multiplicity and Possession Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Likewise loyalty to game platforms is in part due to in-game achievements stored in users' accounts (Castranova 2008;Moon, Hossain, Sanders, Garrity & Jo 2013). For consumers DCOs seem to become highly valued possessions, as already noted in archival practices (Kirk & Sellen 2010), the transformation of digital commodities into meaningful possessions (Denegri-Knott, Watkins & Wood 2012;Watkins & Molesworth 2012), teenager's treasured digital possessions (Odom, Zimmerman & Forlizzi 2011) and digital heirlooms (Kirk and Banks 2002). However these objects also remain assets for the companies that host them and are exploited as such.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alongside the material consumption objects that have long dominated consumer research we have witnessed the emergence of digital consumption objects (DCOs) which possess no enduring material substance but rather exist within digital space (computer-mediated electronic environments), accessed and consumed via devices such as desktop computers, laptops, tablets, mobile phones and videogame consoles (see Denegri-Knott and Molesworth 2010;Watkins and Molesworth 2012;Molesworth and Denegri-Knott, 2013). The objects we call our own therefore increasingly exist in digital form (Belk 2013a;Denegri-Knott and Molesworth 2010;Lehdonvirta 2012), yet present significant opportunities for profit for companies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Possession Work on Hosted Digital Consumption Objects as Consumer Ensnarement

Molesworth¹,

Watkins²,

Denegri‐Knott³

2016

Journal of the Association for Consumer Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper extends prior critical discussions of digital prosumption by demonstrating that prosumer reliant online business models represent new ways to valorise consumer labour through the creation of multiple realities whereby digital consumption objects are simultaneously enacted as assests by companies, and as possessions by consumers. We argue that this ontological multiplicity means that consumers' 'possession work' no longer serves to separate these objects from the market sphere, as in prior work. This produces a new form of consumer lock-in, or actually ensnarement as it is consumers' own efforts to make objects meaningful that keep them in the market, similar to the psychological attachments seen in 'brand love', but also incorporating aspects of proprietary tie-ins, and access-based market systems. We further consider the implications of such a system. For companies we portray such ensnarement as an attractive, emerging mechanism for ongoing valorization of 'free labour'. Yet we also argue that this presents significant consequences for ensnared consumers who may be subject not only to the ongoing financial exploitation of their possession work, but also restrictions on possession. As a broader contribution we highlight how the examination of multiple, potentially conflicting, ontologies in markets may interact and shape one another.2

show abstract

Section: Ontological Multiplicity and Possession Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ontological Multiplicity and Possession Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ontological Multiplicity and Possession Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Possession Work on Hosted Digital Consumption Objects as Consumer Ensnarement

Molesworth¹,

Watkins²,

Denegri‐Knott³

2016

Journal of the Association for Consumer Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Back to consumption and production? Prosumers negotiating the WMG lockdown on YouTube

Bajde

Koklič

Bajde³

2015

J of Consumer Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a growing body of literature that explores the increasingly blurred divide separating production and consumption. Within this stream of work, digital environments are commonly depicted as sites of consumer empowerment, participation, co-creation and prosumption, the intertwined process of production and consumption. Yet, in response to the mounting commercial and legal pressures, Web 2.0 companies pro-actively regulate prosumption, deploying advanced technological devices and innovative contractual arrangements. Exploring the case of Warner Music Group lockdown on YouTube, we investigate the role of a content-sharing platform in (re)formatting prosumption. We draw from prosumption theory and Ritzer's "prosumption continuum" to highlight how shifting arrangements of rights and content regulation shape prosumption of corporate content (in our case music owned by record labels). In contrast to the studies emphasizing the blurring of the line between consumer and producer, we illustrate how prosumption can also be transformed (back) into more conventional forms of consumption and production. We highlight several mechanisms that make this process of "de-prosumption" possible despite considerable consumer opposition, and consider the implications facing prosumers of corporate content.

show abstract

When Good Fences Make Good Customers: Exploring Psychological Ownership and Territoriality in Marketing

Kirk¹

2017

Theoretical Orientations and Practical Applications of Psychological Ownership

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attachment to Digital Virtual Possessions in Videogames

Cited by 45 publications

References 22 publications

Possession Work on Hosted Digital Consumption Objects as Consumer Ensnarement

Possession Work on Hosted Digital Consumption Objects as Consumer Ensnarement

Back to consumption and production? Prosumers negotiating the WMG lockdown on YouTube

When Good Fences Make Good Customers: Exploring Psychological Ownership and Territoriality in Marketing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About