While the traditional categories of form and function were informative and serviceable in the analysis of MUD behaviors, they were not always fully applicable to the peculiar environments studied. To illuminate their varying utility, the chart below is presented, with subsequent expansion in the pages that follow.
| Evaluation of the form-function framework as applied to MUDs | Instances include: |
| Framework Supported |
|
| Framework Extended or Altered |
|
| Framework Rejected |
|
Another form of nonverbal communication which supported the descriptive framework to some degree was the appropriateness with which haptic phenomena were viewed by participants. As explained earlier, MUDders are likely to react with indignation if groped inappropriately, and may, for example, shake hands to finalize a bargain. This phenomenon is evidence of the deep-seated reification to which users subject their MUD experiences, which in turn indicates the level to which the spatial metaphor extends even to users' virtual bodies. That is, users feel as though they actually have hands to shake with, and bodies that can be inappropriately groped or lovingly caressed.
Most established (i.e., those documented by Patterson, (1990)) nonverbal functions were readily discernible in the behavior of the users within the MUDs studied. A key element to all such behaviors, which has profound consequences for how they are to be interpreted, is that they are intentionally enacted in MUD interaction, which contrasts with their sometimes unintentional enactment in face to face interaction. So, while the function "providing information" was discernible in every MUD interaction observed, it could just as easily been subsumed by "presenting identities and images"; the verbal channel has always been the easiest for humans to control, and in a world created solely by words, where self-presentation is restricted only by one's imagination and typing skills, one's identity is itself presentational.
Another way in which the form of vocalics is altered in MUD environments lies in the means by which phrases within utterances can be stressed. While such stress is exceedingly complex in face to face interactions (i.e., it can be accomplished in an infinitely varying combination of rate, pitch, loudness, accent, etc.), the means by which vocalic stress is represented on MUDs are restricted to text. Given the finite number of ways in which this is done (e.g., with asterisks, capital letters, underscores, et.al.), the complexity with which utterances can be modified is necessarily lessened.
A closely related issue, which also seemed to reject the traditional framework, was the fact that the ordinarily vocalic feature of conversations, pauses during or between utterances, simply did not apply to MUD interaction. This is due to the fact that, unlike face to face interactions, utterances are only made known as they are completed, rather than contemporaneously with their production. This unique state of affairs also has important implications for turn regulation behaviors.
As detailed in Chapter 4, MUDders compensate for the peculiarities of the environment by keeping their utterances fairly short, and adeptly maintaining multi-threaded conversations. MUD environments were designed to be virtual spaces wherein users could interact, and these methods enhance that feeling of interactivity. As such, it is no surprise that lectures (i.e., "one way" communication) are exceedingly rare.
On the opposite end of the output spectrum are those individuals who have such irreproachable typing skills that they are able to overbear any conversation. Much has been said about the equalization of status in text based environments, but those individuals who can type quickly and accurately can achieve status and conversational control on MUDs.
Several nonverbal forms were difficult to identify on the MUDs studied, including olfactics, proxemics, environmental cues. While some exceptions are noted in Chapter 3, it was concluded that for such nonverbal forms to be particularly salient, actual physical copresence is required. This conclusion was reached when it was realized that such cues are hardly meaningful in other physically removed settings, such as video conferencing or telephone conversation.
Kinesic phenomena were similarly difficult to ascertain on MUDs. While the tradition of face to face kinesic behavior is one which has lead many to consider it as primary to interpreting interactions, the author has come to believe that the primacy of kinesic activity springs from the simultaneity which characterizes face to face utterances. That is, what makes kinesic behavior so powerful is its ability to enhance, modify, illustrate, intensify, belie, or otherwise affect others' interpretation of the content of our utterances, while the utterance is being produced. While there are stylized methods for roughly portraying this simultaneity (e.g., "Aarchon says: *nodding happily* Really, I can do it!"), kinesic behaviors on MUDs are generally enacted independent of the utterances they may accompany (e.g., "Aarchon says: Really, I can do it." followed by "Aarchon nods happily"). This lack of simultaneity, combined with the fact that MUD commands are parsed only upon carriage returns, necessitates methods of conversational caretaking unique which are generally unique to text-based environments. These methods include more conscientious word choice (inevitable since words cannot be accidentally "blurted out" in the same sense as they can in face to face interactions), the use of the emote command and programmed feelings to illustrate and modify utterances, shortened utterances (to facilitate speedy repair), and a willingness (and ability) to follow multiple simultaneous conversations.
There are numerous implications of such a world of selective self-presentation. Without the wealth of visual nonverbal cues available in face to face interactions, it becomes easier to seem genuine, to depict interest, to conceal emotion, and to state falsehoods. In short, successful deception is a few mere keystrokes away, unfettered by the unintentional nonverbal "leakage" that often exposes inconsistencies in face to face interaction. Patterson's descriptive functional framework contends that "affect management", for instance, is an important nonverbal modifier to strong emotional affect. On MUDs, affect is not merely managed, but is actively, and intentionally, created, and therefor differs from the framework of face to face nonverbal functions.
As this project was drawing to a close, the author hypothesized that the utility of the form/function framework as applied to MUDs could probably be summarized in the following statement: As human, social animals, we will seek to enact the same nonverbal functions no matter what variety of communicative environment we find ourselves in; what may differ is the modes of communication available. With the exception of the idiosyncratic functions "affect management" (which Patterson (1990)characterizes as "behavioral adjustments" which "are often spontaneous and temporally limited") and "facilitating service and task goals" (of limited utility due to the fact that such task-oriented relationships rarely arise on MUDs), it does seem to be the case that the more common intentionally effected nonverbal communication functions are no less important in MUD environments than they are in face to face interactions. Restricted as they are to text based interaction appearing on one's computer screen, however, the modalities, or tools, with which the functions can be enacted demands ingenuity and creativity on the part of both programmers and users.
The verbal channel is the easiest to control in face to face interactions, as compared to controlling facial expressions or gestures. Due to their intentional nature, MUD interaction offers even more control of the words one utters, due to the availability of the backspace key on standard keyboards, which allows one to "eat one's words" even before they are uttered. As such, utterances are rarely "blurted out", and utterances are generally more deliberate than in face to face discussion.
Intentionality also has implications for backchannels in MUD conversation. In face to face interactions, backchannels are generally not explicitly intentional, but rather the byproducts of interpersonal engagement. On MUDs, backchannels must be intentionally enacted. Moreover, backchannels take on an additional importance in text-based environments, since the lack of visual cues makes it impossible to know when other users may have been called away from their keyboards. Indeed, backchannels "play a large role in establishing achievement of mutual understanding and [facilitate] a sense of co-presence," (Cherny, 1995b, p. 13).
As noted previously in this chapter, the intentional nature of MUD nonverbal communication also has important implications for deception and affect management as well. Without unintentional nonverbal behaviors, MUDders find it much easier to selectively present themselves, either by only portraying their best qualities, by portraying qualities they perceive as desirable, or even by presenting qualities they may find repulsive in "real life", in order play some exotic role. Similarly, since there is no need to "manage affect", as there is in face to face relations, MUDders find that it is more comfortable to discuss topics that might be painful or embarrassing if conducted in a physically co-present setting.
In face to face settings, much time is spent endeavoring to control one's unintentional nonverbal behaviors. On MUDs, intentionality is a defining characteristic of all behaviors, which gives rise to phenomena which exists in sharp contrast to their "real life" correlates, as discussed above.
The first category of emotes, "conventional actions", refers most directly to opening and closing behaviors, but also includes a "blink" or a "smile" to indicate that one is no longer idle. These actions not content-driven, but rather ritualized mechanisms of greeting, and to skip them is to be less than cordial, similar to other conversational arenas.
The simulation of backchannels in MUD interactions is important, due to the lack of the visual cues which show that one is listening in a face to face conversation. Such emotes as "nods" and "smiles" are common backchannels in MUD conversations, which is similar to ways in which people show attention in face to face interactions; the difference is that MUD backchannels are intentionally, mindfully, explicitly enacted, and are not the the mere byproducts of interpersonal involvement.
The third category of emotes is that of "emoted byplay". This includes simulated actions which could not ordinarily occur in "real life". To use Cherny's (1995b) example, "Karen detonates a low yield nuclear device over Penfold," (p. 16). This also includes cases in which interactions with MUD objects (actual or imaginary) are simulated, and narration of imaginary real life actions (such as "Vandal throws his computer off the third floor balcony,").
The fourth category of emotes is narration of real life actions. Especially to explain an upcoming idle period, MUDders will document their real life actions for others, as in "Magnafix runs upstairs to make lunch."
Finally, Cherny (1995b) discerns the category of exposition, unique in that it need not be enacted in the simple present tense. For example, the author might emote "Magnafix has never seen that movie." These expositions "seamlessly fit into conversation as if they were [produced via the 'say' command]", (Cherny, 1995b, p. 23).
Cherny's (1995b) categories of uses of the emote command are informative in that they show various rich uses for a simple command, one which merely issues a message consisting of a user's name followed by a string of letters. This is testimony to the ingenuity of participants, as well as the depth which can be created in a world consisting of "mere text".
Some social MUDs allow users to change their gender at will, and some even have as many as ten different genders to choose from (including "both", "neither", and "none"). Adventure MUDs generally provide a choice of two or three genders, the third being "neuter", a choice which can generate some uneasiness for those with whom the genderless person interacts. MUDders report that this uneasiness is generally brought about by a sense of insecurity akin to speaking with someone of indeterminate gender in a face to face interaction. Even while they recognize that the person to whom they speak may not actually be the gender they're presenting, MUDders find it easier to communicate when a gender is defined.
When that request, "Please choose your gender", appears on a new user's screen, many decide to virtually cross-dress and choose their opposite gender. At that moment, the user enters into a complicated relationship with other members of the community. They must, among other things, think about how gender affects speech, mannerisms, and interpretation of experience (Turkle, 1995). They may also be, at some point, forced to decide just how far they'll take their charade; i.e., what will they do if someone asks them point blank, "Are you gender-swapping?". While the utter novice may have no trouble in lying to other members of the community, their attempts (especially men trying to portray women) are usually quite transparent. More experienced users may be more successful at portraying the opposite gender, but then end up in very tangled relationships with other users which can end quite painfully, as evidenced from these excerpts from a conversation with a man who portrayed a woman on Ancient Anguish for many months, but was then discovered:
Regardless of individual motivations, one thing is certain. The choice of gender that MUDs provide is a tool which forces users to examine their preconceptions about gender and gender roles, sexuality, role playing, and identity.
Identity is a particularly interesting issue when examined in light of MUDs. Those who hold that MUDs are "just games" would posit that there is no "I" on the screen, but merely a fanciful representation, meaningless and essentially hollow. This is frequently the attitude of the uninitiated and of new users who feel as though their anonymity is a passport to vent their darkest impulses.
For postmodernists like Sherry Turkle (1995) and Amy Bruckman (1992, 1993), however, the persona as represented on the screen is just as much a Self as the ones who interact face to face with bosses, colleagues, friends, and family. In other words, identity is fluid rather than fixed, and "who you really are" changes as circumstances change. Turkle (1995) writes of "cycling through windows" of her professional life, family life, and MUD life. No single context brings about her "true self", for, as stated by Wilmot (1994), "the self is created by the relationships it has, AND the relationship(s) literally create the self.", (p. 82). Or, as put by the cognitive philosopher Daniel Dennet (1991), "Selves are not independently existing soul-pearls, but artifacts of the social processes that create us, and, like other such artifacts, subject to sudden shifts in status," (p. 423).
Pavel Curtis (1992) notes three significant effects of users' anonymity. The first is the fact that self-presentation can be so utterly successful, overcoming most "real life" attributes, thus allowing participants to completely fabricate a persona through which to express themselves on the MUD. The second is what Curtis refers to as "shipboard syndrome", or the feeling that since nothing of lasting consequence will come of any MUD actions, it is safe to discuss one's most intimate secrets. The third, though rare, refers to when a user feels that she cannot be held accountable for her deeds, and therefore feels free to be purposefully obnoxious or offensive.
Indeed, "[s]hielded by anonymity and distance from most consequences of their actions, [MUDders] frequently behave in ways they would not in real life," (Leslie, 1993, p.28). While this statement may seem to imply malice, it can also mean disinhibition. Turkle (1995) reports that some young teenagers experiment with sex online as a testing ground before experimenting physically. While many may recoil at the thought of such activity on MUDs, Turkle points out that, if the child is going to experiment anyway, which is the safer forum? Of course, Turkle takes care to note that the Internet is not a forum free of harassment and psychological abuses, and that parents always have a responsibility to monitor their young children's online activities, but her point is a valid one in any event. Even in adults, "given the combined power of anonymity and textual suggestiveness to unshackle deep-seated fantasies," (Dibbell, 1993, p. 40) the disinhibiting effects of MUD interaction can lead to the virtual fulfillment of those fantasies.
Of course, when those fantasies are of less than virtuous character, or even in cases as simple and innocuous as the neophyte user who believes that "it's all just a game", MUD harassment can occur. This is a topic that has received volumes of discussion on newgroups and mailing lists, but about which there is no absolute consensus. Some feel that the solution for harassees is to simply log off, or even find a new MUD. However, this does nothing to prevent or repair the psychological damage done, for on MUDs, the line between word and deed is a difficult one to draw. While seeing the text "Scruffy gropes you, drooling like an animal." appearing on one's screen may be amusing or merely annoying to the uninitiated, to a young woman who has spent hours and hours developing and embodying the persona she lives through on the MUD, the effect can be quite devastating. Indeed, truly atrocious harassment has lead to MUD-wide outcries for the complete removal of the harasser (see, for example, Dibbell, 1993, or Masterson, 1995b).
It must be remembered that even if "real life" dictates that the blips on the computer screen are merely blips, and if the reality of the MUD dictates that one has actually been groped/fondled/molested/raped, the "reality" of the situation can only be found in the "buzzing, dissonant gap between them", (Dibbell, 1993, p. 38). Eventually, except in cases of the virtual sociopath, users become much less likely to use their anonymity for mischief or malice.
Whether traditional ethnographic methods will be applicable to all these virtual communities is a question to be considered. What is clear is that as the technology that supports them gets faster and more powerful, the so-called "bandwidth" of communication will widen, providing more and more communicative cues. This will in turn make these communities more and more like real life, as full motion video and sound via modem (especially cable modems, which promise to transfer data at 700 times the speed of many standard modems) makes text simply redundant.
These graphically represented MUDs will dramatically change the cyberscape of the 21st century. Some say that they will open a wealth of new possibilities, allowing users to express themselves artistically, graphically, visually. Others cling to the text-based environments in much the same way that people "prefer the book to the movie", with the former leaving a large part of the representation to the limitless expanses of the imagination. One recent posting to the newsgroup rec.games.mud.misc sums this up nicely:
Table of Contents
Intentionality
Intentionality is an issue which has come up throughout this thesis, as it is a phenomenon which is peculiarly unique in virtual environments. While face to face interactions are characterized by a wealth of ongoing nonverbal behavior, some of which is communicative, and most of which is unintentional, MUD interactions are almost completely intentional in nature, with many unintentional messages being merely symptomatic of the modalities by which they are produced, e.g., typographical errors. As such, these unintentional messages are generally dismissed by other users, which contrasts with real life interactions, in which meaning is ascribed to unintentional behaviors regularly.
Cherny's categories of emotes
Cherny (1995b) categorized uses of the "emote" command (q.v.) into five distinct groups. While not directly related to the form/function framework pursued in this thesis, they point to some of the differences between MUD and face to face interactions. These groups are summarized by Cherny (1995b) as follows:
Implications for Gender and Identity
While the topic of presenting identities has been treated in Chapter 4, an expansion of this provocative topic is warranted. One of the first things that one sees upon logging into a MUD for the first time is "Please choose a gender". This simple, yet rather profound question is the first clue given that MUDs really can be "identity workshops" for exploring different aspects of the Self.
"I couldn't lie to her face, so I confessed."
"I act, I role play, but I don't lie."
"Some may decide that my simply being here in this form is
a lie, but I dont feel that way."
"I feel that [my female persona] is a part of me, and this
is just the manifestation."
"The whole point was anonymity. No one would be hurt if
that could be maintained."
"All I really want is not to be loathed."
Indeed, the revelation that a MUD acquaintance has been gender-swapping can be even more painful for those who believed the swapper, as can be seen from the following quote from a personal E-mail sent to the author:
[a friend] told me that [my MUD wife] was really a guy in
rl. I was completely shocked. I was so betrayed by his
lying. I never had problems with cross gender players
if they role play, but when they lie about rl it is
more of a cruel trick....I started to distrust mudders
after that.
So, if gender-swapping (or "genderbending") on MUDs can produce so much pain, it remains to be seen why it is that it can be such an intriguing option. Many theories have been put forth, not one of which is universally true. For instance, some people genderbend just to see if they can deceive other players, while others portray the opposite gender do so out of curiosity, to "see how the other half lives." Some have conjectured that those who genderbend are dealing with their own personal issues of sexuality, and find that by switching gender, they can become familiar with flirting with members of their own gender (Serpentelli, 1993). Some males may try presenting themselves as females in order to get the extra attention that is invariably showered upon female characters (given the paucity of female MUDders, this is not surprising). Women may present themselves as men for the opposite reason -- to avoid the extra attention. Men may present themselves as women in order to have a virtual lesbian coupling (with another female presenting persona). More rarely, women may present as men in order to have cyber-relations with other men (Turkle, 1995).
MUD Harassment Through Nonverbal Communication
As freely accessible sites on the Internet, access to most MUDs is quite completely anonymous. That is, one is not required to give any "real life" information such as name address, telephone number, or anything else.
Only with time and the acquisition of a fixed character
do players tend to make the critical passage from anonymity
to pseudonymity, developing the concern for their character's
reputation that marks the attainment of virtual adulthood.
(Dibbell, 1993, p. 41)
In other words, once a participant truly counts herself as a member of the MUD community, the allure of anonymity can dissolve, giving way to a sense of virtual responsibility inherent in the full reification of the connections and relationships made in such environments.
Afterword: What the Future Holds
The future for MUD technology, and MUD communication research, is bright. Looking beyond today's adventure and social MUDs, enough people have caught on to their benefits that their uses as professional/ educational tools are growing rapidly. These benefits include the opportunity to bring people together from all over the world in a technology that supports synchronous or asynchronous communication, the use of a spatial metaphor to create a context for interactions, and the access to the speed and ease of data retrieval inherent in most, if not all, computer systems. Already, there are MUD environments designed specifically for astrophysicists, biologists, and ecologists, which provide a forum for discussion with other scientific professionals all over the world. A MUD called Diversity University supports a college campus spatial metaphor, and the administrators are working to provide a full range of conferences and classes on diverse subject matters. MediaMOO, Amy Bruckman's creation, is a MUD-type environment designed with media researchers in mind, with archives of papers on MUDs and related media issues. Likewise, her MOOSE-Crossing virtual environment recently opened as a MUD wherein youngsters (age 13 and younger) from all over the world can get together to interact and learn some basic programming skills. A MUD designed for neurosurgeons is currently being developed. Finally, Pavel Curtis' Jupiter Project, when complete, will be the prototype for all the future multi-media MUDs to come, with graphics, sound, and even full motion video.
I am not arguing against graphically-oriented MUDs. however,
I believe they will suffer because of the difficulty that
players who cannot draw worth a damn will have expressing
themselves in an impromptu fashion, the way they can on a
text-based mud. on a text-based mud I can express nearly
any action in a matter of a few words. to do the same thing
on a graphic-oriented system requires at the least dozens
of drawings-and as I can't draw worth a shit, I will have
to rely on someone else to do so for me.... the problem is,
in all likelihood, there will be a paucity of "words"
available on your average graphic mud. rather than the
virtually unlimited options of text, the average user will
only have perhaps a few hundred (thousand, if he's lucky)
"words" (images) with which to express himself. (Goehring, 1996)
Nevertheless, the graphical MUDs (the term MUD now being used in its loosest, "Multi-User Dimension" sense) are springing up with regularity, including DOOM-like three dimensional combat arenas, virtual office space for forward thinking marketing firms, television network marketing vehicles, chat rooms for gays/lesbians/bisexuals, and interactive fanzines for up-and-coming rock bands (see
http://www.assiniboinec.mb.ca/user/downes/muds/graphic.htm
for more details). While the breakthroughs being made represent important advances in multimedia technology, it is the author's opinion that the environments being created will attract a new breed of computer user, those who have come to expect and demand a graphical user interface. Given that such users are comprising a growing share of the Internet market, the graphical MUDs will surely explode in popularity, opening up numerous avenues for continued nonverbal research, given the implications of users freedom to represent meanings graphically.
Connect to Leviathan,
one of the muds from which data was collected (previously known as Paradox II).
©
John Masterson