Trust and Online Shopping – What Drives You?

As the holiday season wraps up with end-of-the-year inventory clearance specials being promoted by many online retailers, early reports are that spending was up a little this year versus 2008.  Each year it seems that online shopping gains more ground in terms of dollars spent as well.  Shoppers point to the many conveniences like being able to find the best price, inexpensive or no shipping charges, easy transactions that don’t require dealing with traffic, in-store crowds, and the patience-wrecking check out lines.  In years past, this Santa has utilized a number of sites including those that are known as the traditional big-box giants as well as specialty retailers that offer expertise and a wider selection of unique gifts (get your mind out of the gutter, I am talking about motorcycling and outdoor adventure here).

As technology develops and makes it easier for marketers to present, promote, and sell and for consumers to research, compare, and buy online, the ever-lurking specter of identify theft is never quite vanquished is it?  Let’s face it, technology has to stay ahead of the nefarious high-tech scoundrels hacking, scamming, and outright stealing whenever the opportunity arises in the online market place.

Researchers continue to measure all the intricacies of consumption and new and emerging media is like a new and expanding frontier for them to observe, analyze, and publish their findings.  The issue of trust is vital to the well being of e-commerce as one might imagine and marketers are continually funding research to better understand consumers – the how’s, the why’s, and the how often’s.  Central to this research is finding out what puts consumers at ease – what factors facilitate transactions online?  After all, if consumers don’t trust the site for whatever reason, they won’t be divulging the information required to conduct business online that is for sure.

So what factors influence your decisions to shop and conduct transactions with particular retailers?  Conversely, what factors cause you to take pause and opt to shop elsewhere?  Here are some of the facets that impact my online shopping habits.

1. Aesthetics – A poorly designed site just doesn’t instill a lot of trust for me.  If the design is crude or unprofessional I tend not to tarry long on the site.
2. Navigatability – Actually, this is closely linked to the look of the site.  Usually a poorly designed site is harder to navigate.  Either I have a hard time finding what I want, or there are other issues like broken links, etc. that just diminish the credibility of the retailer in my opinion.
3. Suspect information – This happens a lot when I shop on eBay, especially when I am looking at a big-ticket item like electronics.  Of course the seller’s reputation and feedback are primary factors, but the content of their item descriptions also make or break it for me.  Content obviously lifted from a manufacturer’s web site is cause for concern.  Poor grammar, a lot of misspellings, and/or the obvious lack of ability to speak or write in coherent English and I am off to the next listing.
4. Pricing – One of the biggest advantages of shopping online is being able to shop for the best price.  But my radar goes off when I see pricing that is just to good to be true.  You cannot buy something for a fifth of the price unless it is a) stolen; b) damaged; c) a knock-off; d) a complete scam; or e) all of the above.  The online shopping experience is cluttered with what amounts to the “For Sale: antique Corvette in pristine condition.  $500 obo.” Of course the Corvette is being sold by a little old lady who has no idea what it is really worth.  I was born, but not yesterday.

There are others, but these are among the top factors that cause me to doubt the veracity or motives of online retailers.  Of course, sticking with reputable retailers like Wal-Mart, Target, Toys R Us, and Borders to name a few really up the trust quotient.

What online factors drive your shopping patterns online?

Kind regards,

Chris Daniel

Marketers Target Children with Powerful, Subtle Online Tools

New and emerging media provides a wealth of information and entertainment for millions across the globe.   Along with the good content there is a fair share of bad.  Some content may be intended for a mature audience so adults wanting access to that content would argue that attempts to label and control what is allowed on the Internet smacks of censorship of the worst kind – subjecting everyone to someone else’s idea of what is suitable and depriving users of their right to freely choose.  Whether you like all of the content online – and believe me there is a lot out there that I could not begin to justify on any level – it is impossible to set standards that would please everyone.  Modifying an old cliché to suit the theme here, “One man’s junk is another man’s treasure.”

Ultimately, parents do need to set some guidelines about acceptable use of new and emerging media and the technology that literally can bring the whole world streaming right into their homes and the impressionable minds of their children.  While software can help parents set controls on what can be accessed via a home computer and they can even limit the amount of time their children spend online per day and week, they should remain vigilant as some inappropriate or questionable content is delivered in formats that might otherwise be overlooked.

Whether you know it or not, children are targeted and bombarded by marketers and brands relentlessly.  It might be a fast food chain or a toy manufacturer promoting unhealthy foods or encouraging poor behavior, which can be bad enough.  Or perhaps children might be exposed to content that usurps the parents’ authority by teaching viewpoints that go against the religious, political, or general principals of the family.

Marketers today are taking full advantage of new media to communicate with children in powerful albeit sometimes subtle ways.  Online videos often incorporating cartoon content, advergaming that blatantly promotes a product, service, or theme or incorporates such content seamlessly into the action, and behind-the-scene web analytics that track, measure, and then target children with tailored online advertisements are but a few of the powerful ways marketers and others are making inroads into children’s minds.  The bottom line is that parents can’t simply rely on software to keep their children safe nor can they assume children are mature enough not to be affected by the online content they are purposefully exposed to on a regular basis.

Just this past week for example, Build-A-Bear Workshop gained a great deal of unwanted notoriety on a national scale for online content that critics claim targets children with climate-change indoctrination.  I first heard about the issue listening to Glenn Beck’s radio program where a mother and her daughter phoned in to discuss advergaming on the Build-A-Bear Workshop web site that incorporated a climate change message.  This was soon followed by traditional media coverage of the site’s three-part video series entitled, “Under the North Star: An Uplifting Christmas Experience,” featuring a cartoon polar bear warning Santa about global warming and how it was wreaking havoc on the environment – going so far as to say that the North Pole could vanish by Christmas.

Headquartered in Overland, Missouri near St. Louis, Build-A-Bear quickly removed the content and issued a statement insisting that the message was intended to inspire children to make a difference as individuals and not intended to indoctrinate.  Radio hosts and bloggers opposed to the notion of global warming continued to report on the issue with some calling for a boycott of the toy company. Maura Flynn, a contributor on BigGovernment.com, stated that the Build-A-Bear online content is “brainwashing on the sleaziest and most sinister” level.  She goes on to write, “People, we have the means, if we have the will, to topple these charlatans who shamelessly prey on little children.”

Regardless of whether you believe global warming is a threat or not, most can agree that the topic is an overly politicized one.  Much of the outrage stems from the belief that companies shouldn’t overstep their bounds and should instead leave such topics to parents to discuss with their children.  That is the point.  Marketers have a great deal of latitude when it comes to targeting children whether the message promotes a kid’s meal with the latest movie toy, sugar-drenched cereals and snacks, or “pick your political topic sure to enrage half of the nation.”  This is why it is essential that parents remain vigilant about the content their children are exposed to.

Regards,

Chris Daniel

Resources

Build-A-Bear Draws Global Warming Fire

http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog/2009/12/build-a-bear_draws_fire_in_global_warming_debate.html

Toy Company’s Animated Series Riles Global Warming Skeptics

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,581093,00.html

GPS Enabled Mobile Marketing – Invasion of Privacy or Good Tradeoff?

Someday in the near future marketers may seek to strategically utilize GPS technology to track and target you with mobile advertisements and promotions.   The technology exists already. In fact GPS apps are already avaible for cell phones including both the iPhone and Blackberry.  Some experts believe brands will continue to develop and offer free or low cost “apps” including GPS variations that users can download onto their phones or hand-helds – the idea being that users will “opt in” to receive promotional messages via text or e-mail in order to access and utilize the particular app or apps of interest.

Other variations and strategies may be employed although marketers are aware that over-zealous use of GPS-enabled mobile marketing campaigns, especially those targeting users who have not given permission to receive such communications, could very well result in regulatory intervention similar to the “do not call” registries aimed at curbing telemarketers.  Obviously getting consumers to opt in is advantageous for marketers and could be seen as beneficial to some consumers interested in low-cost GPS functionality.

Once users have opted in and downloaded the GPS app, marketers can track and send promotional offers directly to them based on their proximity to particular distribution points.  Imagine walking or driving down the street and receiving a mobile promotion for a discounted value meal as you approach a McDonald’s or other fast food restaurant.  Consider the same scenario but this time you receive a digital coupon for an oil change as you approach a Jiffy Lube or PEP Boys.  There might even be a day when your GPS-equipped device might send and receive data that enables marketers to delivery digital coupons as you pass certain sections in the supermarket or to cause coupons to print out from stationary devices affixed to the store’s shelves.

So far those scenarios don’t raise too much concern – or do they?  Some consumers might be a bit wary of marketers and potentially other entities tracking their every move.  Would you consider the “privacy for GPS functionality” a reasonable tradeoff?  Would you rather pay for GPS functionality for your mobile device without the compromise – even if the price was much more expensive?   Are you overly concerned about being tracked and information about your habits stored by marketers?

Kind regards,

Chris Daniel

2009 Viral Video Retrospective – What Made Your Top 10?

As December comes to a close and people begin to embrace the coming new year (or bracing for it if you are a bit more pessimistic), the unavoidable lists of the best and worst of 2009 are sure to make their way onto television, radio, print, and yes, even new media.  Whether it is the best and worst movies, music, or viral media, the lists will either rekindle some humorous or enjoyable memories or perhaps clue us in to some items we may have missed in popular culture over the past 12 months.

Maybe you joined the millions who followed Susan Boyle’s meteoric rise thanks to Youtube videos of her incredible audition and subsequent performances on the television program Britain’s Got Talent.

Or perhaps you were unable to resist the “Wedding Video”.

Of course there were many other viral sensations that were viewed and shared digitally that showcased musicians, dancing babies, surprised kittens, sleep walking dogs, stupid people doing dangerous things, and many others.

For me, I must admit Susan Boyle’s first in-your-face performance and the stunned reaction by a dismissive audience and panel of judges captured my attention and kept me coming back to Youtube for subsequent performances.  Maybe it was the classic appeal of the “underdog.”  One thing is for certain though as we head into 2010, Youtube and other Internet-based video sites will continue to springboard the unlikeliest of people, animals, and video content to viral acclaim.

Looking back over the past 12 months, what Internet sensations caused you to stop and take notice?  As you mentally compile your list, also consider how likely you were to have forwarded either a video or link that was e-mailed to you to someone else.  How often did that occur?  Did you share the link via Twitter?  Facebook? Other social media?

Here’s to your health and happiness in the new year.  Stay tuned, you never know when the next viral sensation will appear in your e-mail inbox.

Kind regards,

Chris Daniel

Now that Santa Delivered, Will You Use that Gizmo As Much as You Thought?

Well, another Christmas has come and gone.  Maybe you spent too much for a particular gift or you blew the budget altogether.  Now you wait dreading the delivery of those credit card statements or you look at your checkbook and realize just how little value all those pre-numbered slips of paper represent.  As my father once said following the holidays, “if it cost a quarter to go ‘round the world, I couldn’t get out of sight!”

For those of you who asked for and received any digital gadgets this holiday season, consider this.  Often we as consumers vastly over-estimate how much we will utilize something that we thing we just have to have.  According to Lee Dye in an ABC opinion piece, psychology researchers have studied consumers to determine if we are capable of accurately estimating just how much we will use something we really want.  One university study found that “nearly two thirds of the time people overestimate how much they will use that must-have gizmo.”  Interestingly researchers have also found that others can better predict how much a person will utilize an item, even if they are not familiar with the person.

In one test, researchers asked college students to identify the gift they wanted the most and to estimate how much they would use the much-wanted item.  The following semester, researchers tracked down as many of the students as they could to see if they had in fact received the items they most wanted, and to determine if they were using them as much as they had estimated.  Researchers found that the students had “grossly overestimated” their usage.

The researchers had also asked another group of students labeled as observers to estimate how much the test subjects would use their wish-list items.  These observers were unfamiliar with the test subjects and were only given the item and the estimate of usage for each.  They then provided predictions that were remarkably accurate.  Another group of observers were only provided with the item and not the test subjects’ usage estimates.  These observers faired no better than the test subjects in estimating usage.

According to Dye, researchers came away from the study with the belief that consumers would be wise to consult others – even strangers – when considering a purchase that they think they simply must have.  “Why would anyone else know our needs better then we know ourselves?  Quite possibly because we all feel guilt over the stuff we thought we had to have, but never use, so we’re doubtful that anyone else will use their stuff as much as they think they will, either.”

While Dye’s opinion piece and the research that inspired it likely have a lot of merit, especially in light of the mysteries of the human psyche, I wonder though if this applies to coveted gadgets and gizmos such as cell/smart phones, computer equipment, and other items that make it possible for users to connect via new media?  Maybe it is still too early to tell whether or not we will use and enjoy the digital gifts as much as we thought when we asked Santa for them?

How about you?  Were there any must-have digital items on your holiday wish list?  If you received them, do you think you will wind up not using them as often as you thought?  Maybe this has happened in years past?  Or maybe you bought a digital device for someone else only to find that they hardly use the gifts.

Kind regards,

Chris Daniel

P.S.
From personal experience, I have purchased two computers for family members as Christmas presents and found that both are rarely used.  The circumstances are a bit different though as these were surprise gifts and weren’t requested.  One was a complete desktop system for a teenager and the second was a loaded laptop for my significant other.  Go figure.

Resource

Gotta Have the Latest Gadget? Consumers Won’t Use New Gadgets as Often as They Think They Will, Research Shows

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/DyeHard/gotta-latest-gadget/story?id=9344253

Going Ape for Apps: Will iSurgeon Be a Cut Above?

People are going ape over “apps.”  For those poor unfortunate souls who don’t have a smart phone, apps is short for applications.  And there are literally tens of thousands of them.  Some are designed for the Apple iPhone.  Others are designed for the Blackberry.  And don’t forget about the thousands of apps developed for download and use on these and the many other smart phones and hand-helds out there.

There are apps that are extremely informative.  There are those that are perplexing and odd.  Quite a few are just plain weird and designed for the fun of it…how else can you explain an app that generates flatulence sounds on command.  Apps can help you share information online.  They can keep you up-to-date on the weather, news, and the latest Facebook and/or Twitter posts of those you are interested in.  They can store your important contact phone numbers and addresses.  They can help you coordinate your itinerary down to the best clothes combinations for the coming week.  There are apps to help you navigate.  There are apps to help you get lost (figuratively let’s hope).  There are even apps that convert images of our beloved Congress into caricatures – yes, that one was finally approved and we are all better off for it.

Speaking of Congress, the Senate just passed a health care bill right before Christmas and fortunately for California’s’ economy the proposed tax on cosmetic surgery was eliminated.  And just in time too because Dr. Michael Salzhauer of Bay Harbor Islands, Florida has just launched the iSurgeon app for iPhone users.

iSurgeon will soon be available in a “lite” and “pro” version.  The $1.99 “pro” version allows users to play in Game Mode or opt for Advanced Surgery Mode.  Game Mode allows users to play plastic surgeon with pre-programmed images.  In Advanced Surgery Mode, the user can upload their own photos and perform e-surgeries ranging from cheek implants, rhinoplasty, face-lifts, lip enhancements, ear reshaping, tummy tucks, and even breast augmentations.  The idea is to view the possibilities before going under the knife.  Once the user is finished ‘doctoring’ their images (pun very much intended), they can choose to share the images via e-mail or on a social networking site.

Is anyone interested in adding iSurgeon to their smart phone?  How many apps do you currently have?  What are your favorites and why?  Are apps an important part of the smart phone ownership experience?  Did they factor into your purchasing decision?

Kind regards,

Chris Daniel

Resources

http://www.isurgeongame.com/

Technology Filling Unique New Media Niches

New media technology in the form of hardware, software, and even user-developed applications are driving more and more U.S. and global consumers to sign on, log in, and power up.  In the U.S. alone, an estimated 270 million people are using cell phones, and the market for hand-held smart phones and other portable devices continues to grow in share thanks to the popularity of text messaging, mobile media access, and the blizzard of applications being developed to aid, entertain, and connect users like never before.

Smart phone and portable hand-held devices are evolving at warp speed.  Consumers were wowed a few years ago by cell phones with digital cameras installed.  Now many phones have high quality video recording capabilities, allow for music download, storage, and playback, offer Internet functionality, incorporate a keypad that makes text and e-mail functions much easier, and come equipped with enough memory to store and run any of the tens of thousands of “apps” currently available.

Computers are continually advancing as well.  At one time a laptop was a costly and rare upgrade over a desktop.  Today, consumers can get netbook computers that offer amazing memory, functionality, and above all portability for under $400 dollars.  Service providers like AT&T and Verizon are even offering netbook/service packages to enable users to access e-mail and surf the web via Wi-Fi while on the go.

In fact, technology is advancing at such a swift pace that often times devices can become outdated in less than two years – not just a little less desirable, I am talking about “the” top of the line equipment today being considered a relic by 2011.  Just as new and emerging media is differentiated from traditional media by the unique capacity for immediate interaction between consumers and marketers/brands, the power driving technology today has the consumers’ fingerprints all over it.  Consider a few of the devices earning media attention this holiday season and you will see how consumer wants are shaping technology in what would have been unexpected ways just a few short years ago.

The Chumby One for instance is an amazing gadget that incorporates a small 3.5-inch touch screen, a “Home Screen” button on top, and volume knobs on the side.  ABC News technology reviewer Eric Strauss referred to the Chumby One as a “turbo-charged, mini-alarm clock/picture frame/Internet device with Wi-Fi and hours of fun packed inside.”  The device works independently from any other computer device and connects to the Internet via Wi-Fi to provide weather information, news, and allow for social media updates.  The device also allows for streaming radio and can be further customized by the user with a selection of widgets (currently over 1,500 to choose from) that then display whatever content the user wants.   The one drawback is that a computer is needed to add widgets to the Chumby One.

Another unique device being lauded by gadget aficionados is the Litl Webbook.  Billed as “an ideal first computer for the kids, a fun digital appliance for the kitchen, or a simple to use device for the elderly,” the Litl Webbook is an Internet device but its operating system is unique.  The device’s designers wanted to develop a new and simple device that allowed easy access to the Internet and made sharing photos, watching videos online, and connecting via social networking a breeze.  The device automatically updates remotely every night and user settings and data are automatically backed up.  According to the manufacturer, these automatic features offer a great deal of value to consumers.  “If your Litl is lost or broken you won’t lose any of your data.”

Both devices are offered as alternatives to traditional computers, and were designed to fit unique niches.  Granted neither product is a suitable substitute for a computer, nor are they able to offer all the bells and whistles of many smart phones.  Yet both are very customizable, easy to use products developed to allow users to take advantage of and enjoy a variety of tools and functions a non-conformist sort of way – and in the end, isn’t the uniqueness of form and function defined by the individual consumer’s preferences representative of the very essence of what makes new and emerging media so powerful?

Kind regards,

Chris Daniel

Resources

http://www.chumby.com/

http://litl.com/

Are We Witnessing the Point Where Technology Outpaces Wireless Providers’ Capabilities?

Over the past two weeks, Research in Motion Ltd., makers of the Blackberry and provider for its e-mail functionality, has experienced unexplained delays.  iPhone customers are up in arms and voicing their frustration over AT&T’s wireless network inadequacies that results in dropped calls and slow data speeds.  “Operation Chokehold,” which started as a satirical memo from a popular blogger who writes “The Secret Diary of Steve Jobs,” has grown into a plot whereby iPhone owners can voice their dissatisfaction with AT&T’s wireless network performance “by running the phone’s most data-intensive applications at the same time” in order to overwhelm the network and cause it to crash.   Could it be that mobile technology is beginning to outpace or tax the available resources of service providers to the point that consumers are going to grow increasingly dissatisfied or worse?

The originator of “Operation Chokehold” and blogger behind “The Secret Diary of Steve Jobs” is Newsweek reporter Daniel Lyons or “Fake Steve” to his blog followers.  Ever since Apple entered into an exclusive relationship with AT&T the market has been in a tizzy.  Many would-be consumers wanted the iPhone but wanted to have the option of either keeping their service provider or at least being able to select one.  Today, many unhappy iPhone users take solace in castigating the service provider.  “Send the message to AT&T that we are sick of their substandard network and of their abusive comments,” Lyons wrote in his original post.  “The idea is we’ll create a digital flash mob.”

What began as satire, according to ABC News reporter Ki Mae Heussner, took on a life of its own as iPhone users began to use blogs, Twitter and other social networking media to spread the word and plan for the take down of the network.  According to Heussner, one Facebook group now has over 4,000 people as fans and a Web site has sprung up to provide a countdown for the operation.

Lyons as “Fake Steve” has since reminded his readers that while the frustration is real, “Operation Chokehold” was intended as a joke.  He has advised concerned iPhone users to build upon their efforts and to take their protest off-line to take advantage of traditional media especially television, which can attach pictures with the protests.

Ultimately, the group doesn’t believe they could succeed in bringing down AT&T’s networks but those involved state that that really isn’t the point.  They argue that their efforts have in some ways “humiliated AT&T and brings the issue to the light of day.”  AT&T responded that the campaign is irresponsible because of the intent to cripple a network utilized by more than 80 million people.  They also jabbed back at Lyons by stating that the whole intent was merely to promote his blog.

The original question still stands.  In light of the ever-developing world of applications and digital content that will both empower owners of hand-helds and challenge those trying to supply high levels of dependable access to voice and digital services, are we beginning to see a point where the technology and consumption are too much for the delivery systems of providers like AT&T Wireless and Research In Motion Ltd.?  Do you feel Apple made a mistake by deciding to offer one of its most popular products exclusively through one network provider?  Have you experienced any annoying delays in your iPhone or Blackberry service?  How will this impact your future provider selection?

Kind regards,

Chris Daniel

Cell Phone Use & Cancer – If Linked, Would Consumer Behaviors Change in the U.S.?

There is little doubt about the popularity of cell phones and mobile technology in our society today.   In fact, it is estimated that over two billion cell phones are in use worldwide right now, with the number of new users growing steadily.  It is estimated that in the Unites Dates alone cell phone use has grown from 34 million to over 270 million in the last decade.  Cell phones have been identified in separate research studies as the one invention people feel that couldn’t live without and in one study conducted by the University of Michigan, 83 percent chose the cell phone as the device that makes life easier – it was selected over the Internet by the way.
Device manufacturers, app developers, and plan carriers are constantly evolving their products and services to capture more of the growing market.  Marketers too are investing heavily in the trend as they seek to capitalize on the ability to target consumers anywhere and at anytime more economically via mobile media advertising.   The Gartner research firm predicts that mobile ad spending will surpass $13 billion by 2013 as more and more companies shift funds away from traditional media like direct mail, radio, and television.  Looks like brand names such as iPhone, Blackberry, and Droid will remain hot commodities for some time to come.

Despite all the optimism, there are some foreboding, ominous clouds on the mobile technology horizon.  With a high percentage of mobile users voicing their disapproval of marketers being able to deliver unwanted solicitations to them, the threat of increased government scrutiny and the potential for a mobile version of the “do not call” legislation that put significant limits on telemarketers in the past decade remains ever present.  But there is a potentially larger storm brewing that could have a lasting impact on the manufacturers, service providers, and consumers. While scientists have not reached a consensus on the potential risk and industry leaders insist there is no such connection, there is a growing legislative debate on whether makers of cell phones and mobile hand-held devices should be required to add warnings about a potential link between electromagnetic radiation generated by the equipment and certain forms of cancer.

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission currently maintains that all cell phones sold in the U.S. are safe.  However some foreign nations do require a warning on hand-held devices that emit electromagnetic radiation.  As it now stands, politicians in the city of San Francisco and the state of Maine are poised to consider such legislation.  The warnings that would be required on both the devices and packaging would recommend users, especially children and pregnant women, keep the equipment away from their heads and bodies.

The CTIA-The Wireless Association was quoted in a recent article reaffirming the safety of cellular devices in the U.S.  “With respect to the matter of health effects associated with wireless base stations and the use of wireless devices, CTIA and the wireless industry have always been guided by science, and the views of impartial health organizations.  The peer-reviewed scientific evidence has overwhelmingly indicated that wireless devices do not pose a public health risk.”   The National Cancer Institute says that thus far scientific studies have resulted in “mixed and inconsistent results” while emphasizing more long-term research is needed since “cell phones did not come into widespread se in the United States until the 1990s.”

Obviously if a connection is proven by a reputable source and confirmed through peer review, a warning is not unreasonable.  My question though is would such a connection change your usage of mobile devices?  How would such evidence and warnings impact mobile usage in the U.S.?  Would marketers have second thoughts about using mobile advertising?

Kind regards,

Chris Daniel

Online Gaming Addiction – Warning Signs

Regardless of the producers’ good intentions most if not all technological advances can be misused, abused, or even falsely accused – who let Jesse Jackson in here?  What I am trying to say, and have alluded to in recent posts, is that new or emerging media/technology can be credited with innumerable social benefits like opening up educational opportunities to students unable to commit to brick and mortar programs; opening up global markets to consumers and producers both here and abroad; making it possible for people to communicate more readily and stay connected regardless of geographic circumstances; and, creating countless entertaining diversions for users of all ages just to name a few.  But with the good also comes the bad – sometimes it can take the form of misuse as when married individuals seek to engage in infidelity unbeknownst to their current partner or those they meet online or abuse, with predators prowling the web for unsuspecting victims ripe for sexual or financial exploitation.  And in a few instances, new or emerging media can be linked to addiction, with the usual suspects that gain the most notoriety being online pornography and online gaming.

Interestingly enough there is still a great deal of debate regarding addiction to online gaming.  There are researchers who say that players who play excessively – a definition that is hard to quantify (the AMA sets a 2-hour-per-day threshold) – exhibit similar characteristics and reactions as drug addicts.  According to researchers at the Charite University Medicin Berlin, in Germany online gamers have “drug memory” meaning that when exposed to “triggers” such as still images from an online game, they are tempted to abuse again.

Nations including South Korea and China believe that the evidence is overwhelming to support the existence of online gaming addiction and countless reports indicate excessive or addictive play has led to suicide, exhaustion and eventual heart failure, and even child neglect.  Players have been known to play for days without eating or sleeping.  Some become so engrossed in their online persona that they attempt suicide based on the outcome of a game into which they have invested hundreds if not thousands of hours.  The problem has spawned governmental action in both countries with South Korea training experts to identify and treat the condition.  China has instituted a series of measure to attempt to curb what it considers to be an epidemic with most efforts directed at limiting player access.  Addiction is harder to measure in the United States where “gamers” tend to access online games from home and efforts to measure addiction are clouded by “shame, denial, and minimization” according to researchers.

For many, there is no question that online gaming is a legitimate addiction and there is a push to have it added to major medical and psychological journals.  Yet for others, questions still remain.  In the U.S. for example, one researcher states that about 86 percent of “Internet addicts” have actually been diagnosed with a behavioral or psychological condition previously and questions whether “online gaming addiction” should be classified as a standalone condition or should be considered a manifestation of existing and commonplace compulsive-impulsive disorders.

Studies indicated that like substance addictions, people with mental health issues are more likely to be at risk of developing online gaming addictions.  And vice versa, addiction to online games can increase the likelihood of mental disorders.   Most believed to show signs of online gaming addiction tend to be dissatisfied with their lives and are socially awkward.

One researcher writes, “psychological and social factors are probably the underlying cause of excessive online game playing.  Social factors include peer pressure and social relationships that affect the need for people to play.  Loneliness and faulty relationships may lead to clinical psychological disorders such as depression and anxiety.  Clinical depression may cause patients to channel their emotions and energy to an interest, such as computer games that cannot further hurt their self-esteem.  People also get adrenaline rushes as a result of achieving a goal in a game, which they will push themselves to their psychological limits to stimulate more adrenaline production.  This production of adrenaline is both psychologically activated and a contributing factor to addiction.”

According to the University of California at Berkely, signs of online gaming addiction include the following:
1.    Inability to stop the activity.
2.    Neglect of family and friends.
3.    Lying to employers and family about activities.
4.    Problems with school or job.
5.    Carpal tunnel syndrome.
6.    Dry Eyes.
7.    Failure to attend to personal hygiene.
8.    Sleep disturbances or changes in sleep patterns.
9.    Feeling empty, depressed, irritable when not at the computer.
10.    Craving more and more time at the computer.

Regards,

Chris Daniel

For anyone interested in exploring the topic, here are a few online resources.

Issues for DSM-V: Internet Addiction

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/165/3/306

Online Gaming Addiction – Myth or Realty?
www.devhardware.com

Unhealthy Gaming Habits and Addiction

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~jenchan/OnlineGamingAddiction.html