Connect with us

Science

69% of gamers say they “smurf,” even though they hate it

blank

Published

on

blank

A recent study on toxicity in gaming reveals that a significant majority of gamers, 69 percent to be precise, openly confess to engaging in smurfing, even though they vehemently despise it when others resort to smurfing tactics against them.

For those unfamiliar with the term, smurfing may seem like a perplexing concept. Some may even imagine a scenario where 69 percent of gamers paint themselves blue and only communicate using the word “smurf” during their gaming sessions. If that’s your assumption, then you couldn’t be more mistaken.

When engaging in online multiplayer games, developers strive to create a balanced and enjoyable experience by matching players with opponents of similar skill levels. This ensures that players aren’t constantly overwhelmed by opponents who far exceed their abilities. However, individuals have discovered workarounds for this issue. They either create new accounts or borrow existing ones from other gamers to compete against opponents who possess significantly lower skill levels.

In 1996, two players of Warcraft 2 gained such a fearsome reputation for their exceptional skills that fellow gamers would immediately withdraw from matches upon spotting their usernames. When it came to playing the game they had bought, they decided to create additional accounts called PapaSmurf and Smurfette and proceeded to dominate their adversaries using these fresh profiles. The term “smurfing” gained popularity and is now commonly used to refer to players who intentionally create new accounts to compete against less skilled opponents.

A significant number of gamers have reported the occurrence of smurfing, with 97 percent of participants in a recent study acknowledging that they encounter smurfs during their gameplay. The gaming community perceives this behavior as detrimental; despite this, 69 percent of individuals acknowledged engaging in smurfing on occasion, with 13 percent admitting to doing it frequently or almost always.

The study conducted by the team from Ohio State University found that, in comparison to smurfees, participants perceived smurfs as having a higher likelihood of being toxic, disengaging from the game, and enjoying the game. “There were also significant self-other effects observed.” Compared to their own perception, participants believed that other gamers were more prone to displaying toxic behavior, less inclined to continue playing the game, and less likely to derive enjoyment from it.

Upon concluding the study, the researchers solicited feedback from gamers (recruited from Reddit) and discovered various motivations behind smurfing. These motivations included the desire to play with friends of varying skill levels as well as the satisfaction derived from defeating inexperienced players. The team conducted a subsequent study, in which players were asked to assess different justifications for smurfing. They were informed that these justifications were actual reasons provided by smurfs who had achieved victory in the game they were smurfing in. In addition, they were queried about the appropriate degree of retribution to be meted out to the smurf.

The team anticipated that individuals would adopt a “motivated-blame perspective,” wherein they would universally consider smurfing to be morally objectionable, regardless of any justifications.

“According to lead author Charles Monge, this perspective asserts that if an action is deemed wrong, the justification behind it becomes irrelevant as it remains inherently wrong,” as stated in a press release. “The concept is that it should be irrelevant whether you were simply playing casually to join your friends; you caused me to lose this game, and now I am angry.”

Nevertheless, the team discovered that gamers assessed the morality of smurfing on a personal level, categorizing certain forms of smurfing as more culpable than others. They also expressed a desire for stricter penalties for smurfs who had less valid reasons for engaging in smurfing, such as a desire to dominate less skilled players.

A third study discovered that individuals who do not play video games exhibit a similar socially regulated viewpoint, perceiving subtleties in smurfing behavior. Although intriguing due to the commonly associated toxicity in gaming, the team aspires to apply the findings in other areas.

“Games can serve as a powerful tool for testing concepts that extend beyond the realm of gaming,” Monge stated. Studying how blame is assigned in an online setting can provide insights into how blame is assigned in general.

The research is published in the journal New Media & Society.

As Editor here at GeekReply, I'm a big fan of all things Geeky. Most of my contributions to the site are technology related, but I'm also a big fan of video games. My genres of choice include RPGs, MMOs, Grand Strategy, and Simulation. If I'm not chasing after the latest gear on my MMO of choice, I'm here at GeekReply reporting on the latest in Geek culture.

Astronomy

The exciting Lunar Standstill will be streamed live from Stonehenge

blank

Published

on

blank

People are very interested in Stonehenge, which is one of those famous landmarks. It is very clear that it lines up with the sun at the solstices, but no one is sure what the monument is for. But over the next few months, scientists will look at a different kind of alignment: some stones may be lined up with the lunar standstill.

In the sky, things move around. The sun moves around during the year because the planet is tilted with respect to its orbit. This means that the times when it rises and sets are often different. Stonehenge is set up so that the first rays of dawn on the summer solstice and the last rays of sunset on the winter solstice both pass through the middle.

But outside the stone circle are the so-called station stones, whose purpose is unknown. They don’t seem to be linked to the sun, but to the moon. The position of the moonrise and moonset changes because the moon’s orbit is tilted relative to the earth. This is similar to how the sun moves. But it doesn’t happen every year. The cycle goes around and around for 18.6 years.

When the Moon is at the fullest point of its cycle, it moves from 28.725 degrees north to 28.725 degrees south in just one month. The next one won’t happen until January 2025. This time is called the major lunar standstill (lunistice). So, scientists will be going to Stonehenge several times over the next few months, even during the major standstill, to figure out how the monument might line up with our natural satellite.

Talked to Heather Sebire, senior property curator at Stonehenge. “I think the moon in general would have been very important to them.” “And you know, maybe they could do things they couldn’t do other times when there was a full moon because there was more light.”

“They think the lunar standstill might have something to do with this because there are four rocks out in the middle of the ocean that are called “station stones.” Only two of them have been found so far. Together, they form a rectangle, which some people think may have something to do with the setting outside the circle.

When the Moon is in a minor standstill, its distance from the Earth is between 18.134° north and south. It will happen again in 2034.

As archaeologists continue to look into this interesting alignment, Stonehenge wants everyone to join in the fun. As usual, people will be able to enter the circle for the solstice, which this year is the earliest since 1796. However, the next day will be all about the lunistice.

blank

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As the moon rises, the lunar standstill event can only be seen online. You can watch the livestream from the comfort of your own home and wonder with the researchers if this great monument was also lined up with the Moon.

 

Continue Reading

Medicine and Health

Long-Term COVID Risk Factors Found in Data from Almost 5,000 People

blank

Published

on

blank

More information about who may be most likely to get a long-lasting illness has been found by looking at data from 4,700 people who have recovered from COVID-19. Scientists still don’t know exactly what causes the painful symptoms of long COVID—there are hundreds of possible causes—but this new study gives them a better idea of who may be affected.

If you get infected with SARS-CoV-2, you will have a long-term condition called Long COVID for at least three months. The symptoms may get worse over time or come on and off in waves. Some people will get better after a while, but for others, whose symptoms started in the early days of the pandemic in 2020 and haven’t gone away yet, they are still sick.

A lot of work has been done by scientists to figure out what causes long-term COVID and to find treatments that might help, not just for these patients but also for people with other post-viral syndromes. There are still a lot of things we don’t know, though. One of the biggest questions is who may be most likely to get long-term COVID. Someone at the Columbia University Irving Medical Center may have led a new study that could help.

“Our study clearly establishes that COVID posed a substantial personal and societal burden,” said Professor Elizabeth C. Oelsner, who wrote the study and was the lead author. “By figuring out who was most likely to have had a long recovery, we have a better idea of who should be involved in ongoing research into how to lessen or stop the long-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

The 4,700 people who took part in the study agreed to be a part of the Collaborative Cohort of Cohorts for COVID-19 Research, or C4R. C4R is made up of more than 50,000 people from all over the US who are doing long-term research to help us learn as much as we can about the COVID-19 pandemic.

The people who took part were asked to say how long it took them to get better after getting COVID. The average time to get better from an infection between 2020 and 2023 was 20 days, and more than one in five adults had symptoms for at least three months.

The biggest groups of those were found to be women and people who already had heart disease. American Indian and Alaska Native people who took part also had more severe first infections and took longer to recover.

Being vaccinated against the virus and having an infection with an omicron lineage variant, which is usually linked to milder disease, were both linked to a faster recovery. She said, “Our study shows how important it is that COVID vaccinations have been, not only in lowering the severity of an infection but also in lowering the risk of long-term COVID.”

Other health problems that are usually linked to worse outcomes from COVID, like diabetes and chronic lung disease, were linked to longer recovery times. However, this was no longer a statistically significant finding when sex, heart disease, vaccination status, and variant exposure were taken into account.

The study also found an interesting lack of a significant link with mental health disorders. Studies have shown that a lot of people with long COVID have problems with their mental health, but Oelsner said, “We did not find that depressive symptoms before SARS-CoV-2 infection were a major risk factor for long COVID.”

The main thing to remember is that getting vaccinated is still the best way to avoid getting COVID in the first place, so make sure you don’t have a worse experience with it. The current circulating variants are mostly offshoots of Omicron. This may also be a reason to be hopeful, since these variants were linked to shorter recovery times.

New vaccines are being made to match the newest strains, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) puts out detailed information on when people of different ages and risk levels should think about getting their next booster. Different countries have different vaccine availability, but the health authority in your area should be able to tell you if you can get a shot.

The study can be found in JAMA Network Open.

Continue Reading

Astronomy

It’s true that the Earth is not orbiting the sun right now

blank

Published

on

blank

Some of the diagrams and animations that show how the planets move around the sun are not quite accurate. To be more precise, they are making the planets’ orbits easier to understand so that teachers don’t have to explain barycenters to kids who are still getting used to the idea that Earth isn’t the only planet in the universe.

Most of the time, the way you learn about how planets move around the sun looks like the video below.

But this version is easier to understand. The Sun has about 1,048 times the mass of Jupiter, making it the largest object in the Solar System. However, gravity works both ways. For the same reason that the Earth pulls on itself, you pull on the Earth as well, though it is much smaller.

“Kepler’s third law describes the relationship between the masses of two objects mutually revolving around each other and the determination of orbital parameters,” NASA says.

“Think about a small star that circles a bigger star. The two stars actually move around the same mass center, which is called the barycenter. That’s always the case, no matter how big or heavy the things are. Using a massive planet to measure how fast a star moves around its barycenter is one way that planetary systems linked to faraway stars have been found.

To keep things simple, we say that the planets go around the Sun. But because the Sun has the most mass, the barycenter of the Solar System’s objects is usually close to it. However, because of Jupiter and Saturn’s orbits and effects, it is almost never inside the Sun. The paths look a bit more like the video below, which was made by planetary astronomer and science communicator James O’Donoghue.

Because of this, the Earth is not orbiting a point inside the Sun right now because the barycenter is not there. We are not going around the sun, but that point in space.

“Planets orbit the Sun in general terms,” O’Donoghue says on Twitter, “but technically, they don’t orbit the Sun alone because the gravitational influence of (mainly) Jupiter means planets must orbit a new point in space.”

“The planets do orbit the Sun, of course; we are just being pedantic about the situation,” he said. “The natural thinking is that we orbit the Sun’s center, but that very rarely happens, i.e., it’s very rare for the solar system’s center of mass to align with the Sun’s center.”

Things that are smaller, like planets and their moons, are the same way. The Earth and Moon go around a point about 3,100 miles (5,100 kilometers) from the Earth’s center. This path changes as the moon moves farther away from the earth.

Continue Reading

Trending