Keywords

Since digital games entered the mass market in the 1980s, the public, as well as many scholars, have viewed them with skepticism. For example, early studies investigated whether playing video games may lead to decreases in academic performance (Harris & Williams, 1985), cardiovascular risks (Gwinup, Haw, & Elias, 1983), or epilepsy (Maeda et al., 1990). From early on, the use of violent games has been considered a possible cause of aggressiveness (e.g. Ellis, 1990); a topic that gained particular attention in the context of the school schoolings of Columbine, Erfurt, or Winnenden, and that is still being discussed controversially among scholars (Drummond, Sauer, & Garea, 2018; Scharrer, Kamau, Warren, & Zhang, 2018). Recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) decided to include the addictive use of digital games (“gaming disorder”) into the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). This has triggered a worldwide debate about the question whether the classification in the ICD-11 is useful or not and what consequences will arise from it (e.g. Aarseth et al., 2017; Király & Demetrovics, 2017).

The dominance of research and debates on negative effects of gaming may disguise the fact that playing digital games is a very popular and entertaining spare time activity that attracts billions of players worldwide. In recent years, more and more studies on positive aspects of playing were conducted that may help to overcome the one-sided view of digital games as a risk to health and society. For example, studies examined the educational potentials of digital games in school contexts (e.g. Bai, Pan, Hirumi, & Kebritchi, 2012) or in health care and intervention (e.g. DeShazo, Harris, & Pratt, 2010). Other studies explored the benefits of using so-called exergames—a combination of digital game and physical exercise (e.g. Staiano & Clavert, 2011). Also commercial off-the-shelf games were brought in connection with positive effects, such as recovery and stress reduction (e.g. Reinecke, 2009a; Reinecke, Klatt, & Krämer, 2011).

The current chapter will overview of some of these positive effects playing digital games, with a specific focus on how the use of games may contribute to players’ well-being. Well-being is a concept that is often associated with positive psychology and refers to optimal experience and sufficient mental functioning (Ryan & Deci, 2001). In particular, we will distinguish between three often-investigated subcomponents of well-being: hedonic, eudaimonic, and social well-being.

Digital Games and Hedonic Well-Being

In a general sense, the hedonic component of well-being relates to the experience of positive affective (i.e. mood) states. Hedonic understandings of well-being have often been associated with the Greek philosopher Aristippus who believed that living a good life in essence means maximizing individual pleasure and enjoyment and minimizing pain and suffering (Huta, 2017; Ryan & Deci, 2001). The hedonic view of well-being was also adopted by psychologists like Kahnenman and colleagues (1999) who stated that the primary aim of psychological treatment and research should be to assist people in creating pleasurable experiences and amplifying happiness as well as in reducing negative emotions like sadness or dissatisfaction (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Pleasure and happiness are two terms that have often been used to define hedonic experiences. Others include fun, enjoyment, relaxation, or carefreeness (Huta, 2017). Further, hedonic well-being was often understood as a state in absence of negative feelings, such as stress, depression, anxiety, or emotional pain (Huta, 2017).

Communication researchers and media psychologists have brought hedonic well-being in connection with the use of entertainment media, including films and television (e.g. Vorderer & Reinecke, 2012; Vorderer, Klimmt, & Ritterfeld, 2004). Viewing a comedy, reading a novel or listening to pop music can undoubtedly be pleasurable experiences that increase individual’s enjoyment and well-being. A good example for a theoretical concept of entertainment research that has a clear link to the hedonic understanding of well-being is escapism (e.g. Katz & Foulkes, 1962). It is widely known for several decades that escaping daily life problems can be an important motivation to use media content (e.g. Hastall, 2017). From a hedonic perspective, media use thus can be seen as s sufficient strategy to (at least temporarily) increase well-being via the distraction from stress, interpersonal problems or day-to-day worries.

Concerning digital games, several studies have found that escapism and being immersed into a fantasy world to be relevant motivations of players (e.g. Scharkow, Festl, Vogelgesang, & Quandt, 2015; Sherry, Lucas, Greenberg, & Lachlan, 2006; Williams, Yee, & Caplan, 2008; Yee, 2006a, 2006b). Especially complex games like online role-playing games are often used for escapism-related motivations like immersion/fantasy (e.g. Ghuman & Griffiths, 2012; Scharkow et al., 2015). These games typically feature detailed narrations within a sophisticated virtual world and offer the fascinating opportunity to take over different identities. They thus provide an optimal environment for a pleasurable escape from the restrictions and difficulties of the real world.

While escapism is a rather broad concept that relates to many different facets of distractive media use, mood management theory (Zillmann, 1988) takes a more pronounced perspective by focusing on media-based mood regulation processes. Introduced by Zillmann (1988), mood management theory claims that the use of entertainment media can be an efficient coping strategy to bring negative mental conditions and suboptimal excitation levels back into balance (and thus to increase hedonic well-being). Studies indicate that, for example, bored individuals tend to choose exciting TV programs, while stressed individuals prefer to watch relaxing TV programs (Bryant & Zillmann, 1984). Further, participants in bad moods were found to prefer to listen to energetic-joyful music, which helped them to regulate their affective states (Knobloch & Zillmann, 2002).

In recent years, several studies have also analyzed the mood repair potentials of digital games (e.g. Bowman & Tamborini, 2012, 2015; Rieger, Frischlich, Wulf, Bente, & Kneer, 2015). For example, Bowman and Tamborini (2012) argued that digital games should be particularly well-suited to repair negative affective states since the interactivity they provide make them more demanding (and thus distracting) than non-interactive media. In a laboratory experiment with 176 participants, task demand and the participants’ mood were manipulated and pre- to post-play mood repair was measured. The results indicated that higher levels of task demand (induced by varying levels of interactivity) increased the game’s intervention potential and resulted in a more effective reduction of stress and boredom. In a follow-up study, Rieger et al. (2015) showed that also sadness is more effectively relieved by playing a computer game than by watching a non-interactive gameplay video.

Similarly, a survey study by Reinecke (2009a) showed that digital games are frequently used to recover from stress and strain and that work-related fatigue and daily hassles are significant predictors of the recreational use of games. Playing digital games at the workplace has also been found to have a high potential for recovery from work-related exhaustion (Reinecke, 2009b). A laboratory experiment with 160 participants showed that playing a digital game induced the highest levels of overall recovery experience in comparison to watching a non-interactive media stimulus. Further, media-based recovery experiences led to increases in vitally and cognitive performance (Reinecke et al., 2011). Taken together, these results illustrate the positive role digital games can take in increasing hedonic well-being.

Interactivity seems to be a key factor in the specific potential of games to induce hedonic well-being. The possibility to influence what happens on the screen fundamentally changes the reception process and transforms the role of the media user from a passive viewer to an active player. Becoming a famous knight in a medieval fantasy world, beating others in a shooter game, or winning the championship with one’s own professional football team provide unique gratifications that other types of media can hardly offer. Unsurprisingly, achievement and experiencing success were found to be important motivations for playing digital games (e.g. Williams et al., 2006; Yee, 2006a). Effectance is a psychological concept that has been applied to explain the particular interactivity-based gratifications of digital games (e.g. Klimmt, 2017; Klimmt, Hartmann, & Frey, 2007).

Effectance relates to the inherently positive feeling that humans experience when interacting with the environment and realizing that their actions have an impact or make a difference (Klimmt, 2017). Small children that throw down a pencil again and again and wait for their mother to pick it up experience effectance as well as users of a computer that press a mouse button and notice a direct reaction on the screen. Digital games induce particularly strong and continuous feelings of effectance: all important events happening in a digital game are bound to the inputs of the players and only occur because the player directly caused them or at least did not prevent them (Klimmt, 2017). Further, simple commands and small inputs can have huge, direct and explicit effects on the game environment and, for example, can trigger floods, explosions, or earthquakes (Klimmt, 2017). Klimmt et al. (2007) showed that effectance experienced while playing a digital game was an important factor for the perceived game enjoyment. A deeper understanding of the link between digital game-based experiences of effectance and increases in well-being can be achieved through flow theory (Klimmt, 2017).

The concept of flow was established by the psychologist Csikszentmihalyi (1990) who investigated what makes people happy and under which circumstances activities contribute to life satisfaction and well-being. Flow is broadly defined as a state of optimal experience. It can arise in very different life domains and in the context of very different types of activities, such as playing chess, working, or mountain climbing (Klimmt, 2017; Sweetser & Wyeth, 2005). The most important prerequisite for the emergence of flow states is an optimal match between the skills of a person and the requirements of a task or activity (Sweetser & Wyeth, 2005). While a simple task might be experienced as boring, a too demanding task will likely lead to frustration (Klimmt, 2017). Activities that provide such an optimally balanced challenge are experienced as intrinsically motivating and lead to high levels of absorption that shift the sense of the duration of time and can offer a very pleasant relaxation from everyday life stressors (Sweetser & Wyeth, 2005).

Experiencing efficacy is a key factor contributing to the maintenance of flow states—failing in effectively manipulating the environment will immediately terminate flow (Klimmt, 2017). Digital games are particularly well-suited to enable flow: Not only do they induce strong feelings of efficacy by directly reacting to the players’ inputs, but additionally offer a perfect challenge by constantly increasing in difficulty in sync with the improving skills of the user (Sweetser & Wyeth, 2005). Since regularly experiencing flow states can contribute to life satisfaction (Klimmt, 2017), playing digital games may (via its high capacity to initiate flow) not only elicit positive short-term effects, but could additionally strengthen well-being in the long run.

Taken together, there is clear evidence that the unique characteristics of digital games have a high potential to induce positive affective states as well as to resolve or relieve negative feelings. Or in other words: digital games can foster hedonic well-being. Therefore, it is not particularly surprising that digital games have already been used as tools in diverse therapeutic contexts (Griffiths, 2019). For example, digital games have already been successfully utilized in depression interventions (Li, Theng, & Schubert, 2014) and as distractors in cancer therapy and pain management (Griffiths, 2019).

Digital Games and Eudaimonic Well-Being

The term eudaimonia was coined by Aristotle who, in contrast to Aristippos and other supporters of the hedonic understanding of well-being, believed that living a good life means more than seeking for pleasure and amusement (Huta, 2017; Ryan & Deci, 2001). According to the eudaimonic understanding, real happiness is achieved through personal growth, virtuousness, and reason (Huta, 2017; Ryan & Deci, 2001). Other terms often associated with eudaimonia include meaningfulness, self-realization, autonomy, authenticity, or ethics and integration (Huta, 2017). Eudaimonic well-being is a multidimensional construct that consists of many distinct components (Wirth, Hofer, & Schramm, 2012). Several systematizations were published that help to categorize the different elements of eudaimonic well-being and to make them operationalizable for empirical research.

For example, Ryff (1989) distinguished between six different contours of well-being: mastery (successfully mastering the challenges of life), autonomy (experiencing self-actualization and inner freedom), personal growth (developing and expanding as a person), self-acceptance (having a positive attitude toward oneself), positive interpersonal relationships (being able to love and build up intimacy), and life purpose (finding a goal and meaning in life). According to Ryff (1989), all these elements are important factors that contribute to positive psychological functioning and well-being.

Three of the components described by Ryff (1989) also play an important role in another prominent theory that was often associated with the eudaimonic understanding of well-being: Self-Determination Theory (SDT). SDT was developed by Deci and Ryan (e.g. 2000) and assumes that human beings have three basic psychological needs and that the satisfaction of these needs is essential for well-being. The needs postulated in SDT include autonomy, competence and relatedness and, in essence, parallel Ryff’s (1989) dimensions of autonomy, mastery, and positive relations. Many empirical studies have approved the assumptions of SDT: The satisfaction of autonomy, competence and relatedness needs was shown to facilitate well-being and enjoyment in a variety of contexts like, for example, the work place (e.g. Manganelli, Thibault-Landry, Forest, & Carpentier, 2018), nursing homes (e.g. Custers, Westerhof, Kuin, & Riksen-Walraven, 2010), sports teams (e.g. Quested et al., 2013), or therapy and counseling (e.g. Ryan & Deci, 2008).

In recent years, a growing number of studies have also examined in how far media use can help people to fulfill eudaimonic needs and thus can increase enjoyment and well-being (e.g. Oliver & Raney, 2011; Tamborini et al., 2011; Wirth et al., 2012). Several of these works focused on digital games (e.g. Bowman et al., 2016; Oliver et al., 2016; Ryan, Rigby, & Przybylski, 2006; Tamborini, Bowman, Eden, Grizzard, & Organ, 2010). In the following summary, we will follow Vorderer’s and Reinecke’s (2012) distinction between studies with a background in SDT (that investigate need satisfaction in gaming contexts) and works that are based on Beth Olivers’ notion of meaningful entertainment (e.g. Oliver & Bartsch, 2010, 2011).

Digital Games and Psychological Need Satisfaction

In the last two decades, SDT has developed into one of the most often adopted frameworks in empirical games research. The general idea behind the application of SDT to the context of gaming is that the specific features of digital games are expected to offer a particularly fruitful ground for the satisfaction of autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs (Przybylski, Rigby, & Ryan, 2010).

First, digital games continuously confront players with new challenges and solving these tasks induces feelings of competence and mastery. The direct feedback games provide and new online technologies that allow to automatically match players based on their previous performance predestine digital games to satisfy competence needs (Przybylski et al., 2010). Second, digital games offer multiple opportunities and choices. For example, players can create their own avatars, decide what mission or level to play, and influence the future course of the happening by their in-game behaviors (Przybylski et al., 2010). The freedom of choice digital games provide can be assumed a rich source for experiences of autonomy. And third, it has become a standard that games offer multiplayer functions and possibilities to directly communicate with fellow players. Thus, games can also be considered a resource for the satisfaction of relatedness needs (Przybylski et al., 2010).

A number of empirical studies have demonstrated that digital games fulfill the basic psychological needs proposed in SDT and that need satisfaction in the gaming context contributes to enjoyment and well-being (e.g. Rieger, Wulf, Kneer, Frischlich, & Bente, 2014; Ryan et al., 2006; Tamborini et al., 2010, 2011). For example, Ryan et al. (2006) conducted three experiments using different console games and showed that playing can satisfy autonomy and competence needs. Need fulfillment, in turn, was shown to be associated with more enjoyment and pre- to post-play increases in various measures of well-being (e.g. subjective vitality, self-esteem, mood). An additional survey study among players of a multiplayer online game showed that playing together with others via the Internet can satisfy relatedness needs which was found to be associated with longer playing times and higher levels of game enjoyment (Ryan et al., 2006).

Tamborini et al. (2010) confirmed the importance of need satisfaction for game enjoyment and additionally identified several underlying factors of game-based need fulfillment, such as the physical presence of co-players (relatedness) and the perceived natural mapping of the game controls (autonomy and competence). Przybylski, Ryan and Rigby (2009) showed that also within violent first-person shooter games experiencing autonomy and competence are key factors contributing to enjoyment, while the display of violence was of minor importance for the motivation to play such games.

A more recent study by Reer and Krämer (2018) showed that joining a persistent gaming community (like a first-person shooter clan) further amplifies the potential of digital games to facilitate well-being via need satisfaction. The multiple opportunities such groups provide in terms of interacting with fellow players, improving one’s game skills, participating in offline events, or helping in organizing and managing the community offer additional grounds for the satisfaction of autonomy, competence and relatedness needs (Reer & Krämer, 2018).

The potential for digital games to enhance well-being and enjoyment via the fulfillment of basic psychological needs are well documented by existing empirical studies. However, the long-term effects of game-based need satisfaction remained understudied so far. That said, it seems plausible that regularly experiencing game-based need satisfaction may also be of relevance for superordinate components of well-being, like life satisfaction or mental health.

Digital Games and Meaningfulness

The starting point of Oliver’s considerations on the relationship between media use and eudaimonic well-being lay in the question why seemingly aversive media content such as dramas or tragedies are quite popular (Oliver & Raney, 2011). A merely hedonic perspective is not sufficient in explaining this phenomenon: given the negative emotions the usage can elicit (e.g. sadness, melancholia, grief), at first sight it is hard to understand how the reception of these products can be experienced as enjoyable or entertaining. According to Oliver, the use of such contents can be explained by eudaimonic motivations: people appreciate the meaningfulness of complex narrations and sophisticated media contents, even if they may also make one ruminative or even sad (Oliver & Bartsch, 2011; Oliver & Raney, 2011). In this context, appreciation is introduced as a eudaimonic entertainment experience that exists beyond hedonic enjoyment and is “[…] characterized by the perception of deeper meaning, the feeling of being moved, and the motivation to elaborate on thoughts and feelings […]” (Oliver & Bartsch, 2010, p. 76). It is primarily triggered by contents that have a high artistic value, that are thought-provoking and can offer new insights, or that demonstrate or teach human moral virtues (Oliver & Bartsch, 2011). In the long run, the consumption of meaningful entertainment and the experience of appreciation can “[…] strengthen individuals’ general ability to confront and cope with negative experiences, thus contributing to emotional stability and eudaimonic well-being” (Bartsch & Oliver, 2017, p. 89).

Research on meaningfulness and appreciation has long focused on non-interactive media such as films. However, many digital games nowadays contain complex stories, deal with sophisticated topics, and indeed have an artistic value. Accordingly, the results of recent empirical studies have revealed that also digital games can serve as sources of meaningfulness and appreciation (e.g. Bowman et al., 2016; Oliver et al., 2016; Rogers, Woolley, Sherrick, Bowman, & Oliver, 2017).

For example, following an explorative approach, Rogers et al., asked 575 players about their most fun vs. their most meaningful video game experience. World of Warcraft and Final Fantasy were often named as meaningful games. The participants experienced games as meaningful because “[…] of a connection to characters in the game, of the story of the game, and of the moral choices allowed by the games” (Rogers et al., 2017, p. 71). In line with these findings, Bowman et al. (2016) showed that identification with a game character and feeling responsible for it are two important underlying factors of the emergence of game-based feelings of appreciation.

Oliver et al. (2016) surveyed 512 players and asked them about the game experience a fun-oriented vs. a potentially meaningful digital game provides. Meaningful games were shown to feature narrations of a higher quality than fun-oriented games. Further, they were demonstrated to satisfy the need for insight, which in turn was positively associated with experiencing appreciation (Oliver et al., 2016). A recent study by Colder Carras et al. (2018) investigated mental health benefits of gaming among military veterans and found evidence that playing did not only help the participants in terms of stress reduction, but in some cases also increased their eudaimonic well-being by offering new insights into their own situation and by giving them a new sense of self-confidence.

Even though the number of studies on the meaningfulness of digital games remains limited, there is some evidence that high quality games can induce feelings of appreciation in a similar manner as sophisticated films. Experiencing meaningfulness and satisfying needs for new insights supplements the possibilities playing provides in terms of fulfilling the three basic psychological needs postulated in SDT, thus substantially enhancing the potentials of digital games to contribute to eudaimonic well-being.

Digital Games and Social Well-Being

Undoubtedly, digital gaming has developed into a highly social activity as playing together with others (either online or offline) has come to be standard practice. According to recently published data from the American Entertainment Software Association (ESA), 56% of frequent gamers play multiplayer games at least once a week and 55% say that gaming is helpful to stay in contact with friends (ESA, 2018). The increasing possibilities for cooperative play and Internet-based communication with fellow players have made games social environments and raised the question as to whether spending time with multiplayer games may serve as a basis for the development of substantial social relationships that could increase the social embeddedness and social well-being of players (e.g. Domahidi, Festl, & Quandt, 2014; Kaye, Kowert, & Quinn, 2017; Reer & Krämer, 2019; Trepte, Reinecke, & Juechems, 2012). This question was briefly touched in the above passage on SDT and the potentials of games to satisfy relatedness needs. However, given the importance of the topic and the many existing studies that address social aspects of gaming beyond the SDT-framework, we will dedicate a separate paragraph to the possible social benefits of digital game use.

Even though first studies on social effects of gaming were already published in the 1990s (e.g. Parks & Roberts, 1998) a research boom in this area coincided with the popularization of massively multiplayer online games (MMOs) like World of Warcraft (Blizzard Entertainment, 2004) in the 2000s. Many of the relevant studies analyzed social effects of playing against the background of social capital theory (e.g. Reer & Krämer, 2014; Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006; Trepte et al., 2012; Williams, 2006a; Williams et al., 2006).

Social capital is a sociological concept that is closely linked to the works of Robert D. Putnam (e.g. Putnam, 2000). In the broadest sense, social capital can be understood as the benefits people receive from the interpersonal relationships and networks they have formed (Reer & Krämer, 2014; Trepte et al., 2012; Williams, 2006b). According to Putnam (2000), two types of social capital can be distinguished: bridging and bonding. Bridging social capital is based on informal weak ties that offer useful information, whereas bonding social capital refers to strong ties that provide emotional and material support (Reer & Krämer, 2014; Trepte et al., 2012; Williams, 2006b). Putnam (2000) demonstrated that social capital is important for many different aspects of well-being, like happiness, health, and life satisfaction.

Several studies found that MMOs and other types of online games can serve as meeting points that facilitate the formation of weak ties and bridging social capital (e.g. Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006; Trepte et al., 2012; Williams et al., 2006). For example, Williams et al. (2006) interviewed World of Warcraft players and found that many of them had enlarged their social networks through the game and had built casual relationships with fellow players.

Concerning the creation of bonding social capital, some early works were rather skeptical and implied that the development of deep relationships is rather seldom in gaming contexts (Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006; Williams et al., 2006). As a consequence, it was often discussed whether using online games might lead to displacement effects in the sense that meaningful offline ties are neglected in exchange for superficial gaming friendships (e.g. Kowert, Domahidi, Festl, & Quandt, 2014; Shen & Williams, 2011; Williams, 2006a). However, a recent longitudinal study did not find any signs for displacement effects (Domahidi, Breuer, Kowert, Festl, & Quandt, 2018) and other studies clearly proved that it is in general also possible for players to build up deep and meaningful relationships with fellow players (e.g. Kaye et al., 2017; Reer & Krämer, 2014, 2019; Trepte et al., 2012). The results of a study by Trepte et al. (2012) even indicated that social capital acquired in the gaming context is positively related to higher levels of offline social support. Kaye et al. (2017) recently found that game-based bonding social capital (but not bridging social capital) was associated with lower levels of perceived loneliness.

When discussing the social aspects of digital games, it is important to note that social benefits may vary strongly depending on the game, the way it is played, and the personalities and behaviors of the players. For example, playing a casual browser game may offer fewer opportunities for socializing than playing a complex online role-playing game. Even when the same game is used, players may differ in their motivations and in-game behaviors, resulting in differing social outcomes. For example, several studies have demonstrated that playing for social motivations increases the chances to experience positive social effects, while playing for escapism or achievement is less socially beneficial (e.g. Dalisay, Kushin, Yamamoto, Liu, & Skalski, 2015; Domahidi, et al., 2014; Hellström, Nilsson, Leppert, & Åslund, 2012; Reer & Krämer, 2019). Further, particular game-related behaviors such as the membership in a clan or guild, the participation in face-to-face gatherings, or the frequencies of team play and communication with fellow players were shown to foster social capital acquisition (Reer & Krämer, 2014, 2019; Trepte et al., 2012).

Concerning personality aspects, especially outgoing, extravert players were found to experience social benefits from playing (Reer & Krämer, 2017; Shen & Williams, 2011). However, this does not mean that shy, socially anxious, or introverted individuals may not also profit from playing. For example, Kowert, Domahidi, & Quandt, (2014) found that playing online games may help shy individuals to overcome their inhibitions and can support them in maintaining as well as in building up social relationships. Further, online games can serve important social functions for individuals high in attachment avoidance (Kowert & Oldmeadow, 2015). Reer and Krämer (2017) showed that at least some introverted players intentionally use online games in a compensatory manner, which enhances their chances to generate bridging as well as bonding social capital.

Taken together, there is clear empirical evidence that playing digital games in general can have positive social outcomes, which can contribute to players’ well-being. However, more research is needed to deepen the understanding of the complex interplay of the many underlying factors that can influence these outcomes.

Conclusion

Digital games have been traditionally linked to negative personal and social outcomes both in the public debate and in parts of academic research: The discussed risks and effects range from inducing aggression via violent content to overuse or “addiction”. Victims of these postulated negative consequences are typically adolescents and children. The reasons for this bias in the debate are manifold, but there seems to be a certain repeating pattern to portray perceived “youth” media as problematic or dangerous (as part of so-called “moral panics”, see Bowman, 2016). This one-sided debate does not only characterize digital games in a misleading way—as they are far from being just youth media (Quandt, Breuer, Festl, & Scharkow, 2013)—but it also blocks the view of the beneficial effects games may have and limits the research and discussion on potential positive uses. In that sense, the negative bias in the debate may indeed have negative effects itself, by preventing a clearer understanding and exploitation of the positive aspects of digital gaming.

In this chapter, we explored the potentials of digital games on users’ well-being. That is, whether digital games can contribute to a positive experience and ideal mental functioning (Ryan & Deci, 2001). As outlined above, there are three main types of well-being considered in the literature: hedonic, eudaimonic and social. In the public perception, well-being is often equated with a hedonic understanding (i.e. reaching high levels of pleasure and enjoyment paired with minimal negative feelings): People “have fun” while playing digital games, and games are used to “relieve stress” or “make gamers happy”. Indeed, research on affective states has consistently shown that digital games are very effective means to positively influence the feelings of users. Gamers can escape stress or negative life-circumstances, alter or manage their mood in desired directions, experience feelings of agency and control (often in contrast to their daily life), and they consistently reach flow states that contribute to increased life satisfaction.

However, there are forms of well-being that go beyond a “(just) for fun” idea of positive affective states. Eudaimonia is a concept to describe meaningful experiences that contribute to the realization of autonomy and personal growth, and follows the idea that happiness and personal fulfillment are not just achieved by “fun” experiences. Research based on Self-Determination Theory has confirmed that digital games can serve the very basic psychological needs of their users, and by doing so, effectively contribute to enjoyment and well-being. Furthermore, there are specific types of games that seem to allow for deeply meaningful experiences via complex narrations and high artistic values. These games elicit feelings of appreciation, which in turn enhance a person’s well-being.

Furthermore, digital games are not just tools to boost individual feelings of fun or meaningfulness in an isolated setting—they are often played with other humans, either co-located or online. The idea of the “lonely gamer” who plays shooter games in a darkened room without any social contact is an outdated stereotype (Kowert, Festl, & Quandt, 2014; Scharkow et al., 2015) that does not reflect the reality of most digital games users today. In addition, digital games are not only experienced in social settings—they can also be beneficial for social interactions or contribute to a person’s social capital. Indeed, the respective research could highlight numerous positive effects, ranging from friendship building, overcoming inhibitions, to accumulating social capital, while debunking some of the earlier ideas that games automatically contribute to loneliness and dysfunctional relationships.

In short, games can substantially contribute to an individual’s well-being, either by inducing positive affective states in various forms, by evoking feelings of appreciation for meaningful experiences, or by building social relationships and acquiring social capital. These findings need to be especially stressed in light of a rather biased discussion about the effects of digital games that seems to just focus on the negative side, and feeds a very pessimistic view.

Naturally, our call for balance in the discussion also applies to this chapter itself, and we have to admit that our overview is solely focusing on the bright side (on purpose). In all fairness, one should also mention that many of the positive potentials of games that we described in the current chapter can, under specific circumstances, also have a problematic reverse side. As we recently discussed elsewhere (Reer & Quandt, in press), the elements and mechanisms that make games enjoyable and that have the potential to strengthen hedonic, eudaimonic or social well-being were often also brought in connection with problematic, addictive forms of game use (Reer & Quandt, in press). Especially individuals with mental health challenges, those that lack meaning and need satisfaction in real life, or suffer from deficits in social integration, might find digital games so attractive that they develop excessive, unhealthy forms of engagement. This does not devaluate the positive potential of games but should never the less be kept in mind.

In many ways, games are not, by definition, “good” or “bad”—they follow the design and intentions of their producers as well as the use of the gamers. They can be a means for meaningful experiences in socially relevant settings or potentially destructive forces in the lives of some. In short: games are what we make them and how we use them. It is time that digital games start to be thought of as more than just simple entertainment but as tools to enhance our lives, including our psychological well-being.