Collective Frames and the Legitimation of Contested Practices Within Consumption Communities Nicholas J
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations 2016 The nU written Rules About Breaking The Rules: Collective Frames And The Legitimation Of Contested Practices Within Consumption Communities Nicholas J. Pendarvis University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons Recommended Citation Pendarvis, N. J.(2016). The Unwritten Rules About Breaking The Rules: Collective Frames And The Legitimation Of Contested Practices Within Consumption Communities. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/3987 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE UNWRITTEN RULES ABOUT BREAKING THE RULES: COLLECTIVE FRAMES AND THE LEGITIMATION OF CONTESTED PRACTICES WITHIN CONSUMPTION COMMUNITIES by Nicholas J. Pendarvis Bachelor of Science South Carolina State University, 2007 International Master of Business Administration University of South Carolina, 2011 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Business Administration Darla Moore School of Business University of South Carolina 2016 Accepted by: David Crockett, Major Professor Bikram Ghosh, Committee Member Randall Rose, Committee Member Patrick Nolan, Committee Member Cheryl L Addy, Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School © Copyright by Nicholas J. Pendarvis, 2016 All Rights Reserved. ii DEDICATION For mom and dad. For Bob, Jervey, Lewis, Flossie, Leroy, Lila Mae, Dave and all the rest of my family and friends. But, especially for mom, your unwavering love, support, and encouragement made all things possible. Thank you for everything. iii ABSTRACT This research explores the legitimation of contested consumption practices in the context of a highly competitive online gaming community. Building on prior research, which has relied on an institutional perspective to shed light on how perceptions of legitimacy form and evolve in the marketplace, this research explores the role of legitimacy at the level of consumption communities to highlight the ways in which consumers socially construct “collective frames” which give meaning to action and organize these communities. In the empirical context studied here, online gamers have incorporated user-created modifications (e.g., modified game accessories, or "mods") into game play over the last several years. Though these mods are increasingly common, they remain explicitly prohibited by the game’s producers and their role in competition is heavily contested. I draw from the literatures on community, practice theory, new social movement theory and framing processes, as well as the multidisciplinary literature on legitimation to explain how consumers develop oppositional collective frames for the meaning and legitimacy attributed to an emergent contested practice. I then discuss the cultural production of inequality as a consequence of the legitimation process as the normalization of mod use restructures social organization and status hierarchy within the online gaming community. Qualitative data collection and analytical techniques are used to explore in-depth interview data, netnographic data, which includes online interactions in internet based gaming forums, as well as field notes from both participant and non- participant observation iv TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ....................................................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................. vi LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................ vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ..........................................................................13 CHAPTER 3: EMPIRICAL CONTEXT: THE CALL OF DUTY COMMUNITY AND THE MODIFIED CONTROLLER ......................................................................................................................41 CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION .......................................................51 CHAPTER 5: CALL OF DUTY COMMUNITY STRUCTURE AND MECHANISMS OF SOCIALIZATION ...................................................................................................................61 CHAPTER 6: CONTESTED ELEMENTS OF PRACTICE AND FRAME FORMATION ......................99 CHAPTER 7: FRAME TRANSFORMATION AND EMERGENT INEQUALITY .............................159 CHAPTER 8: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .....................................................................171 REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................179 v LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 Primary Sources: Netnography & Online Content ............................................55 Table 4.2 Informant Descriptions ......................................................................................57 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure 4.1 Forms of Online/Offline Interaction in the CoD Community…….......……...52 Figure 5.1 Community-level Legitimation Processes as Frame Transformation.…..…...62 Figure 6.1 Elements of Practice Framework…................................................................100 vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CoD ....................................................................................................................Call of Duty CoC ........................................................................................................... Codes of Conduct MLG .................................................................................................. Major League Gaming Mod ................................................................................................ User-modified controller ToS ............................................................................................................. Terms of Service viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Modified controllers are cheating. We all know that. PERMA[NENMTLY] BAN THEM all. Or was it [the developers] intention that the sniper rifle be shot dead on the head faster than some of the assault rifles for those who go pay for it?...if so, CoD is for amateurs and not TRUE competitors. And CoD should be viewed as a game that is biased, unfair, unbalanced, cheater happy piece of shit (jhonnydizznill - callofduty.com forum) Other player's might think this as a joke and kinda nail [you for complaining about modified controllers]...They're so common though, that they're often not rage'd about. To answer your question though: Yes, they are bannable. Big time. You don't hear much about it because rapid fire controllers have existed since CoD's infancy. (rsjc741 - callofduty.com forums) The brief comments presented above represent two distinct voices in the Call of Duty online gaming community. Both comments are made in reference to a specific community practice; the use of user-modified gaming equipment (i.e., “modded controllers” or “mods”) in the video game’s popular online multiplayer competitive 1 mode. Each comment represents one of the two prevailing ideals concerning the legitimacy of modified controller use. What is immediate clear is that each commenter hold a distinct, and even oppositional, view of the same practice. Whereas the first commenter stands vehemently opposed to the use of modified controllers suggesting that the practice goes against the game’s intended design and using disparaging language to call into question the moral character of those willing to use one; the second commenter seems to support the notion that these controllers have attained a degree of legitimacy among community members, further suggesting that complaining about the devices may be regarded as a laughable offense among members of the community and grounds for ridicule. So, which statement most accurately reflects Call of Duty players’ shared understanding of the practice? Contemporary marketing logic has called for increased collaboration between firms and the customers they serve, gradually blurring the line between producer and consumer in the cocreation of value in the marketplace. (Schau, Muniz, and Arnould 2009; Vargo and Lusch 2004). However, this perspective has also exacerbated a classic dilemma among marketing practitioner’s - which voices should marketers be listening to? The contrast between the two comments is apparent. What is less obvious here is which, if either, of these perspective has the potential to become the dominant view in the community, and what, if any, influence do marketers have on the process. Comments such as the ones presented above are equally as common in the CoD community as consumers wrestle with the meaning and social significance of this emergent practice. What is being negotiated within the CoD community, as illustrated in contrasting the above comments,