Cited by 16Cultural Studies and PostmodernismDigital Games and MediaDigital Media and Philosophy

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Virtual worlds, real knowledge: towards a hermeneutics of virtuality

AARSETH, ESPEN·2001·European Review

Abstract

What is the ‘virtual’ and what types of phenomena can be so described? This article tries to establish the context within which this unclear and ideological term can be constructive. Phrases such as ‘virtual community’ are paradoxical and weak, but ‘virtual’ applied cognitively to simulated phenomena, such as virtual worlds or computer games, has validity and represents an alternative discourse mode to narratives and storytelling in conveying experience and knowledge.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1062798701000205

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
AARSETH, E.
Affiliations
University of Bergen (NO)
Corresponding author
AARSETH, ESPEN
Venue
European Review
Published
2001-05
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
227-232
ISSN
  • 1062-7987 (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-0575
OpenAlex
W2082530923
Cited by
16
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Review (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Cultural Studies and Postmodernism
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Digital Media and Philosophy
Keywords
virtual worlds, virtuality, online communities, video games, simulation, knowledge, discourse, experience

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review