The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year.
The Ethics of Computer Games
Abstract
This chapter develops a comprehensive ethical framework that can be used to understand, analyze, and perhaps even predict the ethical issues computer games pose, as well as the possible solutions that developers, players, and theorists can apply. The framework applies two different and consolidated ethical frameworks—information ethics and virtue ethics—to the findings of Chapter 2 and 3. The central questions are: how do we play these ethical systems, and how do we tackle the ethical issues they raise? The chapter concludes with a general theory for the understanding of computer game ethics.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Arrambide, K., Yoon, J., MacArthur, C., Rogers, K., Luz, A., & Nacke, L. E. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3502019 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Sicart, M.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sicart, Miguel
- ORCID
- Sicart, Miguel
- Venue
- The Ethics of Computer Games
- Publisher
- The MIT Press
- Published
- 2009-04-24
- Pages
- 107-150
- OpenAlex
- W169766694
- Cited by
- 437
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 23
- FWCI
- 26.73
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The MIT Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- video games, information ethics, virtue ethics, ethical frameworks, game developers, gamers
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
