Paper detail

Gendered Conversation in a Social Game-Streaming Platform

Online social media and games are increasingly replacing offline social activities. Social media is now an indispensable mode of communication; online gaming is not only a genuine social activity but also a popular spectator sport. With support for anonymity and larger audiences, online interaction shrinks social and geographical barriers. Despite such benefits, social disparities such as gender inequality persist in online social media. In particular, online gaming communities have been criticized for persistent gender disparities and objectification. As gaming evolves into a social platform, persistence of gender disparity is a pressing question. Yet, there are few large-scale, systematic studies of gender inequality and objectification in social gaming platforms. Here we analyze more than one billion chat messages from Twitch, a social game-streaming platform, to study how the gender of streamers is associated with the nature of conversation. Using a combination of computational text analysis methods, we show that gendered conversation and objectification is prevalent in chats. Female streamers receive significantly more objectifying comments while male streamers receive more game-related comments. This difference is more pronounced for popular streamers. There also exists a large number of users who post only on female or male streams. Employing a neural vector-space embedding (paragraph vector) method, we analyze gendered chat messages and create prediction models that (i) identify the gender of streamers based on messages posted in the channel and (ii) identify the gender a viewer prefers to watch based on their chat messages. Our findings suggest that disparities in social game-streaming platforms is a nuanced phenomenon that involves the gender of streamers as well as those who produce gendered and game-related conversation.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.