KOCCA 연구보고서 10 - 34

게임 이용에 대한 인식 및 행동진단

모델 연구 (3차년도)

2010. 6.

- i -

차 례

연구 요약 ··················································································································15

1. 제목 ·······························································································································15

2. 연구 목적 ·····················································································································15

3. 연구 개요 ·····················································································································15

4. 연구1: 게임행동 종합진단척도에 따른 4개 집단 분류 및 분석 ······················17

5. 연구2: 고위험군의 특성과 게임사용의 변화과정 분석 ······································25

6. 연구3: 학부모․교사․청소년상담사 대상 인식조사 분석 ································28

7. 결론 ·······························································································································37

I. 서론 ························································································································43

제1장 연구의 필요성 및 목적 ····························································································43

제2장 연구 개요 ····················································································································47

II. 연구1: 게임행동 종합진단척도에 따른 4개 집단 분류 및 분석 연구 · 51

제1장 목적 ······························································································································51

제2장 방법 및 절차 ··············································································································52

제1절 예비조사 ····················································································································52

제2절 본조사 ························································································································53

1. 조사문항 구성 ·············································································································53

가. 게임선용 진단척도 및 문제적 게임 이용 진단척도 ·····································53

나. 가족 관계 및 부모 양육태도 ·············································································54

다. 학교생활환경 ·········································································································54

라. 공존 장애 및 주관 안녕 ·····················································································55

마. 통제력, 자결성 및 자존감 ··················································································56

바. 게임관련 신념 및 행동특징 ···············································································56

사. 인구통계 변수 및 기타 ·······················································································57

2. 조사 대상 ·····················································································································58

- ii -

제3절 학생-학부모 Pair 조사 ····························································································61

1. 문항 구성 ·····················································································································61

제3장 결과 ································································································································63

제1절 조사 도구의 신뢰도 ································································································63

1. 게임선용 진단척도 및 문제적 게임 이용 진단척도 ···········································63

2. 가족관계 및 부모양육태도 ·······················································································66

3. 학교생활환경 ···············································································································66

4. 공존장애 및 주관안녕 ·····························································································67

5. 통제력, 자결성 및 자존감 ························································································67

6. 게임관련 신념 및 행동특징 ·····················································································68

제2절 AGUS와 MGUS의 조합에 따른 하위집단 구분 ···············································68

1. 청소년 응답자 전체 자료 ·························································································70

2. 표집별 분류 결과 ·······································································································71

3. 3년 통합 자료 ·············································································································72

4. 하위집단별 평균 게임 이용 시간 ···········································································74

제3절 집단 간 차이검증 ····································································································75

1. ‘고위험군’ 대 ‘일반사용자군’ ···················································································76

2. ‘고위험군’ 대 ‘게임 선용군’ ·····················································································78

3. ‘고위험군’ 대 ‘경계군’ ·······························································································80

4. ‘경계군’ 대 ‘일반사용자군’ ·······················································································82

5. ‘경계군’ 대 ‘게임 선용군’ ·························································································84

6. ‘게임 선용군’ 대 ‘일반사용자군’ ·············································································86

제4절 집단 간 차이검증 결과 논의 및 시사점 ····························································88

1. ‘고위험군’ ·····················································································································88

2. ‘경계군’ ·························································································································89

3. ‘일반사용자군’ ·············································································································90

4. ‘게임 선용군’ ···············································································································91

제5절 학생-학부모 Pair 자료 분석 ················································································92

III. 연구2: 고위험군의 특성과 게임사용의 변화과정 분석 ··························99

제1장 목적 ······························································································································99

제2장 방법 및 절차 ············································································································101

- iii -

제1절 연구 참여자 및 자료수집 방법 ··········································································101

1. 연구 참여자 ···············································································································101

2. 반구조화 면접 ···········································································································101

3. 분석 방법 및 절차 ···································································································101

가. 개방코딩 ···············································································································102

나. 축코딩 ·················································································································102

다. 선택코딩 ···············································································································102

제3장 결과 ····························································································································103

제1절 고위험군에서 게임사용의 변화 과정에 대한 개방코딩과 축코딩 ··············103

1. 인과적 조건 및 현상 ·······························································································105

2. 맥락적 조건 ···············································································································105

3. 중재적 조건 및 작용/상호작용 ·············································································106

4. 결과 ·····························································································································106

제2절 고위험군 게임사용의 변화 과정에 대한 선택코딩 ········································106

1. 핵심 범주 ·················································································································106

2. 이야기 윤곽 전개 ·····································································································107

가. 왜 청소년들은 게임을 하는가?(인과적 조건) ···············································107

나. 위험요인(맥락적 조건들) ···················································································109

다. 청소년들의 문제적/비선용적 게임사용(고위험군의 특징적 현상) ········111

라. 보호요인: 부적응적/비선용적 게임사용에서의 갈림길(중재적 조건) ·····111

3. 작용/상호작용 및 결과 ·························································································113

제3절 시사점 ····················································································································114

IV. 연구3: 학부모․교사․게임 개발자․청소년상담사 대상 인식조사 분석 ····· 119

제1장 목적 ····························································································································119

제2장 방법 및 절차 ············································································································120

제1절 조사문항 구성 ········································································································120

1. 학부모용 질문지 구성 ·····························································································120

2. 교사, 게임 개발자 및 상담가용 질문지 구성 ····················································124

제2절 조사대상 ··················································································································129

제3장 결과 ······························································································································130

제1절 조사 도구의 신뢰도 ······························································································130

- iv -

1. 학부모, 교사, 게임 개발자 및 상담가 공통 문항 ·············································130

2. 학부모 고유 문항 ·····································································································132

제2절 게임의 기능적 속성, 게임사용의 결과, 청소년 게임중독 예방/치료 노력에

대한 인식 및 만족도에서 표집 간 비교 ··························································133

1. 게임의 순기능적 속성에 대한 인식 ·····································································133

2. 게임의 역기능적 속성에 대한 인식 ·····································································134

3. 게임사용의 적응적 결과에 대한 인식 ·································································135

4. 게임사용의 부적응적 결과에 대한 인식 ·····························································136

5. 청소년 게임중독 예방 및 치료 노력에 대한 인식과 만족도 ·························137

6. 청소년 게임중독에 대한 사회적 책임인식 ·························································138

7. 성인 응답에서 표집 간 차이검증 결과 요약 ·····················································140

제3절 학부모 대상 조사결과 ··························································································141

제4절 교사 대상 조사결과 ······························································································150

제5절 게임 개발자 대상 조사 결과 ··············································································157

제6절 상담가 대상 조사결과 ··························································································161

제7절 학부모, 교사, 게임 개발자 및 상담가 대상 조사결과 요약 ························167

1. 학부모 응답 요약 ·····································································································167

2. 교사, 게임 개발자 및 상담가 응답 요약 ····························································168

제8절 개방형 응답 자료 ··································································································169

1. 자료 코딩 ···················································································································169

2. 청소년 게임 이용관련 정부가 가장 시급히 해결해야 할 문제 ·····················169

3. 게임의 순기능적 측면을 신장시키기 위해 관련 주체들이 해야 할 일 ·······170

가. 정부가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·····································································171

나. 게임산업체가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·························································171

다. 일선 학교 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·······························································171

라. 학부모가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·································································171

마. 청소년들이 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·····························································172

4. 게임의 역기능적 측면을 예방하기 위해 필요한 조치 ·····································172

가. 정부가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·····································································172

나. 게임산업체가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·························································172

다. 일선 학교가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ···························································173

라. 학부모가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·································································173

마. 청소년들이 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·····························································173

- v -

5. 개방형 응답 요약 ·····································································································173

V. 논의 및 제언 ······································································································187

제1장 게임중독 현상에 관한 종합적 접근 틀 ······························································187

제1절 위험사회와 위험관리 ····························································································187

제2절 게임중독이 무엇인가? ··························································································188

제3절 게임중독에 대한 공중건강적 접근 ····································································190

제4절 게임중독에 대한 개입 방안 : 치료와 예방 및 건강증진 ·····························193

제2장 청소년 게임문제의 예방 및 해소, 건전 게임문화 조성을 위한 제언 ·········196

참고문헌 ····················································································································205

- vi -

표 차 례

표1. 청소년 대상 본조사의 구성 ·························································································58

표2. 초등학생 응답자(N=461) ·······························································································59

표3. 중학생 응답자 분포(N=450) ·························································································59

표4. 고등학생 응답자 분포(N=454) ·····················································································60

표5. AGUS 하위요인별 문항 ································································································64

표6. MGUS 하위요인별 문항 ·······························································································64

표7. AGUS 하위요인별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ······································65

표8. MGUS 하위요인별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ······································65

표9. AGUS 하위요인별 요인부하량 ····················································································65

표10. MGUS 하위요인별 요인부하량 ·················································································65

표11. 가족관계/부모양육태도 하위요인 별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ··· 66

표12. 학교생활환경 하위요인 별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ······················67

표13. 공존장애 및 주관안녕 하위요인 별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ······67

표14. 통제력(CON), 자결성, 자존감 요인 별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ·······68

표15. 게임관련 신념 및 행동특징 하위요인 별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ···68

표16. AGUS와 MGUS의 조합에 따른 하위집단 분류 ····················································70

표17. 청소년 전체 응답자 집단구분 (N=1,365) ································································71

표18. AGUS * MGUS 집단구분 (초등학생 N=461) ························································71

표19. AGUS * MGUS 집단구분 (중고등학생 N=904) ····················································72

표20. 3차년도 성별에 따른 하위집단 분포 ·····································································72

표21. 최근 3년간 AGUS * MGUS 집단구분 (청소년전체 N=3,831) ···························73

표22. 최근 3년간 AGUS * MGUS 집단구분 (초등학생 전체 N=1,381) ·····················73

표23. 최근 3년간 AGUS * MGUS 집단구분 (중고등학생 전체 N=2,450) ·················73

표24. 최근 3년간 성별에 따른 하위집단 분포 ·······························································73

표25. 하위집단별 하루 평균게임 이용시간 ·····································································75

표26. 하위집단별 하루 평균게임 이용시간 평균(표준편차) ···········································75

표27. ‘고위험군’ 대 ‘일반사용자군’ 차이검증 결과 ···················································77

표28. ‘고위험군’ 대 ‘게임 선용군’ 차이검증 결과 ·····················································79

표29. ‘고위험군’ 대 ‘경계군’ 차이검증 결과 ·····································································81

표30. ‘경계군’ 대 ‘일반사용자군’ 차이검증 결과 ·····························································83

- vii -

표31. ‘경계군’ 대 ‘게임 선용군’ 차이검증 결과 ·······························································85

표32. ‘게임 선용군’ 대 ‘일반사용자군’ 차이검증 결과 ···················································87

표33. 부모의 자녀 게임활동 감독 방식(vs. 자녀가 생각하는 부모의 게임활동 감독 방식) · 92

표34. 부모가 생각하는 자녀의 게임비용 마련방법(vs. 자녀의 실제 게임비용 마련방법) ·····93

표35. 부모가 생각하는 자녀의 중독 가능성(vs. MGUS 기준 게임중독 진단) ··········93

표36. 부모의 게임 이용수용성에 따른 자녀의 집단분류 ·············································94

표37. 부모의 자녀 게임 이용에 대한 관심에 따른 자녀의 집단분류 ·······················94

표38. 자녀와 함께 하는 여가활동 유무에 따른 자녀의 집단분류 ·····························95

표39. 피면접자 구성 (총 28명, 남자 25명, 여자 3명) ···················································101

표40. 근거이론 분석에서 나타난 고위험군 게임사용의 변화 과정의 개념 및 범주화 ········103

표41. 학부모용 질문지 구성 ·······························································································123

표42. 교사용 질문지 구성 ···································································································125

표43. 게임 개발자용 질문지 구성 ·····················································································126

표44. 상담가용 질문지 구성 ·······························································································128

표45. PGCS 하위요인 별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ·································130

표46. NGCS 하위요인 별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ································131

표47. AGUS 하위요인 별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ································131

표48. MGUS 하위요인 별 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ································131

표49. 자녀 게임 이용서비스 이용관련 변수, 자녀 게임 이용에 대한 수용성 및 자녀

게임 이용에 대한 관심 평균(표준편차), 설명변량 및 신뢰도 ··························133

표50. 게임의 순기능적 속성에 대한 인식평균(표준편차) 및 집단 간 차이검증 결과 ··134

표51. 게임의 역기능적 속성에 대한 인식평균(표준편차) 및 집단 간 차이검증 결과 ··135

표52. 게임사용의 적응적 결과에 대한 인식평균(표준편차) 및 집단 간 차이검증 결과 ·····136

표53. 게임사용의 부적응적 결과에 대한 인식평균(표준편차) 및 집단 간 차이검증 결과 ··137

표54. 청소년 게임중독 예방/치료 노력에 대한 인식 평균 및 표준편차 ···············137

표55. 청소년 게임중독 예방/치료 노력 대한 만족도 평균 및 표준편차 ·················138

표56. 청소년 게임중독에 대한 사회적 책임 인식 평균 및 표준편차 ·······················138

표57. 청소년 게임중독의 궁극적 책임소재에 대한 인식 ·············································139

표58. 청소년 게임중독의 근본 원인에 대한 인식 ·························································139

표59. 타 여가 매체에 비한 게임의 해악성(학부모) ·······················································141

표60. 자녀 게임 이용에 대한 수용성 평균, 표준편차 및 반응 백분율(학부모) ······142

표61. 자녀 게임 이용에 대한 관심/관여도 평균, 표준편차 및 반응 백분율 (학부모) 143

표62. 게임 이용정보 서비스 활용 및 결과(학부모) ·······················································143

- viii -

표63. 게임 이용정보 서비스 활용 및 결과(학부모) ·······················································143

표64. 게임 이용정보 서비스 활용 및 결과 (학부모) ·····················································144

표65. 게임 사용연령 등급에 대한 인지 여부(학부모) ···················································146

표66. 자녀의 게임활동 감독(학부모) ·················································································146

표67. 자녀의 게임활동 감독 방식(학부모) ·······································································146

표68. 자녀의 게임활동을 감독하지 않는 이유 (학부모) ···············································146

표69. 자녀의 게임 이용 감독 어려움(학부모) ·································································147

표70. 게임관련정보 탐색 경로(학부모) ·············································································147

표71. 게임관련정보 탐색 내용(학부모) ·············································································147

표72. 자녀의 게임중독 가능성 추정(학부모) ···································································148

표73. 게임중독의 기준(학부모) ···························································································148

표74. 게임등급분류제도에 대한 인지 여부(학부모) ·······················································149

표75. 게임등급분류제도에 대한 태도(학부모) ·································································149

표76. 자녀의 게임 이용 동기에 대한 인식(학부모) ·······················································149

표77. 자녀의 적정 게임 이용시간(학부모) ·······································································149

표78. 자녀와의 여가 활동(학부모) ·····················································································150

표79. 타 여가 매체에 비한 게임의 해악성(교사) ···························································150

표80. 학생의 게임 이용에 대한 수용성 평균, 표준편차 및 반응 백분율(교사) ······151

표81. 학생들의 게임 이용에 대한 관심/관여도 평균, 표준편차 및 반응 백분율(교사) 152

표82. 게임 사용연령 등급에 대한 인지 여부(교사) ·······················································153

표83. 학생들의 게임활동 감독 여부(교사) ·······································································153

표84. 학생들의 게임활동 감독 방식(교사) ·····································································153

표85. 학생들의 게임 활동을 감독하지 않는 이유(교사) ···············································153

표86. 학생 게임 이용 감독의 어려움(교사) ·····································································154

표87. 게임관련정보 탐색 경로(교사) ·················································································154

표88. 게임관련정보 탐색 내용(교사) ·················································································154

표89. 학생의 게임중독 가능성 추정(교사) ·······································································155

표90. 게임중독의 기준(교사) ·······························································································155

표91. 게임등급 분류제도에 대한 인지 여부(교사) ·························································156

표92. 게임등급 분류제도에 대한 태도(교사) ···································································156

표93. 학생들의 게임 이용 동기에 대한 인식(교사) ·······················································156

표94. 학생들의 적정 게임 이용시간(교사) ·······································································156

표95. 자녀 게임 이용정보 서비스 활용도 추정(게임 개발자) ·································157

- ix -

표96. 자녀 게임 이용정보 서비스의 충실도(게임 개발자) ···········································157

표97. 게임관련정보 탐색 경로(게임 개발자) ···································································158

표98. 게임관련정보 탐색 내용(게임 개발자) ···································································158

표99. 중독 청소년 비율 추정(게임 개발자) ·····································································158

표100. 게임중독의 기준(게임 개발자) ···············································································159

표101. 게임등급분류제도에 대한 인지 여부(게임 개발자) ·········································159

표102. 게임등급분류제도에 대한 태도(게임 개발자) ···················································159

표103. 청소년 게임 이용 동기에 대한 인식(게임 개발자) ·········································160

표104. 적정 게임 이용시간(게임 개발자) ·········································································160

표105. 응답자가 주로 개발하는 게임의 종류(게임 개발자) ·········································161

표106. 게임 개발 시 고려사항(게임 개발자) ···································································161

표107. 게임 이용에 대한 관심/관여도 평균 및 표준편차(상담가) ····························162

표108. 게임 사용연령 등급에 대한 인지 여부(상담가) ·················································162

표109. 부모의 자녀 게임활동 감독 방식에 대한 견해(상담가) ···································163

표110. 게임관련정보 탐색 경로(상담가) ···········································································163

표111. 게임관련정보 탐색 내용(상담가) ···········································································163

표112. 게임중독 내담자 상담의 어려움(상담가) ·····························································164

표113. 게임중독으로 인한 비행 가능성 추정(상담가) ···················································164

표114. 게임중독이 아닌 내담자 추정(상담가) ·································································164

표115. 게임중독의 기준(상담가) ·························································································165

표116. 게임등급분류제도에 대한 인지 여부(상담가) ·····················································165

표117. 게임등급분류제도에 대한 태도(상담가) ·······························································166

표118. 청소년 게임 이용 동기에 대한 인식(상담가) ·····················································166

표119. 청소년의 적정 게임 이용시간(상담가) ·································································166

표120. 청소년 게임 이용과 관련하여 정부가 가장 시급히 해결해야 할 문제 ·····175

표121. 게임의 순기능을 신장시키기 위해서 정부가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·······176

표122. 게임의 순기능을 신장시키기 위해서 게임산업체가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ·· 177

표123. 게임의 순기능을 신장시키기 위해서 일선 학교가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ····178

표124. 게임의 순기능을 신장시키기 위해서 학부모가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ··· 179

표125. 게임의 순기능을 신장시키기 위해서 청소년 자신이 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ········179

표126. 게임의 역기능적 측면을 예방하기 위해서 정부가 가장 시급히 해야할 일 ·············180

표127. 게임의 역기능적 측면을 예방하기 위해서 게임산업체가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 181

표128. 게임의 역기능적 측면을 예방하기 위해서 일선학교가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 ····182

- x -

표129. 게임의 역기능적 측면을 예방하기 위해서 학부모가 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 183

표130. 게임의 역기능적 측면을 예방하기 위해서 청소년자신이 가장 시급히 해야 할 일 184

- xi -

그 림 차 례

그림1. 3차년도 연구 개요 ·····································································································47

그림2. 고위험군 게임사용의 변화 과정에 대한 패러다임 모형 ·································105

그림3. 자녀 게임 이용정보 서비스 활용의도 예언 ·······················································145

그림4. 게임사용에 대한 공중건강적 접근 ·······································································191

그림5. 시간적 변화에 따른 노출과 적응효과 곡선 ·······················································193

그림6. 4가지 예방영역의 개입 ···························································································194

그림7. 정신건강 스펙트럼의 평균 이동 ···········································································196

연구 요약

1. 제목

2. 연구 목적

3. 연구 개요

4. 연구1: 게임행동 종합진단척도에 따른 4개

집단 분류 및 분석

5. 연구2: 고위험군의 특성과 게임사용의 변화

과정 분석

6. 연구3: 학부모․교사․게임 개발자․청소년

상담사 대상 인식조사 분석

7. 결론

연구요약 15

연구 요약

1. 제목

게임 이용에 대한 인식 및 행동진단 모델 연구(3차년도)

2. 연구 목적

본 연구는 게임 인식 및 행동 진단모델 구축을 위한 다년 과제의 제 3년차 연구로

서, 1~2차년도의 연구 성과를 바탕으로 다음과 같은 목표를 달성하고자 하였다.

첫째, 청소년(초,중,고) 게임 사용자들을 대상으로 게임 인식 및 행동진단 도구, 청소

년 생활적응과 관련된 심리 및 행동 특성 등을 측정하는 조사도구를 개발하고 실시하여

게임인식 및 행동진단 도구의 진단적 유용성을 확인하는 동시에 종합실태조사를 통해

청소년 게임 이용 현황을 분석하고자 하였다.

둘째, 청소년 게임 사용자들을 대상으로 양적 분석과 질적 분석을 실시하여 게임선

용과 문제적 게임 이용의 하위 유형별 심리 및 행동특징을 유형화하여 유형별 개입프로

그램(교육, 상담, 예방 등) 구성을 위한 실증적 토대를 구축하고자 하였다.

셋째, 청소년 게임 이용과 관련된 주요 유관주체(학부모, 교사, 게임 개발자, 상담가)

를 대상으로 청소년 게임 이용 관련 종합실태조사를 실시하여 각 집단의 인식 특성과

문제점을 규명하고, 이를 토대로 유관집단별 및 유관집단 간 연계를 위한 정책 프로그

램 추진방향을 도출하고자 하였다.

넷째, 청소년 게임 이용자 및 주요 유관주체들을 대상으로 실시한 종합실태조사를

토대로 교육, 상담, 청소년 문화 등 각 정책 영역별 개선방향을 도출하고, 청소년 게임

이용과 관련된 제반 문제의 예방 및 해소전략과 건전 게임 이용문화 조성을 중심으로

게임문화정책 추진의 틀을 제시하고자 하였다.

3. 연구 개요

본 3차년도 연구는 다음과 같은 세부 연구 내용을 중심으로 진행되었다. 첫째, 전국

의 청소년들을 대상으로 게임 이용 실태조사를 실시하였다. 이 조사는 본 연구진이 1~2

차년도에 개발하여 타당화한 게임선용 진단척도(Adaptive Game Use Scale: AGUS)와

연구요약 16

문제적 게임 이용 진단척도(Maladaptive Game Use Scale: MGUS)를 활용하여 청소년

게임 이용자들을 분류하고, 각 집단의 심리 및 행동특징과 청소년 생활적응의 제 단면

및 생활환경 변수들과의 관련성을 탐색할 목적으로 실시되었다.

둘째, 게임행동 종합진단척도를 통해서 ‘고위험군’으로 분류된 청소년 게임 이용자들

을 대상으로 심층면접을 실시하였다. 이는 설문조사에만 의존하는 단일 연구방법을 넘

어서 ‘고위험군’ 청소년 게임 이용자들에 대한 심층 수준의 이해를 도모하고, 하위 유형

별 개입프로그램 개발을 위한 방향 도출을 목적으로 실시되었다.

셋째, 학부모, 교사, 게임 개발자 및 상담가들을 대상으로 청소년 게임 이용 관련 종

합실태 조사를 실시하였다. 이 조사는 청소년 게임 이용과 관련하여 각 집단의 인식 특

성 및 문제점을 확인하고, 이를 토대로 유관집단별 교육 및 계몽 프로그램 개발을 위한

제언을 도출하며, 청소년들의 건전 게임 이용 문화를 증진하는데 필요한 제반 정책개발

방향을 도출하는데 목표를 두었다.

본 3차년도 연구의 전반적 구성은 아래 그림과 같다.

연구1: 게임행동 종합진단척도에 따른 4개 집단 분류 및 분석(청소년 대상 전국 조사, N=1,365)

-목적: AGUS/MUGS 진단기준 하위 집단별 심리 및 행동특징 상세화(양적 연구)

-조사내용: 게임행동 진단척도(AGUS, MUGS), 청소년 생활적응 및 생활환경의 제 단면 등

연구2: 고위험군의 특성과 게임사용의 변화과정 분석(고위험군 청소년 대상 심층면접, N=28)

-목적: AGUS/MUGS 진단기준 고위험군의 심층수준 심리 상세화(질적 연구)

-면접내용: 문제적 게임 이용의 인과 조건, 현상, 작용/상호작용, 결과, 맥락 및 중재 조건 등

연구3: 학부모․교사․게임 개발자․청소년상담사 대상 인식조사 분석(N=913)

-목적: 청소년 게임 이용에 관한 주요 유관집단의 인식 실태 파악(양적 분석)

게임중독 예방과 해소, 건전 게임문화 조성을 위한 정책 방향 도출(양적 및 질적 분석)

-조사내용: 게임의 기능적 속성 및 게임 활동 결과에 대한 인식, 게임관련 제도 개선 방향

등에 관한 의견, 건전게임문화 조성에 관한 의견, 게임중독 예방 및 해소를 위해

필요한 조치에 관한 의견 등에 대한 양적 및 질적 분석

[그림. 3차년도 연구 개요]

연구요약 17

하위 요인 구성 요소

AGUS활력 경험, 생활경험 확장, 여가 선용, 게임몰입, 자긍심 경험, 통제력 경험, 사

회적 지지망 유지 및 확장(하위 요인 별 3문항씩 총 21문항)

MGUS내성, 금단, 과도한 시간 소비, 조절 손상, 강박적 사용, 일상생활 무시, 부작용

에도 계속 사용(하위 요인 별 3문항씩 총 21문항)

가족관계/

부모양육태도

부모와의 의사소통(2), 가족갈등(2), 부모 양육태도(8개 하위요인 2문항씩 총16

문항), 부모의 게임수용성(3)

학교생활환경민주적 학교분위기(2), 교사지지(2), 학업스트레스(2), 교우관계 스트레스(2), 또

래관계:정서적 지지(2), 생활적응:공감(2)

공존장애 및

주관안녕ADHD(6), 불안(3), 우울(3), 외로움(3), 주관안녕 인지(3), 주관안녕 정서(3)

통제력(CON)/

자결성/자존감CON(3), 자결성(3개 하위요인 3문항씩 총 9문항), 자존감(3문항)

게임관련 신념 및

행동특징

비합리적 게임수행신념(3), 금전적 이익추구(3), 가상정체성(3), 게임기대 편향

(3)

인구통계변수 및

기타

성(1), 연령(1), 거주지역(1), 부모 최종학력(2), 부모동거(1), 가족 경제수준(1),

직전 학기 성적(1), 하루 평균 공부시간(1), 신체건강(2), 비행경험(3), 여가활동

(1), 하루 평균 게임시간(최근 1년, 평일기준)(1), 한달 평균 게임비용(1), 게임

비용 마련방법(1), 부모의 게임활동 감독방법(1), 자주하는 게임 종류(1), 자주

하는 게임플렛폼(1), 게임파트너(1), 게임장소(1), 게임에 따르는 시간적 제약(1)

및 경제적 제약(1)

4. 연구1: 게임행동 종합진단척도에 따른 4개 집단 분류 및 분석

1) 방법

본 연구의 1~2차년도 연구 결과 및 청소년 적응관련 선행연구를 개관하여 핵심변수

군을 정의하고, 본 연구의 1~2차년도 조사에 포함되지 않았던 일부 변수들을 대상으로

예비조사를 실시하였다. 본조사에는 게임선용 진단척도(AGUS)와 문제적 게임 이용 진

단척도(MGUS)가 포함되었다. 또한, 청소년 생활적응에 관한 국내외 문헌 및 게임관련

실태조사 자료 등을 토대로, 가족관계 및 부모 양육태도 범주, 학교생활환경 범주, 공존

장애 및 주관안녕 범주, 통제력, 자결성 및 자존감 범주, 게임관련 신념 및 행동특징 범

주, 인구통계 변수 및 기타 범주 등이 포함되었다. 청소년 대상 본조사에 포함된 변수들

은 아래 표에 제시하였다.

[표. 청소년 대상 본조사의 구성]

(괄호 안은 문항 수)

조사 대상의 대표성을 높이기 위해서 통계청의 2005년도 인구 총조사를 기준으로 전

연구요약 18

국의 초, 중, 고등학생들의 지역별 분포를 산출하고 이에 근거하여 유층표집을 실시했

다. 질문지는 초중고생 모두 자기보고형 질문지로 실시했다. 각 지역별로 남녀 비율은

동수에 가깝게 표집 하였으며, 조사는 온라인 조사 전문 업체에 의뢰하여 2010년 2

월~3월 사이에 온라인으로 실시했다. 조사에 참여 참초, 중, 고등학생 응답자는 총

1,365명이었으며, 이 가운데참초등학생은 461명, 중학생 450명, 고등학생은 454명이었다.

세 표집 각각에서 남학생은 응답자의 52.3%, 53.3%, 52.3%였으며, 모집단의 남녀구성과

의 편차는 0~0.8% 이내로 나타나서 모집단의 성별구성과 거의 동일하게 표집되었음을

알 수 있다. 성별 구성과 지역별 구성을 함께 고려했을 때도 모집단과의 차이는

0%~3.5% 이내로 나타나서, 전반적으로 대표성이 높은 표집이 추출되었음을 알 수 있다.

조사 참가자들의 연령분포는 초등학생은 평균 10.46세(SD=1.50), 중학생은 평균 14.58세

(SD=.91), 고등학생은 평균 17.04세(SD=1.12)였다.

2) 주요 결과

(1) AGUS와 MGUS의 조합에 따른 하위집단 구분

본 연구의 1~2차년도 연구와 일관된 집단분류 기준을 적용하여 MGUS의 요인별 합

계가 6점 이상인 요인이 전체 7개 요인 중 3개 이상인 경우와 미만인 경우 그리고

AGUS의 요인별 합계가 6점 이상인 요인이 전체 7개 요인 중 3개 이상인 경우와 미만

인 경우로 응답자들을 분류하고, 그 결과에 따라서 ‘고위험군’, ‘경계군’, ‘일반사용자군’

및 ‘게임 선용군’ 등 총 4개 하위집단으로 응답자들을 분류하였다(표 참조).

[표. AGUS와 MGUS의 조합에 따른 하위집단 분류]

게임선용문제적 게임 이용

비선용群(6점이상 요인이 3개 미만)

선용群(6점이상 요인이 3개 이상)

문제群(6점이상 요인이 3개 이상)

고위험군(A) 경계군(B)

정상群(6점이상 요인이 3개 미만)

일반사용자군 (C) 게임 선용군(D)

위 표에 제시된 기준에 따라 초등학생 표집과 중고등학생 표집을 포함한 전체 표집

에서 얻어진 집단 분류 결과와 표집별 분류결과는 다음과 같다.

표에서 보듯이 약 60%에 해당하는 다수 응답자들이 문제적 게임 이용 차원에서는

정상 집단에 속하면서도 게임을 선용하는 수준에는 이르지 못한 것으로 나타났다. 또한,

응답자들 가운데 적지 않은 수(15%)가 게임선용의 특징과 문제적 게임 이용 경향성을

동시에 보이고 있음을 알 수 있다. 이에 더해서 AGUS와 MGUS 간에는 부적 상관이

연구요약 19

AGUSTotal비선용群 선용群

MGUS문제群 79(5.8%)

203(14.9%)

282(20.7%)

정상群 806(59.0%)277

(20.3%)1,083

(79.3%)

Total885

(64.8%)480

(35.2%)1,365

(100.0%)

AGUSTotal비선용群 선용群

MGUS문제群 18(3.9%)

75(16.3%)

93(20.2%)

정상群 265(57.5%)103

(22.3%)368

(79.8%)

Total 283(61.4%)

178(38.6%)

461(100.0%)

AGUSTotal비선용群 선용群

MGUS문제群 61(6.7%)

128(14.2%)

189(20.9%)

정상群 541(59.9%)174

(19.2%)715

(79.1%)

Total602

(66.6%)302

(33.4%)904

(100.0%)

구분초중고 전체 중고등생 초등학생 자기보고

성별Total

성별Total

성별Total

남자 여자 남자 여자 남자 여자

집단구분

고위험군50

(7.0%)

29

(4.5%)

79

(5.8%)

38

(8.0%)

23

(5.3%)

61

(6.7%)

12

(4.9%)

6

(2.8%)

18

(3.9%)

경계군136

(19.0%)

67

(10.3%)

203

(14.9%)

79

(16.7%)

49

(11.4%)

128

(14.2%)

57

(23.5%)

18

(8.3%)

75

(16.3%)

일반사용자군

375

(52.3%)

431

(66.5%)

806

(59.0%)

258

(54.4%)

283

(65.8%)

541

(59.9%)

117

(48.1%)

148

(67.9%)

265

(57.5%)

선용군156

(21.8%)

121

(18.7%)

277

(20.3%)

99

(20.9%)

75

(17.4%)

174

(19.2%)

57

(23.5%)

46

(21.1%)

103

(22.3%)

Total717

(100.0%)

648(100.0%)

1365(100.0%)

474(100.0%)

430(100.0%)

904(100.0%)

243(100.0%)

218(100.0%)

461(100.0%)

아닌 정적 상관이 관찰되었으며, 두 유목변수 간 상관도 중간 정도였다(phi

correlation=.39, p

연구요약 20

초중고 전체 중고등생 초등학생

성별Total

성별Total

성별Total

남자 여자 남자 여자 남자 여자

집단구분

고위험군138

(6.9%)

78

(4.3%)

216

(5.6%)

91

(7.2%)

57

(4.8%)

148

(6.0%)

47

(6.3%)

21

(3.3%)

68

(4.9%)

경계군251

(12.5%)

113

(6.2%)

364

(9.5%)

168

(13.3%)

87

(7.3%)

255

(10.4%)

83

(11.1%)

26

(4.1%)

109

(7.9%)

일반사용자군

1251

(62.1%)

1394

(76.7%)

2645

(69.1%)

777

(61.4%)

895

(75.6%)

1672

(68.2%)

474

(63.4%)

499

(78.8%)

973

(70.5%)

게임 선용군

374

(18.6%)

232

(12.8%)

606

(15.8%)

230

(18.2%)

145

(12.2%)

375

(15.3%)

144

(19.3%)

87

(13.7%)

231

(16.7%)

Total2014

(100.0%)

1817(100.0%)

3831(100.0%)

1266(100.0%)

1184(100.0%)

2450(100.0%)

748(100.0%)

633(100.0%)

1381(100.0%)

AGUSTotal

비선용群 선용群

MGUS문제群

216

(5.6%)

364

(9.5%)

580

(15.1%)

정상群2,645

(69.1%)

606

(15.8%)

3,251

(84.9%)

Total2,861

(74.7%)

970

(25.3%)

3,831

(100.0%)

AGUSTotal

비선용群 선용群

MGUS문제群

68

(4.9%)

109

(7.9%)

177

(12.8%)

정상群973

(70.5%)

231

(16.7%)

1,204

(87.2%)

Total1,041

(75.4%)

340

(24.6%)

1,381

(100.0%)

AGUSTotal

비선용群 선용群

MGUS문제群

148

(6.0%)

255

(10.4%)

403

(16.4%)

정상群1,672

(68.2%)

375

(15.3%)

2,047

(83.6%)

Total1,820

(74.3%)

630

(25.7%)

2,450

(100.0%)

아래 표에는 본 연구가 진행된 최근 3년에 걸쳐 AGUS와 MGUS의 조합에 따라 창

출된 하위집단의 분포를 통합하여 제시하였다.

[표. 최근 3년간 AGUS * MGUS 집단구분 (청소년전체 N=3,831) (phi=.36**)]

[표. 최근 3년간 AGUS * MGUS 집단구분 (초등학생 전체 N=1,381) (phi=.33**)]

(1~2차년도 자료는 학부모 관찰척도를 통해서 수집하였음)

[표. 최근 3년간 AGUS * MGUS 집단구분 (중고등학생 전체 N=2,450) (phi=.38**)]

[표. 최근 3년간 성별에 따른 하위집단 분포]

연구요약 21

구 분고위험군(A)

M(SD)

경계군(B)

M(SD)

일반

사용자군(C)

M(SD)

게임

선용군(D)

M(SD)

t검증 유의도

하루 평균

게임이용시간3.65(1.10) 3.50(1.07) 2.73(1.08) 3.06(1.04) AC**AD**BC**BD**CD**

구분

하루 평균게임 이용시간

게임하지 않음

1시간 미만1시간~2시간 미만

2시간~3시간 미만

3시간 이상 Total

집단구분

고위험군2

(2.50%)

9

(11.40%)

27

(34.20%)

18

(22.80%)

23

(29.10%)

79

(100.00%)

경계군2

(1.00%)

40

(19.70%)

61

(30.00%)

55

(27.10%)

45

(22.20%)

203

(100.00%)

일반사용자군

76

(9.40%)

316

(39.20%)

234

(29.00%)

113

(14.00%)

67

(8.30%)

806

(100.00%)

게임 선용군

9

(3.20%)

83

(30.00%)

101

(36.50%)

51

(18.40%)

33

(11.90%)

277

(100.00%)

Total89

(6.52%)

448

(32.82%)

423

(30.99%)

237

(17.36%)

168

(12.31%)

1365

(100.00%)

(2) 하위집단별 평균 게임 이용 시간

아래 표에는 네 가지 하위집단별 하루 평균 게임 이용시간(평일기준) 및 집단 간 차

이검증 결과가 제시되었다.

[표. 하위집단별 하루 평균게임 이용시간]

[표. 하위집단별 하루 평균게임 이용시간 평균(표준편차)]

※ AB=고위험군-경계군 비교; AC=고위험군-일반사용자군 비교; AD=고위험군-게임 선용군 비교;

BC=경계군-일반사용자군 비교; BD=경계군-게임 선용군 비교; CD=일반사용자군-게임 선용군 비교

(3) 하위집단 간 차이검증 결과 요약 및 시사점

게임선용 진단척도와 문제적 게임 이용 진단척도에서의 응답 결과를 바탕으로 두 척

도의 조합으로 창출되는 네 가지 하위집단에서 나타나는 심리 및 행동특징을 상세화하

였다. 분석 결과 표집에 따른 변산이 크지 않았으므로, 결과해석의 간결성을 도모하기

위해서 본 보고서에는 전체 청소년응답자들을 통합한 1,365명의 자료를 분석한 결과를

보고한다.

① 고위험군

‘고위험군’과 ‘일반사용자군’의 비교에서 유의한 차이를 보인 변수들을 보면, ‘고위험

군’은 ‘일반사용자군’에 비해서 가족관계, 학교생활환경, 공존장애 및 주관안녕, 통제력

(CON), 자결성 및 자존감, 게임관련 신념 및 행동특징 등 본 연구에서 조사한 생활적응

의 거의 모든 단면에서 상대적으로 부정적인 특성을 보임을 알 수 있다.

연구요약 22

이에 더해서, ‘고위험군’은 ‘경계군’에 비해서 학교생활환경, 일부 공존장애 및 주관

안녕, 자결성과 자존감 등에서 상대적으로 부정적인 특징을 보였다. 또한 ‘고위험군’은

‘게임 선용군’에 비해서 조사된 생활적응 영역의 거의 모든 단면에서 상대적으로 부정

적인 특징을 보였다.

‘고위험군’에서 상대적으로 우세하게 발현되는 이러한 특징들을 고려할 때, ‘고위험

군’에 해당되는 청소년들의 경우 게임관련 문제를 그들의 전반적 생활적응 문제로부터

분리시켜 배타적으로 다루는 접근법은 유효성이 크지 않으리라고 추론할 수 있다. 그보

다는 ‘고위험군’ 청소년들에 대한 개입프로그램은 가족관계와 학교생활환경을 포함하여

그들이 처한 일상적 생활환경에서의 제반 문제점을 종합적으로 고려하고, 공존장애에

대한 상담과 치료, 통제력과 자결성, 자존감 신장을 위한 개입프로그램 그리고 직접적

상호작용 당사자인 부모와 가족구성원 및 일선 학교 교사를 포함하는 총체적인 대응 네

트웍을 구축해야할 필요가 있음을 시사한다.

② 경계군

‘고위험군’에서 비교적 분명한 특징점이 발견되는 것과는 대조적으로, ‘경계군’에서

우세하게 나타나는 심리와 행동특징은 다소 불분명한 면이 있다. 이러한 불명확성은 한

편으로는, 게임선용과 문제적 게임 이용 경향성의 제 단면이 공존하는 ‘경계군’의 특성

자체에 기인한 것으로 보인다. 부모 양육태도와 자결성 및 자존감 등에서 차이의 방향

이 혼재하는 것을 제외하면, 조사된 다른 생활적응 영역 전반에 걸쳐 ‘경계군’은 ‘일반

사용자군’에 비해서 상대적으로 부정적 특징을 보였다. 뿐만 아니라, ‘경계군’은 ‘게임

선용군’에 비해서 조사된 거의 모든 영역에서 부정적 특징을 보였다. 특히, ‘게임 선용

군’과 비교해 볼 때 ‘경계군’은 ADHD, 불안, 우울 및 외로움으로 측정된 공존장애 영역

에서 모두 높은 점수를 보였고, 주관안녕 수준은 낮아서 전반적으로 공병 증상이 강하

고 전반적인 삶의 만족 수준이 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 또한 통제력(CON) 수준과 자결

성 수준도 낮았으며, 비합리적 게임수행 신념, 게임을 통한 금전적 이익 추구, 가상정체

성, 게임기대 편향 등이 상대적으로 강하게 나타났다.

‘경계군’과 ‘고위험군’의 비교를 통해서 볼 때, ‘경계군’은 공존장애 증상에서는 ‘고위

험군’과 큰 차이가 없을 정도로 문제적 경향성을 지니는 한편, 기타 생활적응 영역 및

게임관련 신념과 행동특징들에서는 ‘고위험군’보다는 상대적으로 바람직한 특징을 보임

을 알 수 있다. 그러나 ‘일반사용자군’에 비해서 생활적응의 거의 모든 단면에서 상대적

으로 부정적 특징을 보였으며, 특히 ‘게임 선용군’에 비해서 공존장애 및 통제력(CON)

수준에서 뚜렷한 차이를 보였다.

이 결과는 ‘경계군’의 경우 공존장애 증상의 개선 및 통제력 신장에 초점을 둔 상담

및 개입 전략이 우선적으로 요구됨을 시사한다. 또한 청소년 생활적응의 제 단면에 존

재하는 위험요인을 예방하거나 억제하기 위한 노력이 필요하며, 특히 학부모를 대상으

연구요약 23

로 양육태도와 의사소통 교육에 초점화된 교육 및 계몽 프로그램을 제공할 필요가 있는

것으로 보인다.

③ 일반사용자군

‘일반사용자군’은 AGUS와 MGUS의 조합에 따른 네 가지 하위집단들 가운데 특징적

인 심리나 행동 발현 정도가 가장 약한 집단이다. 이 집단은 ‘고위험군’이나 ‘경계군’에

비해서는 조사된 생활적응의 제 영역에서 상대적으로 바람직한 특징을 보인 반면, ‘게임

선용군’에서 우세하게 발현되는 적응적 심리 및 행동특징은 발견되지 않았다.

앞의 집단별 분류표에서 보았듯이, 본 연구에서 수집한 최근 3년 자료에서 ‘일반사용

자군’은 전체 응답자의 70%에 달하는 청소년들을 포함한다. 이는 한편으로 대다수의 청

소년들이 문제적 게임 이용 경향성을 발전시키지 않으면서 게임을 하고 있음을 시사한

다. 또 다른 한편으로는 대다수의 청소년들이 게임을 여가 선용의 주요 수단으로 활용

하기는 하지만, 게임 활동을 통해서 발현될 수 있는 긍정적 심리 및 행동특징을 경험하

는 수준에는 이르지 못함을 시사한다.

이처럼 다수의 청소년들이 게임을 주요 여가활동 수단으로 활용하면서도 게임선용의

단면이 잘 발현되지 않음을 감안할 때, ‘일반사용자군’의 경우에는 기능성 게임이나 다

양한 학습용 게임프로그램의 보급 및 활용을 통한 게임선용 경험의 신장을 위해서 우선

적으로 노력할 필요가 있다. 또한, 학교 현장, 가정, 지역 공동체에서 대다수 ‘일반사용

자군’을 위한 게임 리터러시 교육과 계몽 프로그램의 보급이 요망된다.

④ 게임 선용군

‘게임 선용군’은 ‘고위험군’에 비해서 조사된 생활적응 영역의 거의 모든 단면에서

상대적으로 바람직한 특징을 보였다. 흥미로운 점은 조사된 변수들 가운데 게임기대 편

향이나 비합리적 게임수행 신념, 가상정체성, 금전적 이익추구 등의 행동특징이 두 집단

간에 유의한 차이가 나타나지 않은 점이다. 앞의 하루 평균게임 이용시간 등 시간에 관

한 분석 결과에서 보듯이, ‘게임 선용군’에 속하는 청소년들은 매일 일정 정도 게임을

하기는 하지만 문제적 게임 이용 경향성의 발현 수준은 상대적으로 낮은 집단이다. 따

라서 이 집단 역시 게임과 관련하여 일정정도 편향된 신념을 보유하고 있기는 하지만

이러한 편향된 신념이 부적응적 게임 사용으로 이어지기보다는 선용의 방향으로 발현됨

을 알 수 있다. 이처럼 이 집단에서 게임선용의 제 특징이 우세하게 발현되는 것은 이

집단의 청소년들이 통제력과 자결성, 자존감을 지니고 있으면서, 주관안녕 수준이 높고,

공존장애 증상은 나타나지 않으며, 상대적으로 양호한 가족 및 학교 환경에서 생활하고

있기 때문으로 추론할 수 있다.

‘게임 선용군’의 경우 전반적으로 생활적응의 제 단면에서 긍정적 특징이 나타나는

것은 사실이지만, 게임과 관련된 비합리적 신념이나 게임을 통한 금전적 이익추구, 게임

연구요약 24

기대 편향 등에서 일부 바람직하지 않은 특징도 함께 나타났다. 따라서 이 집단 역시

잠재적 위험요인을 일정 정도 보유하고 있다고 보아야 한다. ‘게임 선용군’에서 나타나

는 이러한 잠재적 위험 요인을 억제하고 문제를 예방하기 위해서는 학부모의 지속적인

관심과 효율적인 게임활동 감독이 요망된다.

(4) 학생-학부모 Pair 자료 분석

본조사에 참여한 청소년 응답자들과 그들의 학부모 300명이 응답한 자료를 짝지어,

청소년 응답자의 게임행동특징과 학부모 인식 간의 상응성을 분석하였다. 분석을 통해

서 얻은 주요 결과는 다음과 같다.

첫째, 부모가 응답한 자녀 게임활동에 대한 감독 방식과 자녀가 응답한 부모의 게임

활동 감독 방식의 일치도가 높았다. 둘째, 부모가 응답한 자녀 게임비용 마련방식과 자

녀가 응답한 본인의 게임비용 마련방식의 일치도 역시 전반적으로 높았다. 셋째, 부모가

추정하는 자녀의 게임중독 가능성과 MUGS의 진단기준을 통해서 실제로 진단한 결과

간의 상응성은 약한 상관을 보이는데 그쳤다. 전반적으로 학부모는 자녀의 중독가능성

을 높게 추정하였으나 실제 MUGS기준 진단에서는 ‘고위험군’이 아닌 사례는 16.3%였

으며, MGUS 진단기준으로는 ‘고위험군’에 속하지만 학부모는 자녀의 중독가능성을 낮

게 추정한 경우는 11.7%였다. 다섯째, 청소년 응답자들을 AGUS와 MUGS의 진단기준에

따라 네 개의 하위집단으로 분류하고, 부모의 게임수용성, 자녀 게임 이용에 대한 관심,

게임등급물 분류제도에 대한 인지 여부, 자녀와 함께 하는 여가활동 존재 여부, 게임활

동 감독 방식 등에 따라서 네 개 집단의 분포가 달리 나타나는지 분석하였다. 분석 결

과, 통계적으로 유의한 결과는 나타나지 않았다(ps>.24). 비록 통계적으로 유의한 수준에

이르지는 못했지만, 몇 가지 주목할 만한 추세를 나열하면 다음과 같다.

먼저, ‘게임 선용군’에 포함되는 자녀의 사례는 부모의 게임수용성이 낮을 때보다 높

을 때 많은 추세가 있었다. 그리고 자녀의 게임 이용에 대한 부모의 관심이 낮을 때보

다 높을 때 ‘게임 선용군’과 ‘일반사용자군’에 포함되는 자녀의 사례가 많은 추세가 있

었다. 또한 ‘경계군’에 포함되는 사례 역시 부모의 자녀 게임 이용에 대한 관심이 높을

때 많은 추세가 있었다. 이는 ‘경계군’의 경우 게임선용과 문제적 게임 이용 경향성이

공존하기 때문에 부모가 자녀의 게임활동에 상대적으로 많은 관심을 지니고 있음을 시

사한다. 그리고 ‘경계군’에 포함되는 자녀의 사례는 부모가 자녀와 함께 하는 여가활동

이 없는 경우, 있는 경우보다 많은 추세가 있었다.

연구요약 25

5. 연구2: 고위험군의 특성과 게임사용의 변화과정 분석

연구 2에서는 AGUS와 MGUS의 조합으로 창출되는 네 가지 하위집단들 가운데 문

제의 심각성이 가장 높은 ‘고위험군’을 대상으로 심층면접을 실시하였다. 연구2는 질적

연구방법을 취함으로써 연구1이 양적 연구로서 지니는 한계를 극복하고, ‘고위험군’에서

나타나는 게임사용의 변화과정을 심층 수준에서 조명할 목적으로 수행되었다.

1) 방법

연구 2에서는 심층면접 자료를 분석하는 유용한 방법 가운데 하나인 근거이론

(Grounded Theory) 접근법을 채택했다. 근거이론의 이론적 표본추출 방법에 따라 현재

게임을 사용하고 있는 청소년들을 연구 대상으로 하였다. 심층면접에 앞서 대전 소재의

초등학교 1곳, 중학교 1곳, 서울 소재의 고등학교 1곳을 선정하여, AGUS와 MGUS를

실시하여 표 1과 같이 각 집단별로 면접 대상자를 선별하였다. 연구 참여자는 총 28명

으로 이론적 포화에 이를 때까지 심층면접을 실시하였다.

면접 진행자는 임상심리전문가 2인과 임상심리학을 전공한 대학원생 2인으로, 이론

적 민감성을 갖추기 위해 문헌고찰과 연구회의를 수차례 진행하였고, 이론적 표집이 이

루어지도록 연구회의를 통해 반구조화 면접 지침을 작성했다. 심층면접은 2010년 3월

18일부터 4월 21일까지 연구 참여자들과 일정을 맞추어 개별적으로 진행했다.

근거이론을 적용하여 자료를 분석하기 위해, 질적 연구 방법의 하나인 심층면접 내

용을 축어록으로 만들어 그 내용을 한 줄씩 분석해 나가는 줄 단위 분석법을 활용했다.

그 과정에서 개념화를 시도하며 지속적으로 개념들 간의 관계를 비교분석했다. 도출된

범주(개념)들 간의 유사점과 차이점을 밝히고, 패러다임 모형을 통해 인과적 조건, 현상,

맥락적 조건, 중재적 조건, 작용/상호작용 전략 및 결과 사이의 관계를 구성했다. 끝으

로, 선택코딩 단계에서는 핵심범주를 확인하기 위해 줄거리, 즉 해당 연구가 무엇을 말

하고 있는지, 연구 참여자에게 무엇이 일어나고 있는지를 이야기 형식으로 기술했다.

2) 주요 결과

근거이론 분석에서 나타난 고위험군 게임사용의 변화 과정의 개념 및 범주화는 아래

표와 같으며, 패러다임 모형을 통해 인과적 조건, 현상, 맥락적 조건, 중재적 조건, 작용

/상호작용 전략 및 결과 사이의 관계를 구분한 결과는 아래 그림과 같다.

연구요약 26

패러

다임개념 하위범주 범주

인과적

조건

콘텐츠가 재미있음 게임이 지니는

독특한 이유

게임을 하는

이유

생생하고 스릴 있는 전개그래픽, 음향이 호기심을 자극함레벨업(승률 높이기, 캐릭터 치장 등)으로 성취감, 자기만족

을 경험함 게임을 통해 유능감 경험

게임을 잘 하면 주변에서 부러워하고 인정함아이템을 팔 수 있음 게임을 통한 금전적 이득게임을 통해 새로운 사람들을 사귀는 재미가 있음

게임을 통해 사회관계 확장일부 게임 멤버들과는 진솔한 자기노출과 사회적 지지가

가능함오프라인 친구들과 게임을 같이 하면 더 재미있음

놀이문화의 변화게임을 안 하면 대화에서 소외됨주말에는 다른 일정이 없거나 부모님이 게임을 허용함

여가활동이나 스트레스 해소심심할 때 마땅히 할 것이 없음게임으로 스트레스를 해소함

현상

게임시간이 과도하게 많음 과도한 시간 소비부적응적/

비선용적

게임사용

(고위험)

게임으로 공부가 방해 받거나 성적이 저하됨 학업 기능 손상운동 등 다른 여가 활동이 줄어듦

다른 여가활동의 감소주말이나 연휴, 방학에 게임 사용시간이 현저하게 증가함게임에 돈을 많이 들임 금전적으로 손해스스로나 주변 사람들이 ‘게임중독’이라고 평가함 사회적 낙인

맥락적

조건

성적에 대해 압박감을 느낌 학업스트레스 및

학교적응 문제

일상생활에서

의 불만족감

(스트레스)

사교성이 부족하거나 학급 분위기에 적응하기 어려움사회적으로 위축되어 지냄부모님의 개입이나 잔소리가 지나침 따뜻하거나 안정적이지

못한 양육 분위기부모님이 비판적이거나 비민주적임가정불화가 심하거나 한부모 가정임(또는 조부모 가정)

불우한 가정환경부모님이 신체적 또는 심리적으로 질환이 있음가정 경제가 안 좋음형이나 누나가 구박하거나 귀찮게 함

동기간 갈등동생을 돌봐야하거나 동생보다 자신이 혼날 때가 더 많음부모님이 게임사용에 별다른 제재를 하지 않음 보호자의 관리,

감독이 소홀함

게임사용

통제가

어려운

환경적 요소

부모님 귀가가 늦음

일상적으로 정해진 활동(학원, 과외, 종교활동 등)이 없어

자유시간이 너무 많음(자기 통제가 안됨)

일상이 구조화되어

있지 않음학교, 학원, 과외 등으로 일정이 벅참 여가시간이나 환경이

마땅치 않음여가활동의

미비같이 놀 가족이나 집근처 친구가 마땅치 않음게임 외에는 TV를 보거나 다른 여가는 따로 없음 별다른 여가활동이 없음

중재적

조건

고학년이 됨

스스로 게임사용을 제고하게

만드는 상황적 변화

게임사용

조절이

요구되는

상황적 요소

학업 동기 변화 여부

사회적 지지나 긍정적인 경험을 제공하는 타인이나 집단

이 있음

자신감이나 자존감 등 자기신뢰 능력성격적 강점 게임사용

조절에

필요한

개인적 자원

끈기나 �