CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Teamwork has been an essential tool to achieve goals and success. Without teamwork,

teams may fail to perform from the best of their abilities (Pitsoe, 2014). However, some students

still have struggles and perceptions in working cooperatively with their team members, which

may be one of the contributing factors to ineffective teamwork. It is important that students

should learn to function in a team environment in order to enhance their teamwork skills when

they enter the workforce (Stanford University, 2010). In line with this, many researchers had

stated that Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMOs or MMOGs) could create a problem-

based learning environment for students to learn teamwork skills (Wang & Chen, 2012).

Globally, teamwork skills have not been practiced in American classrooms (Weber,

2010).They believed that grouping students together to work on assignments will not

spontaneously result with productive teamwork (Brown, 2010). In North America, they found

teamwork as difficult because they were used of being individualist, independent, self-reliant and

made decisions alone (Mackin, 2011). Furthermore, in a Chinese classroom culture, Chinese

students attributed lack of interest and motivation in participating in a group work due to their

interpersonal communication differences in the classroom, such as classroom and group

agreement, collective interest, respect for knowledge and teachers, having efforts in high

achievement and being competition-oriented (Holmes, 2004).

Meanwhile, Tiong and Yong (2004) stated that Asian students preferred doing group

work and learn collaboratively in an informal setting rather than in a classroom group discussion

together with peers and teachers. Asian students felt silent when it comes to group discussion in

1
the classroom, and it was because of their inadequate language skills, influence of their prior

learning experiences, their weak interpersonal communication skills such as (shyness, low self-

esteem, lack of confidence), and their perceptions to group participation (Campbell, 2006).

Furthermore, research indicated many factors contributing to Asian students silence in group

participation, such as cultural influences, teacher-student relationships, the composition of the

group members, and teaching styles (Tani, 2005).

In Philippines, Kto12 program was implemented by the Department of Education to

develop students capacity for self-directed learning, teamwork skills, becoming goal-oriented,

sense of responsibility and accountability for results (DepEd Order 31, s. 2012). Meanwhile, a

research conducted by Altamira (2013) in Calauag, Quezon City reported that cooperative or

collaborative learning enhances students confidence level and their involvement in the learning

process. However, some students preferred to work alone because they believed they could

accomplish more and do it better than the group could (Altamira, 2013).

Teamwork skills have been proved to have significant benefits to students. Learning

benefits included collective problem solving, developing higher quality of ideas and solutions,

exchange of knowledge and learning from each other, collective and active commitment to

learning and spending more time on a task (Johnson, et.al., 2007; Marks & OConnor, 2013).

Furthermore, recent studies also indicated specific benefits of teamwork such as improvement on

students communication skills, group interaction skills, comprehension skills, better

performance for both high and low level of students, enhanced higher order reasoning and

critical thinking skills (White, 1998; Gabber, et.al., 1986; Wolfe, 2008).In the opinion of

students, teamwork on doing projects help them to reduce the amount of effort of each

2
member, allowing them to learn from each other as well as coming up with a greater number of

ideas (Schultz, Wilson & Hess, 2010).

In the world of gaming, teamwork aspects of game play are being emphasized, in which

two or more players need to work together in order to reach a common goal. Participation and

teamwork among team members were important because the work outcome depends on the

ability of team members to participate and interact effectively and efficiently (DeChurch &

Mesmer-Magnus, 2010). Teamwork was also all about how you get along with your teammates

in every game Dota 2 Wiki 2015). Teamwork was essential to complete a task specifically from

obtaining a weapon up to defeating a mob (Lakshmi, 2011). A team that has better organizational

and teamwork skills can easily defeat a less organized team and wins the game (Jakobsson &

Taylor, 2003).

It has been proved that playing online games such as DOTA2 can develop students

teamwork skills. DOTA 2, which is an example of Multiplayer Online Battle Arena (MOBA) is

quite different from other multiplayer games because it requires a high degree of cooperative

teamwork (Dota 2 Wiki, 2015). This game allows players to work together as a team in order to

complete certain quests or defeat the opponents ABC New, 2011). The way a player handle his

teammates is also the same to the way he respond to people in real life situations (Steam, 2016).

Dota2 cannot just help a person to interact with people in everyday life but it also helps the

introverts communicate better and come out of their so called shell( Granic, Lobel & Engels,

2014). Thus, playing DOTA2 is a problem-based learning environment where in students can

able to learn and develop their teamwork skills.

3
 Students should have the opportunity to practice their skills required as essential for

living in a rapidly changing technology-driven society (Brown, 2010). Hence, one important

matter that deserves attention is to drag the individualist character of the students towards

cooperative teamwork (Datar, Garvin, & Cullen, 2010).. Thus, this study will attempt to create

an understanding based on quantitative data about the relationship of DOTA2 in developing a

students teamwork skills.

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework

This study used the Immersion and Transfer Theory of Witmer and Singer (1998).

Witmer and Singer defined immersion as a psychological state characterized by perceiving

oneself to be enveloped by, included in, and interacting with an environment that provides a

continuous stream of stimuli and experiences. Referring specifically to a virtual environment,

Witmer and Singer noted the factors that influence immersion. These were isolation from the

physical environment, perception of self-inclusion in the virtual environment, natural modes of

interaction and control, and perception of self-movement. Higher the degree of isolation from the

physical environment, greater is the degree of immersion experienced. As the individual

perceives himself/herself to be part of the environment (as opposed to being a mere spectator),

s/he feels more immersed. Lastly, being able to perceive oneself as moving and interacting in the

environment is an important factor that influences the sense of immersion.

Mestre (2002) defined transfer of learning (or transfer) as the ability to apply concepts (or

methods) learned in one context to new contexts. Transfer can be of two types: near and far. In

case of near transfer, learning from one setting is transferred to another setting that is closely

related. In case of far transfer, learning is transferred between settings that are different from

4
each other. It also included the ability to use learning from one setting to resolve new problems

that have a common structure with the knowledge acquired initially. For transfer to occur

effectively, it was essential that the learner understood the principle behind the initial learning.

Therefore, attention to initial learning was important for transfer. Dede (2005) also noted that the

importance of situated learning lied in the fact that it supported transfer. As the setting for

learning became more and more similar to the real-life setting, it became easier to apply the

learned skills.

This section showed the relationship between the independent and dependent variables of

the research study.

Independent Variable Dependent variable

Playing DOTA 2 (Defense of the Teamwork skills

Ancient 2)

Number of hours played per

week Team communication skills
DOTA 2 gaming experience Leadership communication
Participations in clash/ganks skills
Degree of involvement in the Democratic leadership skills
DOTA 2 community Autocratic leadership skills.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework of the Study

5
 Figure 1 shows a conceptual framework of the study. The independent variable is the

playing of DOTA 2 while the dependent variable is the Teamwork skills with indicators team

communication skills, leadership communication skills, democratic leadership skills, and

autocratic leadership skills.

6
Statement of the Problem

The study aimed to determine the relationship between playing DOTA 2 and the

teamwork skills of students. Specifically, it aimed to answer the following:

1. What was the level of playing DOTA 2?

2. What was the level of the teamwork skills of students?

3. What was the significant relationship between playing DOTA 2 and the teamwork skills

of students?

Hypotheses

HO1. There was no significant relationship between playing DOTA 2 and the

development of the teamwork skills of students.

Significance of the Study

The findings of this study benefited the following:

Department of Education head personnel. DepEd might see DOTA 2 in a new light and may

consider it as a healthy exercise for students or staff to improve their team work skills.

Company owners. Company owners may consider DOTA 2 as an exercise or leisure time for

employees to improve their teamwork and communication.

Gaming Caf owners. Gaming cafes will have more customers playing DOTA 2 if the results of

this study will be positive.

7
Valve owner. Valve, the manager and owner of DOTA 2 will have an increase of players and

net income if found that DOTA 2 will have positive effects on a persons teamwork skills.

DOTA 2 community members. The DOTA 2 community will not only expand, it will also

improve as the gamers will unite and form an even teamwork friendly environment and will aim

to achieve more developments.

DOTA 2 players. DOTA 2 players may even strive to develop more of their skills through

gaming provided as they follow appropriate time regulations.

Future researchers. Future researchers may use the results of the study as a basis for future

studies about teamwork skills development and gaming.

Definition of Terms

The following terms were operationally defined for better understanding of the study:

DOTA 2- referred to the MOBA (multiplayer online battle arena) game that the researchers have

used to compare the teamwork skills of students.

Teamwork skills- referred to the ability of students to work effectively in a group.

Scopes and limitation

This study determined the relationship between playing DOTA 2 and teamwork skills of

students. It was participated by 195 male grade 12 students of Cor Jesu College who were also

DOTA 2 players. The researchers have used a Likert Scale questionnaire.

8
 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter provided related literature and studies that are relevant to the study. The first

section presented DOTA 2 and online games. The second part cited about the understanding of

teamwork and teamwork skills.

DOTA 2

Dota 2 stands for Defense of the Ancients 2, a MOBA ( multiplayer online battle arena)

game which is a stand alone remake of Defense of the Ancients mod for Warcraft III: Reign of

Chaos and its expansion pack which is the Frozen throne (Urban Dictionary, 2012). Dota 2 was

developed by Valve Corporation and remains as one of the current famous highly played games

with a peak of 923, 122 players as of June 2017 according to steamcharts.com.

In order to execute complex team-based strategies, players take on very specific roles

within a team (Eggert, et al. 2015). When a person is playing Defense of the Ancients 2( DOTA

2), he/she must communicate with other players in order to plan every attack unto the opponents.

Surprised attacks are called ganks. This kind of atack is very effective when not seen or when the

opponent does not know an attack will be happening.

The game is custom played with 10 players, a five versus five battle of radiant and dire in

defending their ancients through the use of heroes with different roles in the game such as a

carry, disabler, lane support, initiator, jungler, support, durable, nuker, pusher, and escape, and

are divided into two categories, ranged and melee (Dota 2 Wiki, 2015).

9
 Aside from skills, teamwork and communication is needed to win the game as the game

is won through destroying the opponents ancients and needs strategies and team plays to carry

out the victory. Through the use of in game chat and voice chat, players can coordinate their

movements and attacks to win a clash and then win the game according to valvesoftware.com.

The term online can be defined as any activity that takes place through the use of Internet

(Wang & Zhu, 2011). Game on the other hand is defined as an activity that one engages in just

for amusement or fun (Oxford dictionary, 2016). Thus, online game generates activity that is

played via form of connection or computer network also known as Internet.. The games are

different from regular online games as they have the technological capacity to hold hundreds and

thousands of players on the same game in one persistent world (Chan & Vorderer, 2006).

According to Castronova (2008) online game is also known as Massively-Multiplayer-Online

Games (MMOG or MMO), the most interesting innovations in the area of online computer

gaming (Hussain, 2009). Online games are fun and also entertaining and one of the most popular

games are Final Fantasy XIV online (FFXIV, 2014), Defence of the Ancient 2 (DOTA2),

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, Team Fortress 2 and Football Manager (Steam, 2014).

Online Gaming has become a very popular leisure activity among children and adolescents

in recent years. In fact, online gaming garners a larger favorite votes among young people than

physical team sports such as ice hockey and football combined (Wang & Zhu, 2011). According

to Spil Games, more than 1.2 billion people are playing games worldwide while 700 million of

those are playing online games which, is 44% of the worlds online population (Takahashi,

2013).

10
 In ASEAN context, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam have become the three most important

countries for online game revenue (Gaudiosi, 2015). According to Niko Partners forecast, over

the next five years, Indonesia will have the fastest growth in revenue while Vietnam will have

the highest growth in the number of online gamers. Further, there are 97 million computer online

gamers today in Southeast Asia and 119 million are mobile gamers (Gaudiosi, 2015). According

also to a statistical data on selected countries in Southeast Asia (SEA), as of 2016, there were

24% in Indonesia are gamers at ages between 10-20 years old, 23% in Thailand, 21% in

Malaysia, 18% in Vietnam while 12% gamers only in Singapore (The Statistics Portal, n.d.)

In Philippines, there were 20 percent of men ages 10-20 years old are gamers while 30

percent are on men ages 21-30 years old (The Statistics Portal, 2016). Furthermore, a survey

conducted in Metro Manila showed that 75%t of the 375 interviewed respondents were online

gamers and 93% of them are at age 25 years old and below while 48% belongs to the 13 to 17

years old age group (Toral, 2007).

Online gaming had caused a profound impact not only the young, but dynamically every age

group as well. The advancement of modern computing and communication technology have

allowed millions of people to dive and enter into these games and enjoy their so-called second

life inside a fantastical world. The youth of today also seem no longer spend their leisure time in

outdoor games and activities; instead, they are spending their free time in their houses and

computer shops simply to satisfy their hunger on Online Gaming (Robinson, 2016).

11
Teamwork Skills

Team clearly defined as goals and performance objectives for which members are

individually and collectively accountable on it (Katzenbach, 1993). A team is also considered as

a group of individuals, having a shared vision, common goals and objectives, which everyone are

responsible to achieve the vision (Rehman, 2008).

Meanwhile, there are various definitions of teamwork. Most studies (Cardona &

Wilkinson 2006; Grayson, 2012; Greenwood, 2012; Phalane, 2012; Medwell, 2009) defined

teamwork as the activities of a group of individuals having an effective communication and

interaction among the team members to promote knowledgeable sharing, understanding to one

another, helping others in attaining level of perfection, and building a sense of unity in the team

in order to achieve common goals. Tarricone (2002) also defined teamwork as individuals

working together in a cooperative setting to achieve common team goals through sharing

knowledge and skills. Therefore, various literatures have consistently highlighted that one of the

vital tool to achieve teamwork is its focus toward a common goal and a clear purpose (Fisher,

et.al, 1997; Johnson & Johnson, 1995, 1999; Parker, 1990; Harris & Harris, 1996).

Teamwork has been conceptualized with several models. One study that is generally

agreed upon is that teamwork consists of multiple observable and measurable behaviors

(McEwan, 2017). In general, teamwork models focus on behaviors that function to (a) regulate a

teams performance and/or (b) keep the team together. These two components coincide with the

two respective processes originally proposed all groups to be involved in: locomotion and

12
maintenance (Lewin, 1935). Annett (1997) also conceptualized a model of structured team skills

which differentiates team product and team processes. Team product is understood as the

common goal that all members join their efforts towards achieving while team processes are

mechanisms used to achieve the common goal. However, Annett, Cunningham and Mathias-

Jones (2000) stated that the attainment of team goals is hypothetically dependent on a team

processes. Team processes fall under three categories namely Behavioral, Cognitive and

Affective. The Behavioral processes include communication and coordination; Cognitive

processes refer to common understanding of the team members regarding the plan and

responsibilities; while Affective processes are referred to as team spirit or morale that is

essential to a teams effective functioning (Annett, 2000).

Teamwork skills have been proved to have significant learning effect and social benefits

to students. Learning benefits such as collective problem solving, developing higher quality of

ideas and solutions, exchange of knowledge and learning from each other, collective and active

commitment to learning and spending more time on a task (Johnson, et.al., 2007; Marks and

OConnor, 2013). The concept of teamwork also showed a positive effect to collaborative

learning on different studies (Keller, 2001; Ku, Tseng, & Akarasriworn, 2013; Neufeld, &

Haggerty, 2001). Neufeld and Haggerty (2001) showed that team skills were positively related

with team performance. Furthermore, there are also numerous social benefits of teamwork to

students, like students becoming aware of the challenges, complexities and benefits of

cooperation; being able to understand the process of cooperation with different people, and

developed communication, problem solving, trust building, and coordination skills (Chapman

and Van Auken , 2001; Rudawska, 2017). Recent studies also indicated specific benefits of

teamwork such as improvement on students communication skills, group interaction skills,

13
comprehension skills, better performance for both high and low level of students, enhanced

higher order reasoning and critical thinking skills (White, 1998; Gabber, et.al., 1986; Wolfe,

2008).

These benefits also extend to students perception of teamwork. In the opinion of

students, teamwork on doing projects help them to reduce the amount of effort of each member,

build collective safety and allow for learning from each other as well as coming up with a greater

number of ideas (Schultz, Wilson and Hess, 2010). Students also view team-based learning as

motivating, enjoyable (Haberyan, 2007) and improved student motivation and classroom

perceptions (Hernandez, 2002). Studies conducted by Marks and OConnor (2013), it was

revealed that American students generally notice the benefits of teamwork, but their perception

regarding teamwork depend on the area of study.

Teamwork has been an essential tool to achieve goals and success. Without teamwork,

teams may fail to perform to the best of their abilities (Pitsoe, 2014). According to Oster (2012),

he stated that teams are able to reach their goals when they have inspiring leaders, well-qualified

team members and well-defined goals or missions. However, research indicated that team

members should possess these following attributes: (1) a common purpose and clear goals; (2).

the necessary skills and resource; (3) a common approach to work; (4) the willingness to share

information; (5) trust and support in each other; (6) the ability to work through conflict; and (7)

the willingness to take responsibility for team actions (Phalane 2012; Greenwood 2012).

Team Leadership Skills. Team Leadership has been important to achieve team goals

and needs. The success of the team and its abilities to accomplish its goals depend strongly on

the qualities of a leader and its members (Nuangjumnong, 2016). Salas (2005) proved that team

14
leadership hugely influences the effectiveness of the team. Though the source of team leadership

varies, all sources are commonly focused on satisfying the team needs with an objective of

enhancing team effectiveness (Morgeson, et.al, 2010). Therefore, team leadership is necessarily

being oriented on how to satisfy the team needs.

Team Communication Skills. It is often indicated as one of the tool in the successful

performance of teams. The term communication is derived from Latin word means communis

which means common (Foulger, 2004). Communication also defined as an exchange of ideas

and information (Komba, 2008) and transmission of meaning (Katz & Kahn, 1978; Hassall,

2009). It can be described as a two-way process where in there is an exchange and progression of

thoughts, feelings or ideas in order to achieve a common accepted goal (Komba, 2016). Hence, a

team uses communication skills to discuss, interpret, understand and evaluate ideas and

information they have at hand in order to come up with a decision and favorable outcome

(Hassall, 2009). Thus, all team members are necessary to interact and exchange information in

order to achieve their goals.

Democratic Leadership Skills. It refers to a leader sharing his or her decision-making

skills with the group members by promoting their interests, motivation and by practicing social

equality among the group (Salin & Helge, 2010). This requires discussion, debate and sharing of

ideas and encouragement to the group members to be feel good about their involvement

(Blanken, 2013). In the Democratic Leadership, leader allows the member to share ideas and

participate in the decision-making (Isundwa, 2010). Therefore, all members can gain an overall

perspective of the tasks, as well as general procedures to achieve the goals (Nuangjumnong,

2016).

15
 Autocratic Leadership Skills. It is also known as authoritarian leadership, is a

leadership skill in which an individual has the authority to control over the decisions with a view

of ensuring that the group members are doing it (Adeyemi & Bolarinwa, 2013; Nsubuga, 2008;

and Oyetunyi, 2006). An autocratic leader, also called authoritarian, directs the group members

on what things should be done, give orders and tasks, make choices and decisions based on the

ideas, judgments and sometimes accept suggestions coming from the members (Cherry, 2017).

The power is in the hands of the leader in such that the members or staff will have no idea on

what things should be done without the leader (Isundwa, 2015). Furthermore, power and

decision-making resides in the autocratic leader and seeks only little group participation in

decision-making.

Overall, because teamwork had brought many advantages, it has been frequently used as

forms of teaching during the learning process at different grade levels (Rudawska, 2017).

Therefore, it is expected that teamwork in a classroom setting should provide students the

opportunity to learn to draw on others complementary skills; teams should help students

discover knowledge for themselves through interactions with one another and encouraging

students to work in teams (Siha & Campbell, 2015). Students should also work as a team by

doing their responsibilities and by sharing knowledge and skills in order to achieve a successful

outcome. Many researchers had stated that Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMOs or

MMOGs) could create a problem-based learning environment for students to learn teamwork

skills (Wang & Chen, 2012). The researchers aim to find the significance of DOTA 2 to students

and their teamwork skills.

16
17
 CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter discussed the research design, respondents, sampling procedure, research

instrument and data gathering procedure.

Research Design

This study employed a descriptive correlational research design which was used to

describe the characteristics of the population that will be studied. According to Rog (1998),

descriptive research is the best method for collecting information that will describe the

population being studied.

Respondents and Setting

The respondents of this study were 95 DOTA 2 male Grade 12 players of Cor Jesu

College, Digos City derived from a quota sampling procedure. The researchers decided to use

only male students since they are the most common gender in playing DOTA 2.

Sampling Procedure

This study have used quota sampling procedure for the total DOTA 2 male player

population of Grade 12 students in Cor Jesu College.

18
Measures

This study used a research instrument to gather data. The research instrument is a

standardized questionnaire by Jagad (2011). It was used to determine the significant relationship

of teamwork and online games. The research instrument is mainly divided into two parts for the

two variables of the study namely playing DOTA 2 and Teamwork skills of students. It is then

subdivided into four per variable for the indicators of each variable. The results will be gathered

and analyzed separately since the results are not of the same type.

DOTA 2

General Gaming Experience. Participants were asked if they played online games of

any

kind (question 39) and also to report on their years of gaming experience and their average time

spent on gaming in a week (questions 40 & 41).

Experience in playing DOTA 2. Participants were asked how often they played DOTA

2 as part of a team/group (question 42). Responses were measured on a 4-point scale ranging

from 1 - Never to 4 - Often, wherever applicable. They were also asked to report on their

years of experience as well as average time spent per week playing DOTA 2 (or similar games)

as part of a team/group (questions 43 & 44). In addition, they were asked to name the type of

game that they spend maximum time playing (question 45). Options included Solo Play or Party

Play.

19
Table 1. Table for interpretation for experience in playing DOTA 2.

Weight Descriptive Interval Descriptive Interpretation

Equivalent Range Rating

4 Often 3.51-4.50 High Respondents have high experience in

playing DOTA 2 as a party.

3 Sometimes 2.51-3.50 Moderate Respondents have moderate

experience in playing DOTA 2 as a

party.

2 Rarely 1.51-2.50 Low Respondents have low experience in

playing DOTA 2 as a party.

1 Never 1.0-1.50 Very Low Respondents have very low

experience in playing DOTA 2 as a

party.

Participation in Ganks/ clash. Six items were used to measure participants experience

with clash and team gank operations (questions 4651). A sample question is How often

do you participate in ganks/clash operations? Responses were measured on a 5-point scale

ranging from 1 - Never to 5 Very Often. The six items were averaged, with higher scores

indicating a higher degree of participation in raids and guilds.

20
Table 2. Table for interpretation for the participation in ganks/clash.

Weight Descriptive Interval Descriptive Interpretation

Equivalent Range Rating

5 Very Often 4.51-5.0 Very High Respondents have very high degree of

involvement to the gaming community.

4 Often 3.51-4.50 High Respondents have high degree of

involvement to the gaming community.

3 Sometimes 2.51-3.50 Moderate Respondents have moderate degree of

involvement to the gaming community.

2 Rarely 1.51-2.50 Low Respondents have low degree of

involvement to the gaming community.

1 Never 1.0-1.50 Very Low Respondents have very low degree of

involvement to the gaming community.

Degree of Involvement. Six items (questions 5257) were used to measure the participants

degree of involvement in the gaming community. A sample question is How often have you

contributed to online gaming forums and bulletin boards? Responses were measured on a 5-

point scale ranging from 1 - Never to 5 Very Often. The six items were averaged, with

higher scores indicating a higher degree of involvement in the gaming community.

21
Table 3. Table for interpretation for degree of involvement.

Weight Descriptive Interval Descriptive Interpretation

Equivalent Range Rating

5 Very Often 4.51-5.0 Very High Respondents have very high degree of

involvement to the gaming community.

4 Often 3.51-4.50 High Respondents have high degree of

involvement to the gaming community.

3 Sometimes 2.51-3.50 Moderate Respondents have moderate degree of

involvement to the gaming community.

2 Rarely 1.51-2.50 Low Respondents have low degree of

involvement to the gaming community.

1 Never 1.0-1.50 Very Low Respondents have very low degree of

involvement to the gaming community.

22
TEAMWORK SKILLS OF STUDENTS

Team communication skills. Nine items (questions 1-9) were adapted from the

Communication and Teamwork Scale (Pollard, Miers & Gilchrist, 2004). They measure the

participants perception about his/her communication skills, as required for being part of a team.

A sample statement is I am able to adapt my communication style (written & oral) to specific

audiences and situations. Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 -

Strongly Disagree to 5 - Strongly Agree. Negative items on the scale were reverse coded. The

nine items will be averaged, with higher scores indicating that the participant considers

himself/herself to have better team communication skills.

Leadership communication skills. Nine items (questions 10-18), adapted from the

Leadership Communication Skills category of Team Skills Scale (Hepburn, Tsukuda & Fraser,

2002) were used to assess the participants perception about his/her communication skills, as

required for a team leader. A sample statement is I am an active participant in team meetings.

Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 - Strongly Disagree to 5 -

Strongly Agree. The nine items will be averaged, with higher scores indicating that the

participant considers himself/herself to have better leadership communication skills.

Democratic leadership skills. Twelve items (questions 19-30), adapted from the

Democratic subscale in the Revised Leadership Skill for Sports (Zhang, Jensen & Mann, 1997)

were used to assess the participants perception about his/her leadership skills, specifically

belonging to the democratic category. A sample statement is I put suggestions made by team

members into operation. Responses were measured on a 5-point scale ranging from 5 - Always

23
to 1 - Never. The twelve items will be averaged, with higher scores indicating that the

participant considers himself/herself to have better democratic leadership skills.

Autocratic leadership skills. Eight items (questions 31-38) were adapted from the

Autocratic subscale in the Revised Leadership Skill for Sports (Zhang et al., 1997). They

measure the participants perception about his/her leadership skills, specifically belonging to the

autocratic category. A sample statement is I refuse to compromise on a point. Responses were

measured on a 5-point scale ranging from Always to Never. The eight items will be averaged,

with higher scores indicating that the participant considers himself/herself to have better

autocratic leadership skills.

24
 Table 4. Table for interpretation for teamwork skills of Students.

Weight Descriptive Interval Descriptive Interpretation

Equivalent Range Rating

5 Strongly Agree 4.51-5.0 Very High Respondents have very high

teamwork skills.

4 Agree 3.51-4.50 High Respondents have high teamwork

skills.

3 Neutral 2.51-3.50 Moderate Respondents have moderate

teamwork skills.

2 Disagree 1.51-2.50 Low Respondents have low teamwork

skills.

1 Strongly Disagree 1.0-1.50 Very Low Respondents have very low

teamwork skills.

Data Gathering Procedure

In order to start with the gathering of data, the researchers followed the following

procedures:

1. The researchers had secured formal letter to the concerned offices.

25
2. The researchers handed out survey questionnaires to the respondents during class

hours with the permission from the respondents subject teachers at those times.

3. The researchers briefed the students about the survey questionnaires and collected th

results after a given amount of time for the respondents to answer without affecting

their studies.

4. Method of Analysis SPSS 18 was used to compute all analyses.

5. Descriptive statistics of all variables was first obtained in order to view the general

data distribution as well as check for any errors.

6. Zero order correlations were calculated between the teamwork variables and the

DOTA 2 variables.

26
 CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter deals with the presentation, analysis, and interpretation of the data gathered

using the research instrument. Results and discussions are presented according to the problems

and hypothesis of the study.

DOTA 2

The level of playing DOTA 2 of the 95 Grade 12 male student players of Cor Jesu

College was determined through the analyzation of the answers of the questions in the

questionnaire under the four (4) indicators of the independent variable which is DOTA 2 namely

General Gaming Experience, Experience in DOTA2, Participation in Ganks or Clash, and

Degree of Involvement. The results of each indicator were analyzed separately since the results

are of different types.

27
General Gaming Experience

Table 5. General Gaming Experience

General Gaming Number of Descriptive Interpretation

Mean
Experience Respondents Rating

Respondents have an adequate

Years of Playing
95 3.99 intermediate amount of years in playing DOTA
DOTA 2
2.

Hours Per Week of Respondents played DOTA 2 very

95 9.44 Very often
Playing DOTA 2 frequently per week.

Table 5 shows the level of playing DOTA 2 through the general gaming experience of the

Grade 12 male student players of Cor Jesu College wherein the respondents average years of

playing DOTA 2 is 3.99. This mean then has an equivalent descriptive rating of intermediate and

is interpreted that the respondents have played DOTA 2 in an adequate amount of years, not too

low to consider as beginners and not too high to consider as old. The table also shows that the

respondents played DOTA 2 very frequently per week with an average of 9.44 hours a week.

28
Experience in DOTA 2

Table 6. Playing DOTA 2 as a Party A

Playing DOTA 2 as a Party Frequency Percent

Rarely 12 12.6

Sometimes 55 57.9

Often 27 28.4

Very often 1 1.1

Total 95 100.0

The table above shows the level of playing DOTA 2 through the percentage of the Grade

12 male student players of Cor Jesu College who preferred and played DOTA 2 as part of a

party. Out of 95 respondents, 12 said rarely consisting 12.6% of the respondents, 55 said

sometimes consisting 57.9% of the respondents, 27 said often consisting 28.4% of the

respondents, and only 1 said very often making up 1.1% of it.

29
Table 7. Playing DOTA 2 as Party B

Playing DOTA 2 as a Number of Descriptive

Mean Interpretation
Party Respondents Rating

Hours Per Week playing Respondents frequently

95 6.08 Often
DOTA2 as a Party played DOTA 2 as party.

Respondents for the past

Years of Playing DOTA 2
95 3.69 Very often years consistently played
as part of a Party
DOTA 2 as a party.

Table 7 shows the level of playing DOTA 2 through how the respondents, the Grade 12

male student players of Cor Jesu College, preferred to play DOTA 2 as part of a party. Under

hours per week of playing DOTA 2 as part of a party, the respondents have an average of 6.08

hours having a descriptive rating of Often and is interpreted as frequently playing DOTA 2 as

party. For the years of playing DOTA 2 as part of a party, respondents have an average of 3.69

years having a descriptive rating of very often. The researchers interpreted the results with the

respondents consistently played DOTA 2 as a party for the past years.

30
Table 8. Preferred Gameplay

Preferred Gameplay Frequency Percent

Solo Play 46 48.4

Party Play 49 51.6

Total 95 100.0

Table 8 shows the level of playing DOTA 2 through the preferred gameplay of the respondents

of the study. Among the 95 Grade 12 male student players of Cor Jesu College, 46 preferred solo

play or to play DOTA 2 alone consisting 48.4 percent of the respondents. On the other hand, 49

respondents which is 51.6% of the total number of respondents preferred Party Play or to play

DOTA 2 as a group.

Participation in Ganks or Clash

Table 9. Active Party Member

A Member of an Active Party Frequency Percent

Yes 50 52.6

No 45 47.4

Total 95 100.0

31
 The table above shows the level of playing DOTA 2 through the percentage of the

respondents who were members of an active party in DOTA 2. Among the 95 Grade 12 male

student players of Cor Jesu College, 50 confirmed that they were members of an active party

consisting the 52.6% of the respondents. The rest denied to be members of an active party.

Table 10. Party Leader

Became a Party Leader Frequency Percent

Yes 56 58.9

No 39 41.1

Total 95 100.0

Table 10 shows the the level of playing DOTA 2 through percentage of the respondents

who experienced to be a party leader in DOTA 2. Among the 95 Grade 12 male student players

of Cor Jesu College, 56 confirmed to be a party leader before consisting the 58.9% of the

respondents. The other 41.1% stated to never had ever became a party leader.

32
Table 11. Participation in Ganks or Clash

Participation in Team Ganks or Number of Descriptive

Mean Interpretation
Clash Respondents Rating

Respondents
Participation in clash or team gank frequently
95 3.89 Often
operations participated in clash
or team ganks.

Respondents
occasionally
Participation in challenges with participated in
95 3.33 Sometimes
strangers as teammates challenges with
strangers as
teammates.

Respondents
Assisting of players you do not frequently assisted
95 3.60 Often
know with their quests stranger players with
quests.

Respondents
occasionally
Approaching new players and
95 2.98 Sometimes approached other
inviting them to your party
stranger players to
join their party.

Table 11 shows the level of playing DOTA 2 through the participation in ganks or clash

of the respondents. Under the participation in clash or team gank operations, respondents have an

average of 3.89 entailing a descriptive rating of often meaning that the respondents frequently

participated in clash or team ganks. Under Participation in challenges with strangers as

teammates, respondents have an average of 3.33 with an equivalent descriptive rating of

sometimes and was interpreted as the respondents occasionally participated in challenges with

33
strangers as teammates. On assisting of players you do not know with their quests, respondents

have an average of 3.60 having often as a descriptive rating meaning respondents frequently

assisted stranger players with quests. Lastly, the respondents have a 2.98 average under

approaching new players and inviting them to your party thus having a descriptive equivalent of

sometimes and was interpreted as Respondents occasionally approached other stranger players to

join their party.

Degree of Involvement

Table 12. Degree of Involvement

Degree of
Number of Descriptive
Involvement in Mean Interpretation
Respondents Rating
DOTA 2

The respondents were only

Total 95 3.05 Moderate
moderately involved in DOTA 2.

The table above shows the level of playing DOTA 2 through the Degree of Involvement

of the respondents to DOTA 2. Under this indicator, the respondent have a mean score of 3.05.

The mean has a descriptive rating of moderate and is interpreted as the respondents were only

moderately involved in DOTA 2.

34
 The level of playing DOTA 2 is supported by the studys anchoring theory which is the

Immersion and Transfer Theory of Witmer and Singer (1998). According to this theory, as the

subject is more immersed in the environment, the subject will also show the skills used within

the environment to other environments. In this case in the game of DOTA 2, it is more likely that

the skills used by the students will be brought to other environments such as in the classroom

setting. The skills here included the teamwork skills developed by the students in playing the

game.

TEAMWORK SKILLS OF STUDENTS

The level of teamwork skills of students was identified through getting the average score

of the four indicators of the dependent variable which is Teamwork Skills of students namely

Team communication skills, Leadership communication skills, Democratic leadership skills, and

Autocratic leadership skills. Table __ shows the results of the level of teamwork skills of

students.

35
 Table 13. Teamwork Skills of Students

Level of Teamwork Number of Descriptive Interpretation

Skills Respondents Mean Rating

Team Communication Respondents have moderate

95 3.46 Neutral
Skills team communication skills.

Leadership Respondents have high

95 3.66 Agree
Communication Skills leadership communication skills.

Democratic Leadership Respondents have high

95 3.77 Agree
Skills leadership communication skills.

Autocratic Leadership Respondents have moderate

95 3.23 Neutral
Skills autocratic leadership skills.

Total Respondents have high

95 3.53 High
teamwork skills.

As the researchers gathered the result, it was found out that the respondents, 95 Grade 12

male student players of Cor Jesu College, have high teamwork skills with 3.53 as the average

score. It means that they have already displayed teamwork in a classroom basis and may relate to

their other activities such as playing DOTA 2. This is supported by Mestre (2002) who defined

36
transfer of learning (or transfer) as the ability to apply concepts (or methods) learned in one

context to new contexts. This mean that the development of the high teamwork skills of students

may be nurtured at a different environment such as the DOTA 2 game environment.

DOTA 2 AND TEAMWORK SKILLS OF STUDENTS

The significant relationship of DOTA 2 and the teamwork skills of students was

identified through the pearson correlation of the teamwork skills along with its indicators, and

the three indicators of playing DOTA 2 namely Experience in DOTA 2, Participation in ganks or

clash, and the Degree of Involvement. Table __ shows the significant relationship of the

independent and dependent variable of the study.

37
Table 14. Significant relationship of DOTA 2 and the teamwork skills of students

Experience in Participation in ganks Degree of

DOTA 2 or clash Involvement

Teamwork Pearson
.217* .185 .166
Skills Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed) .035 .073 .109

N 95 95 95

Results showed that among the three indicators of Playing DOTA2, only Experience in

Playing DOTA 2 showed a significant relationship with Teamwork skills as shown in the r-value

of .217. With this, the null hypothesis which stated that there was no significant relationship

between playing DOTA 2 and the development of the teamwork skills of students is rejected.

This is supported by the p-value of .035 which is lower than 0.05 level of significance. It means

that playing DOTA 2 has a significant relationship with the teamwork skills of students.

The results were supported by the the studys anchoring theory which is the Immersion

and Transfer Theory of Witmer and Singer (1998). Witmer and Singer defined immersion as a

psychological state characterized by perceiving oneself to be enveloped by, included in, and

interacting with an environment that provides a continuous stream of stimuli and experiences.

Referring specifically to a virtual environment. In this case, the DOTA 2 game is the virtual

environment. As the individual perceives himself/herself to be part of the environment (as

38
opposed to being a mere spectator), s/he feels more immersed. As the significance of DOTA 2

increases, immersion also increases.

After immersion, transfer then takes place. Mestre (2002) defined transfer of learning (or

transfer) as the ability to apply concepts (or methods) learned in one context to new contexts.

Transfer can be of two types: near and far. In case of near transfer, learning from one setting is

transferred to another setting that is closely related. In case of far transfer, learning is transferred

between settings that are different from each other. The transfer of learning and development of

teamwork skills while playing DOTA 2 is then implemented to a classroom basis by the students

thus playing DOTA 2 and teamwork skills of students is correlational.

39
 CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter contains the summary, conclusions, and recommendations of the study. The

findings and conclusions are summarized based on the results from the gathered information.

Recommendations are offered for the improvement of the study emphasizing the significant

relationship of playing DOTA 2 and the teamwork skills of students.

Summary

The objective of this study was to discover the significant relationship between playing

DOTA 2 and the teamwork skills of students specifically the Grade 12 male student players of

Cor Jesu College.

The study used a descriptive- correlational method. The independent variable of the study

was playing DOTA 2 and the dependent variable was the teamwork skills of students.

The respondents of the study were selected through quota sampling technique. There

were 95 respondents from the male Grade 12 students of Cor Jesu College who are also DOTA 2

players.

The questionnaire used to gather data was divided into two major parts for the two

variables of the study namely playing DOTA 2 and teamwork skills of students. It is then

subdivided into four per variable for the indicators of each variable namely General Gaming

40
Experience, Experience in playing Dota, Participation in Ganks/ Clash, Degree of Involvement,

Team Communication Skills, Leadershhip Communication Skills, Democratic Leadership Skills,

and Autocratic Leadership Skills. The playing DOTA 2 variable was analyzed separately

according to its indicators since it has different types, the teamwork skills of students however

had a mean score of 3.53 and was interpreted as respondents have high teamwork skills. To find

out the significant relationship of playing DOTA 2 and teamwork skills of students , Pearsons

Correlation Coefficient was utilized.

Conclusion

Based on the findings and supported related literature, the study was theoretically and

empirically founded. The following conclusions were drawn:

1. The overall level of playing DOTA 2 was divided into its indicators. The Degree of

Involvement has a mean score of 3.05 entailing the respondents were only moderately

involved in DOTA 2.

2. The overall level of teamwork skills has a mean score of 3.53 and is interpreted that the

Respondents have high teamwork skills.

3. The results revealed that there is a significant relationship between playing DOTA 2 and

the teamwork skills of students specifically the male Grade 12 DOTA 2 student players

of Cor Jesu College.

41
Recommendations

In connection with the foregoing and the conclusions of the study, the researcher recommended the

following:

1. Parents should allow their children to play DOTA 2 as it also develops their teamwork skills so long

as proper time management is observed.

2. The schools or companies should consider DOTA 2 as a team building activity or as a leisure time

for students or workers as it develops their teamwork skills such as their team communication skills,

leadership communication skills, Democratic leadership skills, and Autocratic leadership skills.

3. Future researchers should conduct similar studies about the other skills of students that can be

improved through online games such as DOTA 2 as one of the most misleading claims in this

generation is that online games can only have bad effects for you.

42
 References

Annett, J., Cunningham, D., & Mathias-Jones, P. (2000). A method for measuring team

Association 2008 Proceedings, 119-126.

Asyali, E., Saatcioglu, O. Y., & Cerit, A. G. (2006). Cooperative learning and teamwork

Blizzard Entertainment. (2008).Press releases. Retrieved on July 22, 2017 from:

Bryant, Ed. 2006. Playing Video Game: Motives, Responses, and Consequences. Routledge,

Castronova, E. (2005). Synthetic worlds: The business and culture of online games. Chicago,

Chan, E. and Vorderer, P., 2006. Massively Multiplayer Online Games. In P. Vorderer, and J.

Chapman, K.J. and Van Auken, S. (2001). Creating positive group project experiences: an

competitive, and individualistic learning ( 5th ed.). Needham Heights: Massachusetts:

Digital Game and Intelligent Toy Enhanced Learning (DIGITEL), 2012 IEEE Fourth

International Conference on (pp. 94-98). IEEE.

dissertation, Loyola University Chicago).

Effectiveness of Teamwork Training on Teamwork Behaviors and Team Performance: A

effectiveness: Impacts of education period on cadets. IAMU Journal, 4(2), 9-16.

Eggert, C., Herrlich, M., Smeddinck, J., & Malaka, R. (2015, September). Classification of

player roles in the team-based multi-player game dota 2. In International Conference on

Entertainment Computing (pp. 112-125). Springer, Cham.

Examination of the role of the instructor on students perceptions of group projects.

Journal of Marketing Education, 23(2): 117127,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0273475301232005

Fisher, S. G., Hunter, T. A., & Macrosson, W. D. K. (1997). Team or group? Managers'

43
 formation, and problematic usage. In: Schroeder R, Axelsson A, eds., Avatars at work

and play: collaboration and interaction in shared virtual environments. London: Springer-

Verlag: pp. 187207.

Fredrickson, J. E. (2011). Prosocial behavior and teamwork in online computer games (Doctoral

from: http://work.chron.com/benefits-collaboration-teamwork-3618.html

Gabber, B., Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1986). Cooperarive learning, group-to-individual

Games: A Survey. Computing Surveys (CSUR), 46(1), 9. doi:10.1145/2425296.2425300

Gaudiosi, J. (2015). In search of growth, video game companies hungrily eye Southeast Asia.

Greenberg, J. (1996). Managing behavior in organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice

Greenwood, B. (2012). Benefits of collaboration and teamwork. Retrieved on July 22, 2017

Haberyan, A. (2007). Team-Based Learning in an Industrial/Organizational Psychology Course.

Hall.

Hernandez, S. A. (2002). Team learning in a marketing principles course: Cooperative structures

Hero Roles. (n.d.). Retrieved January 6, 2017, from http://wiki.teamliquid.net/dota2/Hero_Roles

http://dx.doi.org/10.19030/ajbe.v3i7.455

http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1079&context=communication_t

heses

http://store.steampowered.com/stats/?snr=1_steam_4__110

http://www.blizzard.com/us/press/081121.html.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/game

Hussain, Z., & Griffiths, M. D. (2009). Excessive use of massively multi-player online role-

44
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning Together and Alone: Cooperative,

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. and Smith, K. (2007). The state of cooperative learning in post

Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams. Small Business Reports,

Keller, W. (2001). Team Centered Active Learning in the Dual Professional Classroom. Decision

Ku, H.-Y., Tseng, H. W.& Akarasriworn, C. (2013). Collaboration Factors, Teamwork

Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and

Marks, M.B. and OConnor, A.H. (2013). Understanding Students Attitudes About Group

McEwan, D., Ruissen, G. R., Eys, M. A., Zumbo, B. D., & Beauchamp, M. R. (2017). The

Ms, L. J. (2011). Online Gaming and Teamwork. Retrieved on July 22, 2017 from:

Ms, L. J. Online Gaming and Teamwork.

Neufeld, D. J., & Haggerty, N. (2001). Collaborative Team Learning in Information Systems: A

North American Journal of Psychology, 9(1).

of frameworks. Small group research, 37(5), 540-570.

on July 22, 2017 from: http://digitalfilipino.com/young-filipino-internet-gamer-report-

2007-and-glimpse-for-2008/

Oster, K.V. (2012). Teamwork explained. http://work.chron.com/teamwork-explained-8261.html

Oxford dictionaries (2016). Definition of game. [Online]. Retrieved on July 22, 2017 from:

P. (2014). How do School Management Teams Experience Teamwork: A Case Study in the

Parker, G. M. (1990). Team Players and Teamwork. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

45
 Pedagogy for Developing Team Skills and High Performance. The Journal of Computer

Information Systems; 42, 1, 37- 43.

perceptions of the differences. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 12(4), 232-242.

Phalane, M.M. (2012). Experiences of secondary school management teams on teamwork in

playing games: A pilot study. International Journal of Mental Health and

Addiction, 7(4), 563.

Retrieved on July 22, 2017 from: http://fortune.com/2015/02/05/southeast-asia-video-

game-market/

Retrieved on July 22, 2017 from:

http://www.westga.edu/~bquest/2015/teamwork2015.pdf

Rousseau, V., Aub, C., & Savoie, A. (2006). Teamwork behaviors: A review and an integration

Rudawska, A. (2017). Students Team Project Experiences and Their Attitudes Towards

Satisfaction, and Student Attitudes Towards Online Collaborative Learning. Computers

in Human Behavior, 29, 922-929.

Schools in the Kamwenge District, Uganda. Mediterranean Journal of Social

Sciences, 5(3), 138.ions. PloS one, 12(1), e0169604.

Schultz, J.L., Wilson, J.R. and Hess, K.C. (2010). Team-based classroom pedagogy reframed:

Sciences Institute Annual Meeting Proceedings, 522-524.

secondary and professional settings. Educational Psychology Review, 19(1): 1529,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9038-8

Siha, S., & Campbell, S. M. (2015). Teamwork: Faculty And Student Experiences. B> Quest.

skills. Ergonomics, 43(8), 1076-1094.

46
Statista, 2016. Distribution of mobile gamers in selected countries in Southeast Asia (SEA) in

Steam (2014, April 21). Steam: Game and Player Statistics. Retrieved April 22, 2014, from

Student Journal, 32, 190-196.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Intervent Pitsoe, V. J., & Isingoma,

taxonomy of team processes. Academy of management review, 26(3), 356-376.

Taylor& Francis Group.

Teamwork. Journal of Management and Business Administration, 25(1), 78-97.

that facilitate active learning and higher level thinking. Journal of Marketing Education,

thestudent perspective. American Journal of Business Education, 3(7): 1724,

Toral, J. (2007). Young Filipino Internet Gamer Report 2007 and Glimpse for 2008. Retrieved

transfer, process grain, and the acquisition of cognitive reasoning strategies. Journal of

Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, (120(3), 265-278.

Tshwane North District schools. Published MEd dissertation, University of South Africa,

South Africa.

U.S.A: University of Chicago Press.

Wang, D. Y., & Chen, Y. A. (2012, March). Training teamwork skills using MMORPGs. In

Wang, L., & Zhu, S. (2013). Online game addiction among university students.

White, L.F. 91998). Motivating students to become more responsible for learning. College

Why Players should stay together MORE and Why COMMUNICATION skills are important.

(2017, April 15). Retrieved August 17, 2017, from http://dailyesports.tv/importance-of-

communication-as-a-pro-player/

Wolfe, A. M. (2008). Student attitudes toward team projects. Marketing Management

47
 Work: What Does This Suggest for Instructor of Business? Journal of Education for

Business, 88(3):147158, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2012.664579

Yahyavi, A., & Kemme, B. (2013). Peer-to-Peer Architectures for Massively Multiplayer Online

Yee, N. (2006). The psychology of MMORPGs: emotional investment, motivations, relationship

48
 Appendices

Team Communication Skills Questionnaire

The following questions ask about your experience working as part of a team at school,

work, or any such similar environment. Please rate the following statements using a five-point

scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree).

Questions 1 2 3 4 5

1. I feel comfortable justifying recommendations/advice face-to-face with

senior team members.

2. I feel comfortable explaining an issue to team members who are

unfamiliar with the topic.

3. I have difficulty in adapting my communication style (written & oral) to

specific audiences and situations.

4. I prefer to stay quiet when other team members express opinions that I

dont agree with.

5. I feel comfortable working in a group.

6. I feel uncomfortable putting forward my personal opinions in a group.

7. I feel uncomfortable taking the lead in a new group.

8. I am able to become involved quickly with new teams and groups.

49
 9. I am comfortable expressing my view in a group, even when I am aware

that other people have different opinions.

Leadership Communication Skills Questionnaire

Please rate your ability to carry out the following tasks using a five-point scale (1 =

Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree).

Questions 1 2 3 4 5

1. I treat team members as colleagues.

2. When disagreements arise, I handle them effectively.

3. I strive to create an environment of cooperation within the

team.

4. I address issues in a succinct manner at team meetings.

5. I participate actively at team meetings.

6. I raise appropriate issues at team meetings.

7. I can recognize when the team is not functioning well.

8. When the team is not functioning well, I intervene effectively.

9. I help draw out team members who are not participating

actively in meetings.

50
 Appendices

Democratic Leadership Skills

For each of the following statements, there are five alternative answers, as follows: 5 means

'always' (100% of the time); 4 means 'often' (75% of the time); 3 means 'occasionally' (50% of

the time); 2 means 'seldom' (25% of the time); and 1 means 'never' (0% of the time).

Questions 1 2 3 4 5

19. I let team members share in decision-making and policy

formulation.

20. I put the suggestions made by team members into operation.

21. I let team members decide on methods to be used in completing

a task.

22. I give team members the freedom to determine the details of

conducting an activity.

23. I get approval from the team members on important matters

before going ahead.

24. I ask for the opinion of team members on important matters.

25. I let team members try their own way even if they make mistakes.

51
 26. I ask for the opinion of team members on specific strategies.

27. I encourage team members to make suggestions for ways to

conduct team meetings.

28. I see the merits of team members ideas when they differ from

the leaders.

29. I get input from team members at regular team meetings.

30. I let team members set their own goals.

52
 Appendices

Autocratic Leadership Skills

For each of the following statements, there are five alternative answers, as follows: 5 means

'always' (100% of the time); 4 means 'often' (75% of the time); 3 means 'occasionally' (50% of

the time); 2 means 'seldom' (25% of the time); and 1 means 'never' (0% of the time).

Questions 1 2 3 4 5

31. I present ideas forcefully.

32. I disregard fears and dissatisfactions of team members.

33. I keep aloof from the team members.

34. I dislike suggestions and opinions from the team members.

35. I prescribe methods to be followed.

36. I refuse to compromise on a point.

37. I plan for the team relatively independent of the team members.

38. I do not to explain my actions to team members.

53
 Appendices

General Gaming Experience Questionnaire

39. Do you play online games (any kind)? Yes, No

40. Approximately how long have you been playing online games (any kind)? ___ Years ___

months

41. How many hours per WEEK do you spend playing online games (any kind)? ___ Hours

per WEEK

Experience in Playing DOTA 2 Questionnaire

42. How often do you play online games (such as MMORPGs/MMOGs) as part of a

team/group? Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Often 63

43. How many hours per WEEK do you spend playing DOTA 2 as part of a team/group? ___

Hours per week ___ N/A

44. Approximately how long have you been playing DOTA 2as part of a team/group? ___

Years ___ months ___ N/A

45. Please select the type of game that you spend most time playing: ___ Solo play ___Party

54
 Appendices

Participation in Ganks or Clash Questionnaire

YES, NO

46. Are you currently a member of any party?

47. Have you ever been a party leader?

Questions 1 2 3 4 5

48. How often do you participate in clashes or gank operations

49. How often have you participated in challenges where most players, if

not all, are people you havent met before?

50. How often have you assisted other players who you do not know on

their quests and raid operations?

51. How often have you approached new players asking them to join your

guild or a raid operation?

55
 Appendices

Degree of Involvement Questionnaire

QUESTIONS 1 2 3 4 5

52. How often have you communicated with your team/guild

members outside the game environment?

53. How often have you logged in to the game environment to

spend time with your guild/team members?

54. How often have you contributed to online gaming forums

and bulletin boards?

55. How often have you attended any gaming conventions or

lanning events?

56. How often have you mentored players who are new to the

gaming environment?

57. How often have you introduced any friends or family

members or colleagues to online gaming?

56
 CURRICULUM VITAE

A. Personal Background

Name: Nor Ain W. Bacarat

Address: Bagumbayan, Zone III, Santa Cruz, Davao del Sur

Date of Birth: May 25, 2000

Place of Birth: Bagumbayan, Santa Cruz, Davao del Sur

Sex: Female

Height: 54

Weight: 43

Civil Status: Single

Religion: Islam

Nationality: Filipino

Parents: Mr. Jomar S. Bacarat & Mrs. Mona W. Bacarat

B. Schools Attended:

Elementary: Santa Cruz Central Elementary School

Junior High School: Santa Cruz National High School

College: N/A

57
 CURRICULUM VITAE

C. Personal Background

Name: Razzel C. Canogcog

Address: Azucena St., Poblacion Dos, BAnsalan, Davao del Sur

Date of Birth: September 19, 1999

Place of Birth: Digos City

Sex: Male

Height: 57

Weight: 60

Civil Status: Single

Religion: Roman Catholic

Nationality: Filipino

Parents: Mr. Ruben D. Canogcog & Mrs. Evelyn C. Canogcog

D. Schools Attended:

Elementary: St. Marys College of Bansalan, Inc. & Bansalan Central Elem. School

Junior High School: St. Marys College of Bansalan, Inc.

College: N/A

58
 CURRICULUM VITAE

A. Personal Background
Name: Ren Christian R. Landero

Address: Blk. 4, Lot 4, Emily Homes Subd., Tres de Mayo, Digos City

Date of Birth: December 22, 1999

Place of Birth: Digos City

Sex: Male

Height: 53

Weight: 52 kg

Civil Status: Single

Religion: Roman Catholic

Nationality: Filipino

Parents: Mr. Efren H. Landero & Mrs. Ana R. Landero

B. Schools Attended
Elementary: Don Mariano Marcos Elementary School

Secondary: Digos City National High School

Cor Jesu College

College:N/A

59
 CURRICULUM VITAE

A. Personal Background

Name: Eljohn S. Sampilo

Address: Purok II Nangkaan, Brgy. Kiagot Digos City, Davao del Sur

Date of Birth: April 8,1999

Place of Birth: Digos City, Davao del Sur

Sex: Male

Height: 56

Weight: 53

Civil Status: Single

Religion: Roman Catholic

Nationality: Filipino

Parents: Mr. Elpidio Sampilo & Mrs. Merlyn Sampilo

B. Schools Attended:

Elementary: Ramon Magsaysay Central Elementary School

Junior High School: Digos City National High School

College: N/A

60
 CURRICULUM VITAE

A. Personal Background
Name: Cresnella Jean P. Tino

Address: San Jose, Digos City

Date of Birth: May 10, 2000

Place of Birth: Digos City

Sex: Female

Height: 54 ft.

Weight: 58 kg.

Civil Status: Single

Religion: Roman Catholic

Nationality: Filipino

Parents: Avelino F. Tino (Father)

Rowena P. Tino (Mother)

B. Schools Attended
Elementary

Cor Jesu College

Secondary

Cor Jesu College

61
62