Virtual Virtue – Ethics in Second Life
DR LUCY ARMITSTEAD-PINKNEY
Abstract Many higher education institutions are starting to use virtual worlds as part of their teaching delivery due to the opportunities they provide for student engagement and discussion. One of the issues that the use of virtual worlds presents is the need for policy regarding student and staff behaviour within them. For these policies to be effective and appropriate, policymakers will need to have an understanding of the ethical issues involved in using virtual worlds so that they are able to understand the implications both of online behaviour and the impact of any policy regarding virtual worlds that is implemented by the higher education institution. As educators we have a responsibility to consider the ethical implications of asking students to engage with each other through tools such as online virtual worlds. Several incidences have already occurred where members of virtual worlds have claimed that they have been harassed, victimized or otherwise mistreated online. Educators wishing to encourage their students to use virtual worlds need to be prepared for the ethical issues involved. The virtual world opens up a fascinating area of ethics due to the fact that many ethical theories are based around the idea of an action. In a virtual world, actions are virtual and therefore individuals may have a less clear idea of what ethical behaviour is. This paper looks at why ethical issues arise in virtual worlds and how policy should be shaped to deal with the particular problems raised by virtual worlds.
Introduction
Virtual worlds are becoming increasingly important in modern education. The virtual worlds are user created and are online worlds in which the user creates an avatar and can interact with others online as well as online tools or simulations. These worlds can be used in an educational sense for demonstrations to students, online seminars for distance students, group work and many other learning activities. Whilst the educational possibilities of virtual worlds are obvious to many, the ethical issues involved are not and therefore some higher education institutions many be leaving themselves open to ethical and legal problems by not first establishing policy regarding student behaviour online or taking steps to protect students from abuse online. This paper argues that universities need to consider the ethical issues involved in virtual worlds so that they can move forward to create suitable policy that will protect students and staff from distressing experiences whilst using approved virtual worlds. The paper will look at why virtual worlds are valuable for education, why their use differs ethically from traditional teaching methods and what factors should therefore be considered by those responsible for creating policy.
Virtual worlds and education
One of the most widely used virtual worlds for education is Second Life. There are three main ways in which students can engage with virtual worlds for educational purposes. These are social tasks, learning demonstrations and learning tasks. Social tasks are those tasks where students use virtual worlds for some kind of interaction. Virtual worlds can be used for online class discussions and can offer an alternative way of fostering debate. Virtual worlds are also useful for learning demonstrations in that educators can use virtual worlds to create simulations for students (Kay & FitzGerald, 2008). This can particularly be seen in science where some educators have designed virtual cells which students can explore through their avatars. Lastly, virtual worlds can be used for learning tasks. These would be situations where educators have set students a task to complete online such as examining a virtually created crime scene or creating a virtual object. They have particular potential value for distance learning students, a growing student demographic, as it encourages socialisation, the lack of which is often cited as a significant reason in the lower retention rates of distance students (Kember, Lee &Li, 2001). Virtual worlds have enormous possibilities for education and many higher education institutions are keen to use them as shown by the numbers already active in Second Life.
“Institutions such as Harvard University, Texas State University and Stanford University have all set up virtual campuses where students can meet, attend classes and create content together. Today, there are over 200 educators from nearly as many universities and colleges using the Second Life Grid for classes, research, learning and projects with their students.”
(Linden Research Inc., 2008)
The reason that virtual worlds have so much educational potential is that they encourage interaction between students and necessitate engagement between the students and a task. As Antonacci and Moderess (2008) argue,
“You cannot be passive in a game or simulation. Students engaged in educational games and simulations are interpreting, analyzing, discovering, evaluating, acting, and problem solving.”
(Antonacci, & Modress, 2008, p116)
The kind of educational activities that virtual worlds support are typical of the constructivist learning approach meaning that they have huge potential for use in universities. With many educators placing an emphasis on the need for students to engage with and discuss ideas in order to understand them, virtual worlds are a useful tool.
Problems with using virtual worlds
Virtual worlds clearly have potential to be important in modern education, however there are ethical issues with encouraging students to engage in online worlds. Online worlds are environments in which many individuals do not behave as they might in face to face situations and there are elements of virtual worlds which some may consider unsavory (Grimston & Smith, 2007 and Stevens, 2007). The main problem that students might be exposed to when entering a virtual; world is griefing. Griefing is essentially online bullying and can occur either verbally (written or spoken) or ‘physically’ which would mean that they individual’s avatar could be impeded, damaged, tampered with or destroyed. Users of virtual worlds can get attached to their avatars, especially if the avatar is used as a representation of the individual rather than a character, and therefore some may find this distressing. Virtual worlds are also populated with some social elements that educational institutes may not wish to endorse. Of the revenue earned on Second Life, a large amount is estimated to belong to the sex industry. Whilst the higher education sector caters for adults, educators need to consider the fact that by introducing students to a virtual world such as Second Life, they may be bringing students into contact with material that may challenge the student’s beliefs or level of comfort. Although it is exciting that institutions are keen to use virtual worlds in innovative ways, there is a concern that the problems of using virtual worlds are not issues that educators are prepared for.
The main issue in terms of ethics and virtual worlds is that there are differences between virtual world situations and real world situations which mean that one cannot assume that each situation is ethically equal. The main difference between real world moral judgments and virtual world moral judgments is that it is unclear whether actions taken in virtual worlds can be harmful to others. Most ethical theories and therefore the policies that guide them are ultimately dependent on the concept of protecting others from harm. A utilitarian approach for example would consider whether an action is in the best interests of majority, thereby placing emphasis on avoiding harm to the majority of ‘others’. Mill, whose approach was libertarian but linked to utilitarianism and which our western approach to ethics owes much to, argued that,
“the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.”
(Mill, 1974, p.9)
If we assume that this premise is a reasonable starting point for considering the ethical implications of virtual worlds, it raises two main questions: who do we judge to be ‘others’ and what constitutes harm in a virtual world?
The question of what constitutes harm in a virtual world is likely to be the immediate issue that will concern policy makers. Violence to avatars, griefing and exposure to ‘adult material’ are all possible problems that students could encounter on Second Life, meaning that policymakers have to be able to establish whether they feel that these experiences can be harmful to students and whether steps should be taken to attempt to prevent this harm. In ‘real-life’ or face to face situations, the ethical issues of bullying, either verbal or physical are simpler; there is often clear harm to the victim. In virtual worlds it can be less clear as to whether harm occurs. Damage to an avatar for example is not a physical action and it could be argued that it is only a game piece and that therefore damage to it should not count as harm. The issue of harm in a virtual world is dependent on how one uses virtual worlds as some individuals will choose to interact with the virtual world as a game whereas others will see it as an extension of real life. Virtual worlds can blur the distinction between character/game-play and self-representation/life-play. What is acceptable in a game scenario may not be acceptable in life, yet some individuals interact with Second Life as if it were an extension of their life-world and some treat it as a game. It is when these two groups interact that problems are likely to occur. It is therefore ultimately the issue of online identity and of who counts as ‘others’ which can really tell us about the ethical implications of using virtual worlds.
Online identity can take several forms. Some individuals will express their genuine personality online and use an avatar to represent themselves, some may express their genuine personality but use the avatar as a more flexible tool, some may see their online personality as a part of their personality and use the online world to explore particular parts of their identity, some may appreciate the anonymity and resulting freedom of virtual worlds whilst some may use virtual worlds to play out characters who have no or little relation to their own identities. How we respond to others socially is often dependent on how we judge them. If an individual sees a virtual world as a game environment, they are less likely to see other online personalities or avatars as individuals with ethical rights so much as other game pieces. Likewise, if an individual identifies with their avatar in that they feel that their online presence is a representation of them, it is likely that they will be more sensitive to abuse online whether it is of their avatar or verbal abuse. The anonymity of virtual worlds and confusion over whether ‘others’ in virtual worlds ‘count’ ethically can cause confusion for students online. Discussion boards are known to have issues with ’flaming’ where discussion can become far more aggressive than it might in real life due to the fact that one is not face to face. In situations where students have the opportunity to be anonymous, such as virtual worlds provide, it is easy for students to feel less restricted in how they treat others online. This is especially pronounced if they expect others to behave in a similar way online. Online identity is therefore primarily responsible for determining how one behaves towards others online and how one responds to potentially problematic situations online.
Policy and virtual worlds
The ethical issues raised by virtual worlds mean that although virtual worlds provide great opportunities for students to learn, higher education providers need to be prepared to deal with issues such as students being harassed, libel and cyber-stalking. The first step in doing this is for institutions to create policy for virtual worlds which adequately reflects the nature of the tool and for staff using virtual worlds for teaching purposes to understand the problems they might encounter. Clearly there needs to be guidelines given to students that outline acceptable behaviour for the teaching environment. Although one cannot control what students do in their own time, it should be made clear to students the appropriate online identity that should be adopted when engaged in an educational task. It may be most appropriate, for example, to use designated areas for educational tasks and request that students can be identified to each other so that it is harder for students to become involving in anonymous attacks on others. One of the added issues to the ethical dilemma posed by the introduction of virtual worlds to education is that the internet is generally seen as a medium in which the individual is free to express themselves and in which there should be relatively little legislation. Universities have found that supporting more draconic forms of policy in regard to some online tools, for example Facebook, has caused a backlash from students who feel their freedom is being curtailed, which can be potentially just as damaging for universities as complains of abuse online (Bass, 2006). On the other hand, ill-behaviour from students online can also de damaging for universities, both in terms of bad publicity and in terms of student satisfaction. Higher education institutes face the challenge to needing to provide a degree of protection and support for students online whilst also allowing for the fact that they are teaching adults who are responsible for their own actions. One of the issues related to the ethical problems of virtual worlds is that many students are engaging in online activities which may come to have repercussions for them. It is claimed that many employers are now using tools such as Google and Facebook to research future employees and this raises a real question as to how responsible the higher education sector is for highlighting to students the need to consider how one represents oneself online, just as many institutions provide advice on writing job applications (CBS Broadcasting Inc., 2006).