Study Suggests Restorative Justice Over Punitive Bans for Toxic Gamers
The study argues that the gaming industry's reliance on punitive bans is insufficient and suggests that restorative justice could address root causes of toxic behavior, potentially changing how platforms moderate player conflict.
Reporting from 1 source: Automaton.
A study led by Jiska Jonas-van Dijk of the University of Twente, published in Games and Culture on July 2, argues that current punitive bans for toxic online gamers fail to address root causes or victim needs. The systematic review of 16 studies from 2010 to 2025 explores restorative justice approaches that emphasize dialogue, accountability, and repair. The research identifies four themes including the need for neutral moderators and challenges with bot-mediated resolution.
The study, published in the peer-reviewed journal Games and Culture on July 2, is one of the first systematic reviews to examine restorative justice in online gaming. The research team, led by Jiska Jonas-van Dijk of the University of Twente, analyzed 16 studies from 2010 to 2025, including research on social media and online education. They argue that current punitive bans do not address root causes or victim needs. The team's analysis identified four themes: the importance of restorative justice in digital environments, victim preferences for dialogue and apology, the role of conflict resolution skills in gaming, and implementation challenges such as the need for neutral moderators and user trust in bots.
Synthesized by Yomimono from the 1 cited source below, including Japanese-language reporting where cited, then editorially reviewed before publishing.