With the lifting of COVID-19 restrictions in China, the WHO declared the end of the global pandemic emergency in May 2023. During the period from March 2020 to 2022, traditional theater attendance was disrupted due to social distancing, mask mandates, vaccination certifications, unexpected cancellations, and the rise of "live streaming performances" as the new norm. However, before audiences fully acclimated to these changes, the world returned to a pre-COVID state, but with notable shifts in theater-going behavior, including the digitalization of live performances and virtual theater attendance.

The lockdowns in early 2020 led to widespread cancellations and postponements of theater and festivals worldwide. Traditional theater-going, as it was understood pre-COVID, became largely inaccessible to audiences. In contrast, digital engagement with performances became the new norm during the pandemic. Various formats, such as live streaming, recorded performances (e.g., London International Mime Festival and Berliner Theatertreffen), live performance streaming (e.g., ITA Live in the Netherlands and NT Live in the UK), new digital theater on Zoom, live interactive online theater, and what Liedke and Pietrzak-Franger (2021) referred to as "viral theater," were made available to audiences globally. Theater ceased to be "now" and "here" during the lockdown, instead becoming "content" through accelerated digitalization and datafication (Otto, 2023).

The digitalization of theater did not begin during the COVID-19 period. Notably, NT Live (UK) had been broadcasting high-definition recordings of British theater productions in cinemas around the world since 2009. The closure of theater venues as public spaces forced audiences to engage with live performance digitally as their sole option. Digital engagement, in this study, includes live streaming and high-definition recorded theater performances viewed by audiences in private or public spaces. The global pandemic not only introduced a wider audience to digital "live performances" without physical constraints but also accelerated technological digitalization. As of the second half of 2023, COVID-19 is no longer a barrier to theater attendance, yet "digital engagement" remains a valid alternative, both at home and in cinemas. The impact of digitalized and mediatized theater has been explored by theater study scholars (e.g., Dunne-Howrie, 2022; Reis and Ashmore, 2022; Liedke and Pietrzak-Franger, 2021; Otto, 2023). Still, the engagement of theater as digital "content" with audiences, as well as the ongoing transformation through the global pandemic on audience theater-going behavior and experiences, remains understudied.

Who constituted the theater audience during the pandemic, what were their expectations for "digital engagement," how did they participate in performances, and how did their pandemic digital engagement experiences influence post-COVID theater-going behavior? These questions are essential to understanding the interaction between the audience and digitalized theater in the post-COVID period.

Building upon existing studies on theater-going behavior and audience segmentation, along with an improved understanding of theater's digitalization, an empirical research project using triangulation methodology (Olsen, 2004) was designed to explore the interaction between audiences and theater as "data" and "content" (Otto, 2023) during the pandemic. The research collects both quantitative and qualitative data to deepen and broaden our understanding of this understudied topic. It comprises three data collection phases: a questionnaire, in-depth interviews, and a follow-up interview after one year of theaters fully reopening to the public (in progress). This paper discusses the findings from the first two phases to illustrate "digital engagement."

The first phase involved a survey questionnaire, covering online theater-going intentions, behaviors, experiences, attitudes, opinions, and participant demographics during and before COVID-19. The survey, distributed through Qualtrics questionnaire platform, was active from December 1, 2020, to January 1, 2021. The survey link was shared on social media, email, and messaging apps in multiple countries. Initially, it was distributed in China, the UK, the Netherlands, Belgium, and France, but the geographical diversity of respondents exceeded expectations due to a snowball effect. The questionnaire invited respondents interested in detailed conversations about their experiences to leave their contact email for further research, resulting in 175 respondents willing to participate in further interviews.

In total, the online survey received 538 valid responses out of 758 participants, and 175 participants were open to in-depth interviews, with 43 being interviewed in the second phase from May to June 2021. Interviews were conducted via Zoom meetings or WeChat calls, with or without video, according to participants' preferences. Interviews lasted between one and two hours, and the analysis was based on the transcripts. All interviewees agreed to participate in return interviews for the final phase.

One limitation of the research design was that the initial invitations came from a researcher who was a regular theater-goer, introducing sample bias. Beside snowball sampling technique, a few methods were used to diversify participants in order to including those who were not regular theater-goers, for instance, posting the survey link to none theatre related social media groups. The mixed audience for "digitized" theater during the global lockdown offered a fresh perspective on the evolving theater and live performance landscape.

The first two phases of data collection shed light on the theater audience during the lockdown, offering insights into theater-going and audience participation during this unique period. Most notably, the qualitative data deepened our understanding of the digital engagement experiences among audiences and their distinctions between digital and physical theater-going experiences. It is essential to recognize that, without the constraints of "here" and "now" associated with physical theater attendance, open access to digital "content" did not significantly attract new audience segments. Only 6% of survey participants had never engaged with theater in any form (live, in cinemas, or online), and 83% had attended live theater before the pandemic. The pre-COVID memory of theater-going shaped their "rituals" of digital engagement at home (Wu, 2022; Piccio et al., 2022), involving activities like dressing up, projecting the “content” to larger screens, dimming lights, and engaging in video calls with friends to "share" the moment. The interviews emphasized the value of physical interaction and shared experiences in traditional physical theater-going. However, the "datafication" of theater as "content" on various platforms, including YouTube, Tencent in China, and theater and festival institutes' digital archive platforms (e.g., the National Theatre in the UK), maintained connections with audiences during the lockdown, particularly for those who lacked the opportunity to experience live productions in person in pre-covid time. While digitalization extended international reach to some extent, it was still limited to an audience with a certain cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1984), the inequality of digital access of cultural contents still prevents the wider outreach.

The digital transformation of theater continues, even as the memory of the COVID-19 lockdown fades. Understanding audience motivations, behaviors, and experiences with digital engagement in theater as "content" is crucial. Bridging digital engagement with physical theater attendance will be essential to comprehending the future hybrid theater landscape and developing audience strategies in the post-COVID era.


Reference
Baía Reis, A., & Ashmore, M. (2022). From video streaming to virtual reality worlds: an academic, reflective, and creative study on live theatre and performance in the metaverse. International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media, 18(1), 7–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794713.2021.2024398
Bourdieu, P., 1984. Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard university press.
Dunne-Howrie, J. (2022). Internet theatre and the historical consciousness of the Covid-19 era. International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media, 18(1), 176–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794713.2021.2005331
Liedke, H., & Pietrzak-Franger, M. (2021). Viral theatre: Preliminary thoughts on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on online theatre. Journal of Contemporary Drama in English, 9(1), 128–144. https://doi.org/10.1515/jcde-2021-0009
Olsen, W. (2004). Triangulation in social research: qualitative and quantitative methods can really be mixed. Developments in sociology, 20, 103-118.
Otto, U. L. F. (2023). Post-performance: Pandemic Breach Experiments, Big Theatre Data, and the Ends of Theory. Theatre Research International, 48(1), 24–37. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0307883322000384
Piccio, B., Helgason, I., Elsden, C., & Terras, M. (2022). A hefty dose of lemons: the importance of rituals for audiences and performers at the online Edinburgh Festival Fringe 2020. International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media, 18(1), 154–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794713.2022.2036489
Wu, F. (2022). CHANGING “THEATRE-GOING” BEHAVIOURS DURING COVID-19. Transforming Leisure in the Pandemic: Re-imagining Interaction and Activity during Crisis.

INTRODUCTION

Releasing creative products at their initial stages, a process known as “early release,” has become pivotal in shaping the evolution of conceptual products in industries ranging from technology (e.g., Tesla’s Autopilot feature) to media (e.g., pilot episodes of “Game of Throne”). This approach characterizes a staged engagement with users while ensuring the creator’s vision is preserved while accommodating user expectations, contrasting with fast release (Paternoster et al., 2014) and lean startup (Bortolini et al., 2021), which emphasize rapid iteration or open innovation (Chesbrough et al., 2006) and user innovation (Von Hippel, 2005) where decision-making is predominantly crowd-sourced.

Despite the growing industry interest and assumed benefits of early releases, the question remains on how creators balance ambitious vision selling and user feedback assimilation during early release. Extant research mainly focused on how creators use early-stage prototypes to access funding and resources, grounded chiefly on rational theoretical underpinnings relating to institutional voids and legitimacy (Hedberg & Lounsbury, 2021; Soublière & Gehman, 2020; Taeuscher et al., 2021), venture quality and signaling (Mollick & Robb, 2016), and information sharing and learning (Faraj et al., 2011). Less is known about the non-cognitive factors driving user engagement, loyalty, and advocacy in the context of unfinished products, such as emotional and symbolic cues that signal creativity or “uncreativity” in the eyes of audiences (Elsbach & Kramer, 2003).

While some recent pitch studies explored the role of emotional cues in fundraising, they regard pitches as a singular entity without dissecting the diverse emotional valences embedded in different pitch sections (e.g., Clark, 2008; Clarke et al., 2019; Jiang et al., 2019). Also, the examined outcomes are predominantly investor-focused (i.e., Chen et al., 2009; Murnieks et al., 2016). Those creators with a pronounced creative identity (Karwowski & Kaufman, 2017) or special attachment towards their early-phase ideas (Lazar et al., 2022) might pitch with various goals in mind, such as obtaining feedback or validating their concepts, rather than simply aiming to secure financial backing (Warnick et al., 2018). While investors may prioritize profitability, scalability, or market size, potential users might look for creators’ presentation of early-release products concerning their novelty, usability, and potential for enhancement. The lens through which a venture capitalist views emotional displays in a venture pitch might not equally apply to a user’s interpretation and decision-making in early-release pitches.

This study seeks to bridge this research gap by examining the influence of creators’ emotional displays on audience engagement and creativity recognition during various sections of early release pitches. Utilizing data from the Steam platform’s Early Access pitches (N = 1928), the study delves into how game developers’ emotional cues impact audience engagement and perceptions of creativity. This investigation offers insights into the dynamic interplay between creators’ emotional signals, audience responses, and the outcomes arising from meeting or deviating from set expectations.

HYPOTHESES

Early release pitches demonstrate the current product state (“What is?”) while inspiring its potential (“What could be?”). Sternberg’s (1985) implicit theory of creativity postulates that an enthusiastic and positive portrayal can hint at a significant creative effort embedded in the idea or product. Painted with positivity, such pitches can implicitly signal novelty, capturing audience curiosity and prompting deeper engagement vital for refining the idea (Harrison & Dossinger, 2017; Zhou, 2008). When creators infuse pitches with positive emotions to solicit feedback, they invite the audience to be co-creators. This approach, imbued with joy and interest, denotes that feedback is not just appreciated but imperative for the product’s evolution (Bayus, 2013; Belleflamme et al., 2014; Howe, 2008; Kleemann et al., 2008).

Positive emotional displays in pitches, if authentic, can elicit genuine feedback. When creators exude genuine enthusiasm, it fosters trust, ensuring the audience provides candid, invaluable feedback (Rousseau, 1989). Creativity recognition, deeply subjective, hinges on user relevance (Amabile, 1983; Godart et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2017). Early releases serve as trial runs, facilitating real-world feedback on the product’s applicability.

Hypothesis 1. There would be a positive linear correlation between creators’ positive emotional display in feedback solicitation during early release pitches and audience attention (H1a) and creativity recognition (H1b) for the early released products. Pitch outcomes would increase as creators display increasing positive emotion in feedback solicitation during pitches.

However, vision selling in pitches is a more intricate affair. Overly positive displays can seem naive, making audiences skeptical of the creator’s overconfidence (Koellinger et al., 2007). Yet, moderate positivity can depict an authentic, grounded pitch. Users form expectations based on creators’ emotional displays in pitches (Oliver, 1980). Overly positive pitches might set unattainable expectations, while negative ones might undervalue the product. Thus, pitches should aim to evoke a balanced, moderate emotional response.

Hypothesis 2. There would be an inverted U-shaped curvilinear correlation between creators’ positive emotional display in visions selling during early release pitches and audience attention (H1a) and creativity recognition (H1b) for the early released products. Compared to those pitched with very positive or very negative emotions in vision selling, those pitched with moderate positive emotions get more beneficial pitch outcomes.

Please find Figure 1 for the hypothetical model.

METHODOLOGY

Context. The video game sector, epitomized by platforms like Steam, is at the intersection of technology and narrative, making it an ideal domain to explore how creator emotions impact audience interactions and creativity recognition (Tschang, 2007; Zhao et al., 2018). The game development journey, rife with challenges and breakthroughs, offers a broad spectrum of emotional displays by creators and thus enables the examination of the effects of these emotional displays on audience attention and creativity recognition. The Early Access pitches on the Steam platform showcase the whole narrative of their creative production evolution.

Sampling. To investigate the effect of emotional displays on pitch outcomes, a dataset of 1,928 Early Access games on Steam released in 2022 was compiled. Developers’ responses to structured Early Access pitch questions were analyzed. Metrics for audience engagement and game creativity recognition were used as outcome variables, while developers’ emotional displays served as the predictor.

Measurements. Early release pitch outcomes are measured by 1) the number of followers, estimated number of owners, and peak number of concurrent players (for Audience Attention); and 2) average playtime, number of recommendations, and ratio of positive reviews (for Creativity Recognition). Developers’ emotional displays in Early Access pitches were measured by the VADER (Valence Aware Dictionary and sEntiment Reasoner, Hutto & Gilbert, 2014) sentiment score in Feedback Solicitation and Visions Selling. Control variables include Early Access released time (Mean = 15.13, SD = 3.49), developer-planned Early Access duration (Mean = 8.97, SD = 7.16), the current price (Mean = 8.96, SD = 9.48), and planned price increase (Mean = 2.61, SD = 1.54).

FINDINGS

Table 1 displays descriptive statistics and pairwise correlations.

As shown in Table 2, emotional display in feedback solicitation was positively correlated with the number of followers (b = .076, SE = .019, p-value = .000, Model 1), the peak number of concurrent players (b = .052, SE = .014, p-value = .000, Model 3), the average playtime (b = .037, SE = .015, p-value = .013, Model 4), and the ratio of positive reviews (b = .046, SE = .021, p-value = .031, Model 6), supporting my hypotheses 1a and 1b.

Meanwhile, the emotional display in vision selling showed an inverted U-shape relationship on average playtime (b1 = .075, SE = .025, p-value = .002; b2 = -.066, SE = .031, p-value = .035; Model 4) and the number of recommendations (b1 = .109, SE = .032, p-value = .001; b2 = -.091, SE = .035, p-value = .009; Model 5), which support my Hypothesis 2b.

DISCUSSION

Conclusion. This study delves into the role of creators’ positive emotional displays for various purposes (i.e., feedback soliciting versus vision selling) within early release pitches and their consequent effects on audience attention and creativity recognition in the video game industry. While high levels of positive emotion in soliciting feedback can enhance audience engagement and help improve the ideas to better meet audience expectations, a moderate positive emotional display in vision selling can strike a balance between optimism and pragmatism.

Theoretical implications. This study contributes to the understanding of context in emotion perception (Barrett et al., 2011). The findings also highlight the intricate interplay between creativity evaluation and feedback interaction in the early-stage entrepreneurial process. Beyond mere funding as pitch outcomes (i.e., Murnieks et al., 2016; Clarke et al., 2019; Jiang et al., 2019), my findings underscore the importance of effectively leveraging emotions to foster a robust fan base, facilitate user insights, and establish a strong market presence in early release pitches. Positive emotions, while influential in shaping audience perceptions (Baron, 2008; Cardon et al., 2009; Chen et al., 2009), need to be strategically used based on pitch content and purpose.

Practical implications. Creators aiming for successful early releases should master the art of intertwining vision and viability with the right emotional tone to foster user engagement and creativity recognition. By calibrating their emotional displays to align with promises and potential, they can build trust and enthusiasm among their target audience, paving the way for creative success.