The realm of esports is experiencing rapid expansion, as projected figures for 2025 anticipate a significant upswing in both regular subscribers (318 million) and casual viewers (322.7 million). This reflects a notable 19.12% increase from the preceding year (Global eSports market size 2023 and Gough, 2024). Concurrently, research in this domain has witnessed consistent growth over the past decade (Reitman et al., 2020), with scholarly investigations spanning diverse areas such as economics (e.g., Cranmer et al., 2021) and sports science (e.g., Sharpe et al., 2022, 2024a,b). This burgeoning body of research has engendered discussions regarding the multifaceted fields of expertise implicated in esports, marking the initial strides toward formalizing its ontology within the realm of scientific inquiry (Brock, 2023).

In the domain of psychology, particularly within the field of sports psychology, esports and its psychological components have garnered significant attention within the scientific community. Numerous investigations have delved into various facets, encompassing the identification of noteworthy stressors (Smith et al., 2019; Leis and Lautenbach, 2020; Poulus et al., 2022a) and their correlation with mental toughness (Poulus et al., 2020). Additionally, research has explored coping strategies (Leis et al., 2022; Poulus et al., 2022b), sleep quality and habits (Klier et al., 2022), the repercussions of winning or losing streaks in competitive scenarios (Machado et al., 2022), as well as their impact on psychophysiological responses (Mendoza et al., 2021) and self-regulation (Trotter et al., 2023). Furthermore, investigations have delved into the psychological factors underpinning sporting performance (Parshakov and Zavertiaeva, 2018; Nagorsky and Wiemeyer, 2020; Sharpe et al., 2022). This includes examining the influence of emotions (Behnke et al., 2022), the requisite psychological skills (Trotter et al., 2021; Bonilla et al., 2022), positive mental health (Griffith and Sharpe, 2024), the role of personality traits (Birch et al., 2023), the impact of high-pressure situations (Sharpe et al., 2024a), and the effects of streaming while gaming on players’ efficiency and in-game behavior over time (Matsui et al., 2020).

The themes currently under investigation in esports exhibit a parallel with subjects extensively studied in sports psychology. Noteworthy examples include the correlation between mental health and performance (Gorczynski et al., 2021), the perspectives of health (Monteiro Pereira et al., 2023), the delineation of crucial psychological skills and their training (Stamatis et al., 2020), skill transfer between esports and traditional sports (Murphy et al., 2020), the use of heart rate variability to index self-regulation (Welsh et al., 2023), and the examination of factors like fundamental needs, attentional control, group cohesion, and decision-making within conventional sporting contexts (Coimbra et al., 2022). However, as the exploration of esports deepens, there is potential for a burgeoning interest in psychological dimensions that either remain understudied or are exclusive to the realm of esports. One such concept, particularly prominent at the professional level, is the phenomenon known as “tilt.” This term is familiar to gamers and esports professionals alike, encapsulating moments of anger and frustration experienced during gameplay and competition. This unique psychological aspect adds a distinctive layer to the understanding of performance dynamics in esports.

The concept of tilt is not entirely novel, with its origins tracing back to the era of pinball machines, which featured tilting mechanisms designed to detect player movements or attempts to manipulate the game. When such actions were detected, the system would either block the movement of the flippers or penalize the player by reducing scores and bonuses. Additionally, a sign with the word “tilt” is illuminated, signaling to the player to cease such behavior to avoid further consequences (Castle, 2020). While tilt found its initial roots in pinball, it gained widespread usage in poker, particularly with the rise of online poker and its expanding player base and audience. Browne (1989) characterized tilt as a mental state marked by a loss of control, directly influencing a player’s gameplay style, including strategic decisions, gambling, risk-taking, and endurance through prolonged losing streaks. This “tilted” state was associated with significant monetary losses and correlated with various psychological disorders such as depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbances (Palomäki et al., 2013), even potentially exacerbating gambling disorders (Moreau et al., 2020). Moreover, the duration of this mental state could range from minutes to days and, in exceptional cases, persist for months (Browne, 1989). Tilt in poker often elicits negative emotions such as anger or frustration, which are typically inadequately managed, underscoring the pivotal role of emotional regulation in mitigating tilt (Palomäki et al., 2012). This behavior is often associated with other factors such as substance abuse (e.g., alcohol), extended gambling sessions in attempts to recoup losses, or experiencing prolonged losing streaks (Browne, 1989; Palomäki et al., 2013). Certain individual characteristics, such as high emotional sensitivity or diminished perception of defeat, may exacerbate or reduce the intensity of tilt (Palomäki et al., 2013). To further understand and assess the extent of tilt experienced by poker players, Moreau et al. (2017) devised a questionnaire with 21 items, designed to measure the degree of tilt experienced during poker gameplay, dividing the experience of tilt in two main factors: (a) emotional and behavioral tilt, focusing on irritability, anger and sadness and (b) cognitive tilt, focusing on self-control and bet risk-taking.

Despite the notable impact of “tilt” on the performance and psychological well-being of esports players, its exploration from a psychological perspective has been relatively limited. Emerging evidence suggests that esports athletes perceive the avoidance of negative emotions as crucial to their successful performance, a sentiment that aligns with the characteristics of the tilt phenomenon (Poulus et al., 2022b). In a systematic review centered on emotions and emotional regulation within esports, Beres et al. (2023) underscore the significance of acquiring skills to regulate frustration, anger, and tilt. Similarly, Bonilla et al. (2022) emphasize the imperative nature of learning to manage tilt by cultivating emotional control, given its substantial impact on both performance and psychological well-being. The primary triggers for tilt in esports appear to revolve around consecutive losses or errors made by teammates, inducing emotional states characterized by anger, anxiety, and stress. These emotional responses may escalate to a point where players contemplate abandoning the game (Wu et al., 2021; Sharma et al., 2022) or engage in toxic behaviors such as trash-talking, intentional abandonment, or cheating (Türkay et al., 2020). As we have seen, tilt is a construct that generates a great impact on the performance and well-being of players, its central axis being emotions related to anger and frustration. In any case, the behaviors are not clear, giving rise to other behaviors such as toxicity, decision making or stress, as possible related behaviors.

The results of the exploratory thematic analysis, summarizing the concepts and themes associated with tilt, are presented in Table 2. Two primary dimensions emerged: the causes that trigger tilt and the subsequent consequences experienced once in a tilted state. Participants highlighted that these dimensions fed into each other during the different level states of tilt.

Based on these themes and their components, a definition was formulated and approved by the expert judges. This definition offers a conceptualization of tilt as follows: “Behavior that increases gradually with repeated errors, by oneself or others in a context where performance is required, which generates frustration. This causes anger, emotional lability, decreased performance, attention, and recurrent negative thoughts about the error or defeat. Tilt is closely related to stressful situations, varying from seconds to hours, with an average duration of 30 min.”

An item analysis was conducted before carrying out the exploratory factor analysis of the tilt scale. All items followed a normal distribution, with no outlier responses and no floor or ceiling effects detected. Consequently, all 53 items were retained for further analysis. A comparison of item scores between the upper and lower 25% of the sample revealed significant differences for all items, indicating that the items effectively discriminated between individuals with varying levels of tilt. Before conducting the exploratory factor analysis, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) index was calculated, yielding a value exceeding 0.9 according to Hutcheson and Sofroniou (1999), this value can be classified as superb. Additionally, Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (X² = 3706.65; df = 118; p < 0.001), confirming the suitability of the data and items for factor analysis.

An Oblimin rotation was employed for the exploratory factor analysis, anticipating relationships between the potential factors. The scree plot suggested the presence of three factors (see Figure 3).

Upon observing that 10 items had factor loadings below 0.4, they were excluded from the analysis. When evaluating the nine items grouped in the third factor, it was noted that they represented an amalgamation of poorly related concepts and were eliminated. Following these modifications, 34 items were retained for a two-factor solution (eigenvalue >1). However, this solution revealed that 2 items loaded inversely, 8 items loaded on both factors and 6 items loaded below 0.4, resulting in their elimination. Consequently, 18 items remained, with 7 items in the causes factor and 11 in the consequences factor, explaining 51.2% of the variance.

Once the factor structure was determined, reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s Alpha (α) and McDonald’s Omega (ω) coefficients. For the total tilt scale, McDonald’s Omega was calculated as ω = 0.922 (0.912–0.932), while Cronbach’s Alpha was α = 0.921 (0.910–0.931). Similarly, for the subscale measuring causes, McDonald’s Omega was ω = 0.855 (0.836–0.875), and Cronbach’s Alpha was α = 0.854 (0.834–0.873). For the subscale measuring consequences, McDonald’s Omega was ω = 0.891 (0.877–0.906), and Cronbach’s Alpha was α = 0.890 (0.875–0.904). Based on these results, we can conclude that the total scale and its subscales show adequate reliability indices with scores above 0.70 and less than 0.95, with both subscales scoring less than 0.90 showing not redundancy with a good consistence (Tavakol and Dennick, 2011; Viladrich et al., 2017). The correlation matrix between the total scale and its subscales (see Table 3) shows a high positive correlation.

To assess construct validity, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using both factors (see Table 1) covariance between factor was 0.81, showing the existence of a general factor called tilt. The model demonstrated acceptable fit indices (X² = 484.794; p < 0.001), as shown in Table 4, and all factor loadings exceed 0.55 which can be considered good or above (Comrey and Lee, 1992). Given that Byrne (2010) states that the use of both fit indices and factor loadings should be used when assessing factorial validity our results suggest that the proposed model adequately explains the underlying structure of the tilt construct.

To evaluate convergent validity (see Table 5), it can be observed that the correlations between the tilt scale and its subscales are considerably higher than those observed with other constructs. This indicates that the tilt scale effectively discriminates from related constructs, particularly Internet Gaming Disorder, which could be a regarded as a similar construct since it addresses negative states and consequences related to video gaming. Second, all correlations are statistically significant. Specifically, there is a positive correlation between tilt and IGD and a negative correlation between tilt and life satisfaction. These findings are consistent with theoretical predictions, indicating that the tilt construct behaves as expected in relation to previously established constructs.

Finally, we tested the hypothesized structural equation model for the relationships between tilt, Internet Gaming Disorder, and life satisfaction (see Figure 1). The results indicate an acceptable fit for the model (X² = 39.456; p < 0.001), providing further evidence of external validity. The model reveals a positive relationship between tilt and IGD, as well as a negative relationship between life satisfaction and IGD. Additionally, a negative covariance between tilt and life satisfaction is evident. The model explains 21% of the variance in IGD (see Figure 4).

The primary aim of this study was to elucidate the concept of tilt, introduce a measurement instrument for the construct, and investigate its association with Internet Gaming Disorder and Life Satisfaction. The initial findings of this research pertain to the proposed definition and components of tilt, as detailed in Table 2. These results suggest that tilt is not an impulsive behavior with an undetermined origin; rather, it exhibits identifiable causes intricately connected to the act of playing video games or participating in esports, particularly within performance-driven scenarios that necessitate the execution of skills to surmount challenges presented by the game. The study revealed that individuals, when faced with the inability to achieve performance goals, undergo a growing sense of frustration that intensifies with prolonged play and repeated attempts to meet their objectives, ultimately triggering the onset of tilt. It is crucial to recognize that the phenomenon of tilt unfolds gradually, “snowballing” over time, often culminating in either explosive manifestations, such as outbursts of anger, or passive expressions, such as a loss of energy and motivation. Adding to the intricacy of tilt is the inclination for individuals experiencing it to persist in gameplay, driven by the hope that achieving victory may alleviate their tilt. Conversely, there is a proclivity for tilted individuals to resort to toxic behaviors, such as quitting the game or engaging in verbal abuse, thereby posing risks to both themselves and others. This complexity in the progression of tilt aligns with prior research in domains like poker (Browne, 1989; Moreau et al., 2017), which shares certain similarities with tilt observed in video games and esports due to the shared underlying logic of gameplay. The study’s findings also resonate with existing research in esports; for instance, Sharma et al. (2022) and Wu et al. (2021) have previously reported tilt-related consequences similar to those identified in the present study, including the inclination to quit games prompted by anger and frustration. Moreover, the research by Türkay et al. (2020) implies that individuals experiencing tilt-like situations are more predisposed to engaging in toxic behaviors or repeated mistakes in performance situations.

Regarding the second aim, the results generated a final 18-item questionnaire, divided into two scales, 7 items for causes and 11 items for consequences (see Table 1 and Suppplementary file).

The questionnaire demonstrates adequate reliability, strong factorial validity with acceptable fit indices, and an explained variance of 51.7%. Additionally, when evaluating external validity, the construct satisfactorily discriminates from other constructs and shows expected relationships IGD and life satisfaction. Consequently, this questionnaire serves as an initially reliable and valid measure for assessing tilt among video game and esports players.

Finally, three hypotheses were formulated to evaluate whether the observed relationships aligned with our expectations, that is, with IGD and life satisfaction to clarify whether tilt and satisfaction are potential predictors of IGD. As depicted in Figure 4, these hypotheses were confirmed, yielding a model that explains 21.7% of the variance. Upon closer examination, it is evident that IGD shows a negative association with life satisfaction, in line with previous research (e.g., Bargeron and Hormes, 2017), and a positive correlation with tilt. Thus, based on the preliminary results, those players prone to high levels of tilt could present a greater risk of developing problematic relationships with video games, which could lead to IGD. Additionally, tilt is found to co-vary with life satisfaction, indicating that esports players experiencing tilt tend to report lower levels of life satisfaction and vice versa. These findings open a new path to understanding the precursor variables involved in Internet gaming disorder, not just the contextual ones or the direct effects on self-esteem, impulsivity or self-esteem (Bargeron and Hormes, 2017), bringing us closer to unraveling the different behaviors that gamers follow to develop a bad relationship with video games or even psychopathology.

These findings pave the way for a new field of study in esports research and opens future lines of research. First, our measurement instrument offers the opportunity to explore the concept of tilt and analyze its relationship with other psychological variables in the context of esports, such as emotional regulation, particularly given that tilt and emotional lability are closely related (Poulus et al., 2022b; Beres et al., 2023), also it allows us to explore its relationship with other cognitive variables like attention or memory (Pedraza-Ramirez et al., 2020). Second, it would be interesting to investigate the relationship between tilt and potentially related variables such as toxicity (Türkay et al., 2020) or the structural characteristics of video games (Wood et al., 2004; Feliu et al., 2023), so we can go further in the understanding of internet gaming disorder specific behaviors. Moreover, it would be useful to develop psychological techniques to mitigate tilt. Such interventions are particularly important to practitioners if we consider the substantial impact of tilt on players and the esports ecosystem; therefore, implementing strategies to reduce individual discomfort, enhance performance, and diminish toxicity could prove highly beneficial to support the overall sustainability of video gaming and esports.

The present study has several limitations that warrant consideration. First, the study sample is limited to a Spanish-speaking culture, which restricts the generalizability of the findings to other cultural contexts. Second, while the tilt instrument effectively measures individual player dimensions, it does not fully capture how teammate behaviors may contribute to tilt. Future versions of the TILTQ could address this limitation by incorporating items specifically designed to assess teammate-induced tilt, thus creating separate versions for individual and team games/esports.

The present study aimed to bridge the existing gap in research by providing a comprehensive definition and conceptual framework for TILT. In doing so, the study developed and validated a questionnaire designed to effectively measure the construct specifically in esports players. The obtained findings facilitated the conceptualization and quantification of the tilt phenomenon, laying the foundation for exploring its intricate relationships with other variables of interest. With the established validity and internal consistency of the Tilt Scale, this study introduces a valuable tool that holds promise for future research endeavors on the psychological experiences of esports players, transcending diverse cultural contexts. Furthermore, the study paves the way for a novel avenue of research, contributing to an enhanced understanding of this specific behavior within the realms of video gaming and esports.

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

The studies involving humans were approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Autonomous University of Barcelona with code CEEAH 5525. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

IB: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Project administration, Software, Supervision, Validation. AC: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. PB: Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. BS: Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. AM-C: Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DM: Funding acquisition, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. CV: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.