Traditionally, playing videogames has been considered a hobby “created by men for men” (Paaßen et al., 2016), with female characters often hypersexualized or in subordinate roles (Davies et al., 2020; Gestos et al., 2018) and a stereotype of the common gamer as male (Williams et al., 2008, p. 995). However, recent data (n = 73,000) suggests that women now represent almost half of the gamer base (45%) when including mobile gaming (Ngoc, 2024). Despite this, women are less likely to identify as “gamers” and are rarely visible in skillful and competitive gaming spheres (Kuss et al., 2022; Ngoc, 2024). When they are, they can be subject to disbelief, scrutiny or backlash from parts of the gaming community (Choi et al., 2019; Schelfhout et al., 2021). A large part of scientific writings on female gamers have been qualitative or case studies that have shed light on their experiences of online sexism and harassment and the associated negative impacts on their gaming experience, involvement, motivation, and performance (Colder Carras et al., 2017; Cote, 2015; Kaye and Pennington, 2016; Kuss et al., 2022; Ruvalcaba et al., 2018; Schelfhout et al., 2021; Shen et al., 2016; Vella et al., 2020; Witkowski, 2018). As mentioned by Robinson (2023), this negative impact on women’s full involvement in gaming is susceptible to create a vicious cycle where they are not perceived to be the norm and thus continue to be marginalized (p. 862). In addition to these qualitative data, a few experimental studies have begun to examine the complex impact of social norms and stereotypes on gaming performance with mixed results (Holl et al., 2024; Kaye and Pennington, 2016; Nolla et al., 2023; Pennington et al., 2018). A variety of factors have been suggested to play a role in limiting women’s participation in gaming, especially in competitive spheres. These include, for example, fewer opportunities to begin their involvement in gaming, less support for this activity from the people in their lives, lower levels of belongingness and self-efficacy related to gaming, and social gender-based education (Darvin et al., 2021; Nolla et al., 2023).

On the other hand, little is known about the women who go on to develop their gaming abilities at high levels of expertise despite these challenges (Choi et al., 2019; Schelfhout et al., 2021). Capitalizing on their strengths, it is likely that in the future, more representation of women in competitive gaming would contribute to minimizing challenges and facilitate their greater involvement in this increasingly popular, lucrative and recognized area of expertise (Morgenroth et al., 2020; Pedraza-Ramirez et al., 2020).

Research with female-only gamer samples have shown that women play a variety of games, both online and offline, and across a variety of platforms (Labrador et al., 2022; Lopez-Fernandez et al., 2019b). Compared to men, women report playing “flash” games more frequently (De Pasquale et al., 2020) and having a stronger preference for “platformer” “brain and skill,” or “casual” games (Laconi et al., 2017; Lange et al., 2021; Rehbein et al., 2016). However, some results suggest that women are as interested in and as likely to play Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing (MMORPG) games such as World of Warcraft, and that they enjoy Multiplayer Online Battle Arena (MOBA) and First-Person Shooter (FPS) games as much as men (De Pasquale et al., 2020; Laconi et al., 2017). Overall, this data offers limited evidence to back up the stereotype that women prefer more simple, casual games (Paaßen et al., 2016). Interestingly, the study by Lange et al. (2021) found evidence of a moderate overestimation of gender differences in game genre preferences among their participants.

Regarding gaming involvement and motives, recent studies suggest that women spend less time gaming than men (e.g., Cudo et al., 2022; Laconi et al., 2017; Rehbein et al., 2016). Women have been reported to play mainly for the purpose of “having fun,” passing time and immersing themselves in a virtual world (Labrador et al., 2022; Lopez-Fernandez et al., 2019b). Compared to men, women report a higher desire to build relationships through gaming (Laconi et al., 2017; Yee, 2006). Some evidence of gender-specific relations between motives to play and disordered gaming have also been found, suggesting a unique role of achievement, competition and skill development motives (Laconi et al., 2017; Lopez-Fernandez et al., 2019b).

Research has suggested that gaming can be a life-enhancing activity but also an attempt to avoid life’s difficulties and/or psychological symptoms (Banyai et al., 2019; Griffiths, 2019). For a minority of players, this can turn into a full-blown addiction (Stevens et al., 2020). Multiple studies which compared GD in male and female gamers have found lower GD scores in women (Laconi et al., 2017; Li et al., 2023), a lower proportion of women among GD players (Bonnaire and Baptista, 2019) or a link between male gender and GD (Holm et al., 2021). However, one study found no gender difference after controlling for game genre (Elliot et al., 2012), one found higher scores in female gamers (Kahraman and Kaya Yertutanol, 2021). Two recent meta-analyses found evidence of a lower risk of GD (Stevens et al., 2020; Su et al., 2020) with a rate of 2.54% in women compared to 6.31% in men (Stevens et al., 2020). However, these data do not allow to understand the interplay between female gaming, competition, and positive and negative outcomes more broadly.

The little gender-specific data available about risk factors for GD suggest that women with gaming problems tend to be older, more often in a romantic relationship, more often unemployed and more likely to have less than a high school education compared to men with GD (Bonnaire and Baptista, 2019). Distraction from problems has also been shown to predict GD in a women-only sample (Labrador et al., 2022). Other risk factors include game genre (i.e., FPS, MMORPG, or MOBA), psychological symptoms, lower self-esteem, lower prosocial behavior, peer problems, body shape concerns, avatar identification and immersion in gaming experiences (Labrador et al., 2022; Lopez-Fernandez et al., 2019b; Thakur et al., 2023).

In general, female players tend to report higher levels of psychological distress and lower self-esteem compared to male players (Finserås et al., 2022; Laconi et al., 2017), both of which are risk factors for GD (e.g., Bonnaire and Baptista, 2019).

Players’ engagement in skillful and competitive gaming is a recent area of scientific research. Of this limited literature, most has investigated eSport and professional gaming, where women are scarce (Faust et al., 2020; Reitman et al., 2020). In fact, most studies on competitive eSports and professional gaming participation and associated consequences report proportions of women between 0 and 10% (Banyai et al., 2019; Jansz and Tanis, 2007; Lee et al., 2020; Maldonado-Murciano et al., 2022). On the other hand, in one study by Tang et al. (2021), women represented 36.9% of eSports consumers when both eSports engagement and viewing were considered simultaneously. Overall, the low representation of women in eSports and competitive gaming bears the question if the very few women who do compete have specific characteristics.

From this data, factors related to competitive gaming include time spent online and being motivated to compete, perfect one’s skills, and socialize (Banyai et al., 2019; Jansz and Tanis, 2007; Martoncik, 2015). Competitive players could have an increased risk of experiencing negative consequences such as depressive symptoms, worse sleep quality and GD (Banyai et al., 2019; Lee et al., 2020; Maldonado-Murciano et al., 2022). On the other hand, very little data is available regarding motives, play styles and consequences experienced by female competitive gamers. The few available studies suggest that these women spend less time playing and viewing eSports than men but share the same genre preferences (with the exception of FPS, preferred by men; Tang et al., 2021) and report a higher motivation for achievement (Kordyaka et al., 2023) than competitive male gamers. Additionally, compared to non-competitive female gamers, competitive women were less likely to underestimate their own skill when playing against a “male” artificial intelligence in an experimental study (Vermeulen et al., 2014). Relatedly, some research has begun to examine the impact of “stereotype threat” on the gaming performance and self-perceptions of female players (Holl et al., 2024; Kaye and Pennington, 2016; Pennington et al., 2018). This concept refers to the possibility for cues associated with common social stereotypes (e.g., a reminder of the idea that women are less competent in gaming than men) to negatively impact members of the stereotyped group (Kaye and Pennington, 2016). Although this impact seems unclear in the context of casual forms of gaming, Pennington et al. (2018, p. 12) have suggested that it could impact women during more competitive play, for example due to the higher level of performance pressure, the presence of harassment, and/or the lower representation of women. On the other hand, self-identifying as a gamer could play a favorable role on performance (Holl et al., 2024), and perhaps this could help counterbalance some of the impact of stereotype threat.

However, to our knowledge, no quantitative study to date has been conducted to draw a portrait of competitive female gamers and psychological aspects such as their motives to play, mental health and gaming habits. Obtaining more insight into the specific realities of highly skilled female gamers may offer avenues to promote more inclusiveness of competitive and expert play, in addition to highlighting possible specificities essential to the promotion of their mental wellbeing and the prevention of gaming-related harm.

Thus, the current study aimed to provide initial data about self-identified female expert videogame players, including their sociodemographic and gaming characteristics, motives to play, and mental health. To highlight the characteristics that set them apart as experts while also taking into account the specific reality of female gaming as a reference point, they will be compared to a group of female non-expert, or casual, gamers. A second objective was to identify the factors that predict being a female expert gamer.

Our sample was recruited via Facebook, Reddit, and Snapchat publicities and Discord postings from June to October 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was hosted on Qualtrics, preceded by an informed consent form. Apart from the selection criteria (18+, play for 1+ hour per week) and the main game played, no other question was mandatory. After completing the survey, participants were able to enter their email address for a chance to win a US$20 or a US$50 Amazon.com gift card, and/or to be contacted for future studies. From the total sample (n = 1,591), only the women who participated (n = 128) were examined in the current paper. This study was approved by the institutional ethics review board, Comité d’éthique de la recherche pour les projets étudiants impliquant des êtres humains of the Faculty of Humanities of the Université du Québec à Montréal (CERPE-FSH #4102, 22-06-2020).

To provide an overall portrait of expert female gamers, and to contrast them with casuals, a series of independent-samples t-test analyses were conducted on continuous gameplay-related and psychological variables. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen’s d statistic. Chi-square analyses were conducted for categorical sociodemographic and gameplay-related variables. Effect size was calculated using the Phi-index for two-level variables and Cramer’s V for variables with more than two levels. Finally, a backward logistic regression using the likelihood ratio method allowed to identify the best predictors of being an expert gamer among the significant variables of the chi-square and t-test analyses. All analyses were conducted using SPSS Statistics version 29.

From the total number of women (n = 128), 43 were classified as “Expert” and 85 as “Casual” players. Sociodemographic characteristics and group comparisons are shown in Table 1. The average age was 26.50 (SD = 8.30). Expert gamers were older than casuals, t(126) = 2.161, p = 0.03. About three out of four women (74.2%) were in a relationship or married and most (79.7%) were working and/or studying at the time of the study. A total of 38 countries were represented, the most frequent being the United States of America (n = 29) and Canada (n = 28). Experts were especially likely to live in North America, χ²(1) = 4.647, p = 0.03. Most participants (83.6%) did not have children at charge.

Motives to play and group comparisons are shown in Table 2. Experts were found to have a higher social motive for gaming than casuals, t(126) = 2.746, p = 0.007. Experts also had higher competition motive, t(126) = 2.746, p = 0.004, and a higher skill development motive, t(126) = 2.591, p = 0.01. Lastly, expert players reported higher recreation motive, t(115.709) = 3.436, p < 0.001.

Psychological characteristics and group comparisons are shown in Table 2. Expert gamers exhibited higher levels of self-esteem compared to casuals, t(126) = 2.772, p = 0.006. Experts also reported higher levels of wellbeing, t(126) = 2.809, p = 0.003.

Gaming experience characteristics and group comparisons are shown in Table 3. The weekly time dedicated to the primary game was higher among expert gamers compared to casuals, t(126) = 3.209, p = 0.002. Additionally, years of experience were higher for experts, t(126) = 3.489, p < 0.001. The mean GD score was 2.48, with 17.2% of potential GD and no significant difference between groups.

Type of main game and comparisons are shown in Table 3. A significant difference was highlighted, χ²(3) = 11.694, p = 0.009, with a small to moderate effect size (Cramer’s V = 0.30). Specifically, experts demonstrated more engagement in MMORPG games. Conversely, casuals were more inclined towards MOBA games.

Results of the logistic regression predicting group (expert versus casual) membership are shown in Table 4. Out of the 128 women, 5 had missing data. Thus, the final sample of the regression included 42 experts and 81 casuals. The final model was estimated to explain 40.6% of the variance in group membership (Nagelkerke R square). The Hosmer and Lemeshow test was nonsignificant (χ²(8) = 12.938, p = 0.114), suggesting that the model fit the data well. The final model was better at predicting casual (88.9%) than expert (47.6%) group membership (overall accuracy = 74.8%). The probability of being an expert gamer increased for each hour and year spent on the main game and each point on the competition motive subscale. Additionally, self-esteem had the largest positive relation with being an expert, while playing a MOBA as the main game decreased the odds of being an expert by 77%.