Space, Time and Metaverse: Analysis of Technological Mediation in Decentraland
Table of Contents
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Framework and Literature Review
3. Methodology
4. Analysis
4.1 User Interface Arrangement
4.2 Functions and Features
4.3 Textual Content and Tone
4.4 Symbolic Representation
5. Conclusion
6. Bibliography
Abstract
The research aims to analyze how space and time experience in the metaverse is constituted from a postphenomenological perspective. Accordingly, technological mediation that mutually constitutes subject and object reveals how the establishment of space and time experience shaped by the intrinsic design choices of the metaverse. Considering the recent gradual transition to Web 3.0 which is often labeled as “open and decentralized”, the metaverse has become prominent in terms of the increased market share of monetary exchanges. Therefore, it is crucial to comprehend how the interaction with virtual worlds coshapes subjectivity and objectivity. Decentraland is used as a case study to operationalize this empirical analysis. For this purpose, the technical walkthrough methodology that utilizes the notion of mediator characteristics will be applied in the analysis of user interface. As a result, the research aims to reflect how the affordances of the user interface technologically mediates the space and time experience in the platform. By bridging the conceptual tools of affordance theory and postphenomenology, the thesis aims to inquire about the multistable nature of the metaverse that affects how the space and time experience is constituted by the mutual interaction between user and technology in metaverse.
Keywords:
Space and Time, Metaverse, Postphenomenology, Virtual Worlds, Affordances.
1. Introduction
Historically, the advancement in computing power accelerated since the first personal computers were introduced to the public (Routley 2017). The computational power has been supercharged with the internet technologies that enabled a new understanding of globalization in terms of “transplanetary relations [which] refers to social links between people located at points anywhere on earth” (Scholte 2008, 1479). As the demand increased, personal computers have become more accessible thanks to decreased prices (Statista 2017). The web as we know it today constantly evolves and transforms our perception of the world, and this gradual change has been the focus of the scholarly work (e.g. Ankerson 2015) that reflects how the “[digital platforms of the web] conceived not merely as tools for computing, composing, or communication, but rather envisioned and used as spaces in which composing, self-representation, and participation takes place […]” (Vasudevan 2010, 45). So-called the transition from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0, the underlying logic of the internet progressively allowed participation and contribution that was fueled by the new internet aesthetics and vision of the foundational structures (e.g. Ankerson 2010). Regarding this transitional development of the Web, Allen highlights that “[Web] versions create order, control and mastery over a process that might otherwise become impossibly flawed in the absence of a consensus about the history of the application or product” (2013, 270). The developmental echoes of Web 2.0 are later reflected in the “platformization” (Helmond 2015) of the social web. In this context, the web has increasingly become under the influence of prominent technology companies which centralized the flow of user-generated data to facilitate internet platforms such as Google. While internet use has become ubiquitous over the last decade, consequently the Web 2.0 internet technologies have generated various concerns such as fragmentation (Kull et al. 2003), polarization (Stroud 2008), filter bubbles (Pariser 2012), power consolidation (van Dijck and Poell 2015) and dissemination of misinformation (Shao et al. 2018).
Gavin Wood refers to Web 3.0 as the “post-Snowden” era that is defined as the new iteration of the internet. The post-Snowden era refers to the information trust concerns that led to what many journalists called the “chilling effect” as the extent of mass surveillance revealed by the documents Edward Snowden leaked (e.g. Lashmar 2017; Bradshaw 2017). While the negative connotations of Web 2.0 grow, the new idea of Web 3.0 aims to transform current Web protocols and technologies. The term Web 3.0, coined by Gavin Wood, envisions the new iteration of the internet in four main categories: decentralized encrypted information publication system (e.g. Ali et al. 2019), identity-based pseudonymous low-level messaging system (e.g. Athanere and Thakur 2022), a consensus engine (e.g. Fowler et al. 2022), and diffusion of ‘browser’ and user interface (e.g. Rees 2002) (2014). These four categories inform how the increased amount of data is being used, secured, and interpreted in the modern iteration of web applications. Against this background, Web 3.0 can be understood as a decentralized ecosystem that functions through blockchain technology, and it enables a democratic way of data transfer which refers to the early ideas of the internet with a nod to network neutrality. The new open and decentralized version of the internet can be regarded as the critical building block for shared virtual spaces, namely, the “metaverse.” While it is still unclear whether blockchain-based non-fungible tokenization technologies (NFTs) will remain relevant over time, the increased rate of adoption in ‘Web 3.0’ technologies informs a new vision in user interaction with the internet. In this vein, the metaverse can be named as the latest iteration of the internet in line with the idea of Web 3.0, which aims to go beyond the traditional approach by altering how users interact on the web. Nevertheless, it can be highlighted that ‘Web 3.0’ and the “metaverse” are not already concrete technologies, and each platform exists as a standalone virtual land piece rather than being a unified entity. In this regard, Morozov reflects that “given these two rather prominent features — self-referentiality and performativity — one would think that the very concept of “Web3” — and the broader historical and political narratives that it enables — would merit far greater critical scrutiny” (2022). In this sense, the critical view toward Web 3.0 is based on the idea that Web 2.0 has never been a valid analytical term for understanding the historical development of the internet and therefore rejects the “new” idea of Web 3.0 altogether.
The word “metaverse” was originally coined in a science-fiction movie called Snow Crash in 1992 (Centieiro 2022). At present, thanks to affordable Virtual Reality headsets becoming accessible to many users, the idea of connected virtual reality spaces through the internet has gained popularity. As Rimol pointed out, “by 2026, 25% of people will spend at least one hour a day in the metaverse for work, shopping, education, social and/or entertainment” (2022). The idea of seamless interaction with the digital world appears to have profound effects on many aspects of social life in terms of economy (Zvyagin 2019), trade (Bamakan et al. 2022), education (McGovern et al. 2020), medicine (Han et al. 2019), and in a broad perspective humantechnology relationship that appears to be blurred by the extent of these technologies into the daily lives of the users (Ritter 2021). While the ambiguity in the gradual transformation from participatory Web 2.0 to immersive Web 3.0 remains, entire ecosystems of ‘new’ social relations appear to gain more influence in the social sphere thanks to the accessibility of the advancements in personal computing. One way of addressing the changes in the structure of the web could be by applying the ideas of Peter-Paul Verbeek, particularly on the philosophy of human-technology relations. Verbeek informs about the main hermeneutical question that concerns technology as “what role do technologies play in the way in which human beings interpret reality — or, conversely, in the way in which reality comes to be meaningful for human beings?” (2005, 128). Arguably, answering these questions from a postphenomenological perspective can inform about how the metaverse interweaves experience, users, and world in the digital domain through technological mediation. Briefly, postphenomenology can be defined as an emphasis of how subject and object constitutes each other. Verbeek explains postphenomenology “as consciousness (perception, experience) can only exist as consciousness of something, reality is always reality for someone; in their engagement with reality, human beings always disclose it in a specific way. At the same time, humans themselves are constituted in this relation” (2005, 112). In its infancy form, the metaverse can be regarded as a collection of fragmented virtual worlds that each operates in blockchain based singular and finite spaces. This thesis will use Decentraland as a case study to analyze human-technology relations in metaverse from a postphenomenological perspective. In this connection, Decentraland is one of the leading metaverse universes since the initial auction that amounted to $30 million USD in 2017 (Winkie 2020). Ethereum blockchain based cryptocurrency called MANA is the central element in the popularity of the platform as it allows transactions for NFTs that certifies every sold unit within the virtual world. Considering the NFT multiverse of Decentraland (MANA) increased its worth to more than $1 billion USD in 2021 (Statista 2021), the platform can be considered as the leading virtual space amongst the existing metaverse universes.
Against this background, one can emphasize that the underlying logic of humantechnology and world relations in virtual reality spaces remains a relatively unexplored field in media studies. For this purpose, Don Ihde, a philosopher of science and technology, outlines how experience plays a significant role in human-technology relations, and his analysis focuses on perception. “Perception is as it were the interweaving of both: in perception, human beings and world — or subject and object, for that matter — are not separated but always intertwined” (Verbeek 2001, 123). The mutual constitution of subject and object can inform how the meaning is mediated through the technological infrastructure. For this purpose, Ihde identifies two levels of praxes, namely, one material/practical and the other ideal/theoretical, that both belong to the lifeworld (1990). Building upon the two levels of praxes, Ihde distinguishes two dimensions of perception that are microperception (sensory perception) and macroperception (cultural perception) (1990). “Both belong equally to the lifeworld. And both dimensions of perception are closely linked and intertwined. There is no microperception (sensory-bodily) without its location within a field of macroperception and no macroperception without its microperceptual foci.” (Ihde 1990, 78). Accordingly, the research paper aims to answer how the user interface (UI) affordances of Decentraland technologically mediates space and time experience within the platform from a postphenomenological perspective that encompasses the macroperceptual and microperceptual frameworks.
“By applying Ihde’s framework of human-technology-world relations to services, the experiences of users or providers are thus formalized in terms of human-interface-infrastructure relations, whereby the other human who co-creates the service experience is revealed in technologically mediated encounters as an aspect of the infrastructure” (Aagaard et al. 2018, 87). Conclusively, the research attempts to show that the space and time experience in immersive virtual worlds of the metaverse can be understood from a postphenomenological perspective. By referring to the human-technology relationship as mutually constitutive, the research will show that the interactive relation of subject and object allows for the establishment of space and time experience in the platform through the affordances of the user interface. The research methodology incorporates the “walkthrough methodology” (Light et al. 2016) on the grounds of the “theory of affordances” (Davis and Chouinard 2016) to operationalize the empirical analysis. Walkthrough methodology informs how technical and cultural influences are transmitted by identifying mediator characteristics that configure relations among involved actors (Light et al. 2016). The theory of affordance, which informs the methodological framework, was further developed by Davis and Chouinard who introduced the theoretical approach to highlight the degree of affordances as interrelated mechanisms (2016). The research analyzes “four mediator characteristics” (Light et al. 2016) of the Decentraland user interface by utilizing “mechanisms of affordance” (Davis and Chouinard, 2016). In this respect, by applying a unique approach, the research aims to investigate the postphenomenological understanding of technological mediation through the affordances of the user interface that constitute both subject and object in their interaction.
2. Theoretical Framework and Literature Review
As the research aims to analyze technological mediation of the space and time experience in the metaverse, the main focus of the theoretical framework is the postphenomenology of Verbeek, who further developed the idea of technological mediation. Verbeek et al. point out that “in order to develop a full understanding of processes of mediation, we should not only study ‘what things do’ (cf. Verbeek 2005) but also how humans give meaning to these mediations — both empirically and conceptually” (2016). Accordingly, the research aims to empirically analyze the formation of space and time experience in Decentraland on the grounds of ‘what things do’ (Verbeek 2005) and contextualize how the space and time experience is technologically mediated through the mutual interaction between user and platform. The relations between human beings and technological objects can be understood from a postphenomenological approach that aims to extend the role of artifacts in the human interpretation of reality. In this regard, Verbeek explains human-world relations from a hermeneutical dimension that suggests how technologies shape reality and involve the perception of the world that encompasses the frameworks for interpretation (2005).
From this perspective, to understand the constitution of space and time experience in the metaverse, one can inquire about direct and indirect ways of technological mediation determining the origin of meaning. The direct way of mediation relates to the mediation of sensory perception that is located in microperception; the indirect way of mediation relates to macroperception that coshapes human-world relations through the frameworks of technological mediation (Verbeek 2005). In this framework, Verbeek challenges the presupposition that there is an “action inbetween” a technological artifact and a human being by bringing the “mediation approach” that constitutes two poles of interaction as mutually shaping each other (2015). The guiding principle of the mediation theory suggests a characterization of human-technology relations in terms of immersion and fusion (Verbeek 2015). Rather than being an extension of the body, the interaction is being shaped by the goals and intentions of human beings, which complicates the instrumentalist approach to technological artifacts. According to the instrumentalist approach, technology is seen as an extension of the human agency and a tool that is merely used to reach certain goals. As opposed to this view, Verbeek illustrates that “social media has generated new types and dimensions of social relations that were not intended in the design of the technology, but rather emerged from them” (Verbeek 2015, 28). In line with this, interactions between agents are understood “from the inside” as they actively help to shape human interpretations of the world (Verbeek et al. 2016). Based on this, one can point out that the “Actor-Network Theory” (e.g. Latour 1994) differs in this hermeneutic dimension of technological mediation as it approaches the human and nonhuman agents symmetrically by looking at these interactions “from the outside” perspective. As the core epistemological idea of the postphenomenological theory is that technologies help to shape the reality of the phenomena, technological mediation constitutes human beings and their world in the “act” of the mediation. Verbeek asserts that “mediation does not simply take place between a subject and an object, but rather coshapes subjectivity and objectivity” (2005, 130).
As the figure 0.1 suggests, metaverse is considered as a collective virtual space that is created by the convergence of virtually enhanced physical reality and digital reality (Gupta 2022). Elements of a metaverse (see figure 0.1) reflects the importance of multiple technologies such as natural language processing, digital currency, digital assets, and trends such as online shopping and digital marketplace in tandem to create a virtual world. From this perspective, the metaverse is not a static term; rather, it has a variable nature that is shaped by the mutual interaction between humans and technology. For example, NFTs represent a wide variety of functions that facilitates an independent virtual economy in a metaverse, and they can gain value or feature based on their finite availability in a digital ecosystem. Against this background, a postphenomenological understanding of the human-technology relations allows us to decipher how the multistable nature of the artifact creates new purposes that are shaped by multiple perspectives in microperception and then applied in use-contexts that are in macroperception. In other words, as the elements of a metaverse suggest, the virtual worlds are not predetermined entities; rather, “artifacts can only be understood in terms of the relation that human beings have to them” (Verbeek 2005, 117). The concept of multistability can be better explained by the “Ihde’s analysis of the bodily technique of archery as a multistable phenomenon (i.e. a structure following different stable trajectories leading to variations in the phenomenon) embedded in cultural-historical lifeworlds shows that consciousness is an abstraction, and that experience is a matter of embodiment and situatedness” (De Preester 2010, 341). Based on this, the conceptualization of the metaverse as a multistable phenomenon guides the empirical analysis of the research. Furthermore, the technological mediation of space and time experience is shaped by the mutual interaction of the subject and object that will be contextualized through microperceptual and macroperceptual frameworks in the analysis. “The multistability of artifacts implies not only that artifact can have different meanings in different contexts, but also that specific goals can be technologically realized in different ways by a range of artifacts” (Verbeek 2005, 136). As a result, the operationalization of multistability concept reveals how the “technologies receive ‘stability’ only in their use; after they are interpreted as “artifacts-in-order-to ...” (Verbeek 2005).
The perceptual configuration of the subject can be understood based on the relations of mediation that also constitute the object through mutual interaction. Regarding the idea of the multistable nature of technological artifacts determining the various purposes and the intentionality of the interactions within a use-context, Ihde informs about two forms of object and subject relations, namely hermeneutic relation and background relation. Rosenberger and Verbeek demonstrate that “[…] in a hermeneutic relation the user experiences a transformed encounter with the world via the direct experience and interpretation of the technology itself” (2015, 17). In essence, hermeneutic relation refers to the use of technology that allows the perception of the world by providing an alternative representation of the reality. In return, hermeneutic relation allows the subject to constitute a new reality based on the perceptual configuration. On the other hand, Ihde addresses the notion of “background relations” as the technologies that constitute the environmental context of the user. “The ‘withdraw’ of this technological function is phenomenologically distinct as a kind of ‘absence.’ The technology is, as it were, ‘off to the side.’ Yet as a present absence, it nevertheless becomes part of the experienced field of the inhabitant, a piece of the immediate environment” (Ihde 1990, 109). In short, background relation refers to the ways in which the technologies “[...] form the backdrop of our experiences. They shape our experiences, protecting us from the elements or keeping our food safely chilled, but do so in ways that do not require direct interaction” (Rosenberger and Verbeek 2015, 19).
Hermeneutic relations and background relations give us the conceptual tools to understand how space and time experience are established in the metaverse. Perceived reality of the virtual world is established through the technologically shaped perception of the user and the world that continuously operates in the background to create immersion and fusion within the experience of the world. It can be argued that the space and time experience is the building block of this immersion as it directly affects how humans perceive their environment. The postphenomenological approach has brought a wide range of different observations in various technologies such as educational technologies, self-tracking and imaging technologies, and robotic technologies (Aagaard et al. 2018). Nevertheless, the application of mediation theory in shared virtual spaces is an uncharted area considering the relatively recent increased adoption of metaverse spaces by online communities. In this context, the effects of technological mediation of space and time experience are scrutinized through the human-technology relations of hermeneutical relation and background relation. To empirically analyze this phenomenon, Decentraland will be used as a case study on the grounds of Peter-Paul Verbeek’s philosophical reflections in his book, namely What things do.
3. Methodology
Verbeek et al. highlight that in postphenomenological theory, the core epistemological idea is that technologies help shape the reality of the phenomena being studied (2016). Accordingly, postphenomenological theory encompasses how human-technology relations are established. To reveal how technological mediation is facilitated in Decentraland, the research will use “the technical walkthrough methodology” (Light et al. 2016) based on the affordance theory. The research methodology considers intrinsic design choices of the platform through the mediator characteristics that embody transformation of the meaning as they invoke interaction (Light et al. 2016). In this vein, the research examines mediator characteristics of the Decentraland to reveal how the affordances of the user interface (UI) are mutually shaped in reference to microperceptual and macroperceptual frameworks of interactions.
The theory of affordance, which James J. Gibson introduced, emerged as an integral analytic tool within media studies, science and technology studies, communication studies, ecological psychology, design studies, and others (Davis and Chouinard 2016). Affordances can be understood as the fundamental relations between object and subject by defining the possible ways of interactions between the actors. In a broader sense, affordances can be defined as “the dynamic link between subjects and objects within sociotechnical systems” (Davis and Chouinard 2016, 241). In his works on ecological perception, James Gibson defined the emergence of affordance within ecological psychology by defining the physical capabilities that are offered by the environment, which affords the subject to interact potentially in unlimited ways (1979). Affordance theory was later popularized by Don Norman, who illustrated distinctions between real and perceived affordances (1999). “Real affordances are the functions attached to a given object — what, potentially, that object affords. Perceived affordances are features that are clear to the user” (Davis and Chouinard 2016, 242). Gibson (1979) and Norman (1999) recognized that the operation of affordances is determined by the operational degree that they indicate based on the distinct features and functions. Based on the variational degree that affordances indicate, Davis and Chouinard propose that “artifacts request, demand, allow, encourage, discourage, and refuse.” Requests and demands refer to bids that the artifact places upon the subject. Encouragement, discouragement, and refusal refer to how the artifact responds to a subject’s desired actions” (2016, 242). Given this, the conceptualization of affordances enables us to discern how technological mediation is enabled by looking at the design characteristics of the technological artifact. Understanding the space and time experience in the metaverse requires identifying how the affordances of the UI facilitate the creation of immersion and fusion. The underlying logic of the real and perceived affordances reflects how specific interactions are established and their contribution to the technological mediation of space and time experience in Decentraland.
Davis and Chouinard explain the degree features of affordances: “requests recommend one line of action, but workarounds remain possible and plausible. Requests invite subjects to engage the object in a particular way, evoking particular outcomes over others” (2016, 243). “An artifact demands when its use is conditioned on a particular set of circumstances” (2016, 243). Demands create the risk of technological determinism; therefore it is important to point out that “subjects may rebuff these demands” (2016, 243). “Artifacts encourage when they foster, breed, and nourish some line of action, while stifling, suppressing, and dissuading others” (2016, 243). “Artifacts discourage when one line of action, though available should subjects wish to pursue it, is only accessible through concerted effort” (2016, 243). “Artifacts refuse when they make certain actions unavailable to users” (2016, 244). “Allow is distinct in its neutral intensity and multidirectional application. Artifacts allow by remaining indifferent to if and/or how a particular feature is used, and to what outcome. Allow applies to bids generated by both artifacts and subjects” (2016, 244). Allow in this sense can be considered as the ability of the user in terms of which actions they can perform within the platform, and what unique features are offered for the users. As Davis and Chouinard conceptualized the degree of affordances inherently shaping the user behavior, this conceptual tool kit becomes crucial to recognize how the design choices of Decentraland establish the space and time experience by promoting specific user actions. Comprehension of this dynamic relation permits us to identify the interrelation of the user and the platform as the affordances of the UI technologically mediate the space and time experience. In this sense, one can argue that while postphenomenological theory encompasses how human- technology relations are established, the affordances theory manifests the intrinsic design choices that make this mutual relation possible. Due to the fact that certain design choices can reflect on possibilities of user actions, it becomes crucial to understand in what sense these characteristics have an impact on the establishment of space and time experience. In other words, the affordances of the user interface design can inform how technological mediation occurs in the metaverse. In this research, the empirical analysis of Decentraland aimed at discovering this intertwined relation between affordances of the UI and technological mediation.
As Aagaard et al. highlighted, “[…] those who want to conduct postphenomenological field studies must look elsewhere for methodological guidance. And in the process of doing so, they can end up exploring phenomena from novel perspectives, arriving at new findings for postphenomenological theory” (2018, 83). In this light, the postphenomenological theory requires different methodological approaches to be utilized. In this research, the technical walkthrough method will be used to understand the establishment of space and time experience in the metaverse from a postphenomenological perspective. According to Light et al., “the walkthrough method is a way of engaging directly with an app’s interface to examine its technological mechanisms and embedded cultural references to understand how it guides users and shapes their experiences” (Light et al. 2016, 882). As the research focuses on Decentraland, a 3D virtual world browser-based platform (Ravenscraft 2021), the research methodology will look at how the everyday practices of the platform mutually construct the space and time experience. While this research methodology is tailored explicitly for apps, the application of the technical walkthrough method “[…] involves the researcher engaging with the app interface, working through screens, tapping buttons, and exploring menus” (Light et al. 2016, 891). Therefore, on the grounds of the affordance theory, the research methodology offers an approach to discover how material forces and intentions are embedded in the design of the platforms on a sociotechnical level (Light et al. 2016). While the conceptual framework of the walkthrough methodology establishes the interactive relationship on the basis of Actor-Network Theory, the research aims to move beyond classical phenomenology.
The main two distinctions can be highlighted in terms of how postphenomenology approaches the human-technology relationship compared to the classic understanding. Firstly, as Ihde pointed out, “there is no direct relation between subject and object, but only an “indirect” one, and technologies often function as mediators. The human-world relation typically is a human-technology-world relation” (Rosenberger and Verbeek 2015, 12). Given this, one can consider the “perceived and actual properties” of an object (Norman 1999) that underlies “[…] social and material influences on how users perceive actions they can take in relation to a technology” (Light et al. 2016, 886). Second, Verbeek showed that “[…] the mediation is the source of the specific shape that human subjectivity and the objectivity of the world can take in this specific situation. Subject and object are constituted in their mediated relation” (Rosenberger and Verbeek 2015, 12). In this connection, the technical walkthrough method classifies the mediator characteristics of a platform that are influenced by technical and cultural conditions. The structural configuration of human-technology relations stipulates interaction with the user interface of the platform. Therefore, scrutinizing the user interface design of Decentraland requires interpretation of the four mediator characteristics, namely, user interface arrangement, functions and features, textual content and tone, and symbolic representation (Light et al. 2016).
Ultimately, by analyzing Decentraland as a case study, the research paper aims to discover how the affordances of the platform construct space and time experience from a postphenomenological perspective. The operationalization of the analysis is possible through a crypto wallet account that enables authentication to the Decentraland virtual world. Decentraland is free to register, and the users can use a wide variety of technological equipment to be part of it. In this research, for the purpose of analysis, the user interface screenshots were taken through a MacBook operating MacOS Monterey 12.4 (Apple 2020).Decentralandis also accessible through a web browser, and users also can navigate the world without a crypto wallet that limits the interaction. Screenshots are being collected to visualize and guide the empirical analysis according to the technical walkthrough methodology. The analysis follows four main technical components of the methodology: namely, user interface arrangement, functions and features, textual content and tone, and symbolic representation. The empirical analysis reflects how the technological mediation constitutes space and time experience within the platform by discovering each degree of affordance within the UI. Davis and Chouinard theorize the degree of affordances that describes how the user interface design request, demand, allow, encourage, discourage, and refuse specific actions that enable the technological mediation of space and time experience.
4. Analysis
Immersive experiences go beyond the two-dimensional object array, and they allow the users to navigate through the virtual space through the relations of mediation. This configures the relation of the user to the world by bringing the space and time experience forefront. In a virtual world, microperception, where space and time experience guide the sensory perception of the bodily dimension, operates within the cultural context of the macroperception that the sensory perception gains a meaning. In other words, the user experiences space and time through the sensory perception of the body while the meaning is established in the cultural context in which these actions are taken. Multistability of technological artifacts implies different meanings in various cultural contexts (Verbeek 2005). For example, thanks to the multistable nature of the technological artifact, a digital plot of land that is in the metaverse gain an intrinsic value through the technological mediation that takes place in the virtual world. Furthermore, this value creation is reinforced by the socio-cultural sphere. In order to understand the role of technological mediation in the metaverse, the research analyzes the mediator characteristics of the user interface by identifying each degree of affordance that facilitates the formation of space and time experience. The analysis demonstrates how space and time experience in the metaverse is constituted from a postphenomenological perspective.
4.1. User Interface Arrangement
One of the salient design choices of Decentraland can be named as the creation of an immersive user experience through a first-person perspective. The perceptual configuration informs the user experience of the user to ensure the adaptation of the machine vision that facilitates how the identity, position, and orientation of the virtual environment would be configured as a response to user input. Three-dimensional space sequence placements in the user interface (UI) guide user activities which are reinforced by a third-person visual style. This user perspective enables the user to “see” more as it extends the user’s gaze more than what is captured in the first-person perspective. While the user interface arrangement is being shaped by selecting one of the two perspectives, the design characteristics remain the guiding principle for how the space and time experience is established in the platform. Affordances of the user interface arrangement mediate the space and time experience in the metaverse as the engagement is captured through distorted virtual elements with real-life provisions. For example, looking at Figure 1.1, the user starts their journey by teleporting to the Central Plaza. At first glance, the UI requests how the user can engage with the platform by evoking how other users spend time in the virtual world through various suggestions. For instance, the number of people is stated for each Crowd area that encourages users to join the masses or find niche areas.
The Central Plaza is designed as a circular and smaller area compared to the other virtual environments in the platform that allows extensive exploring fields. The idea of a circular and small meeting space allows users to establish the perception defined by the functions offered by the platform. In this sense, the circularity signals an egalitarian space that does not discriminate in terms of participation in the platform. This signaling can be considered through the platform’s registration process, which occurs one step before being teleported to the Central Plaza. Looking at Figure 1.2, it can be seen that the platform does not demand providing extensive personal information, which is a common feature in Web 2.0 social platforms such as Facebook. The users are asked to connect to a wallet based on the Ethereum blockchain, which contains the ownership log of all digital assets and tradable items within the virtual world. In this respect, connecting a wallet to participate is a choice to establish the dexterity of the platform. Dexterity is understood in terms of how physical capabilities such as navigating in virtual games and joining events are allowed by the connection of the wallet account that serves as proof of ownership; otherwise, the data is locally stored.
Hermeneutic relation is being established by allowing the perception of the user to produce an alternative representation of themselves by creating a new avatar. In return, the digital persona allows the creation of a new reality guided by the user interface arrangement of the perceptual configuration, which can be first-person or third-person perspective. The goals and intentions of the user are reflected through the movement of the avatar within the virtual world that demands immersion and fusion. Immersion is reflected in the background relation as it encompasses how the user interface arrangement of the platform informs the technological background that interacts with the user. On the other hand, fusion relates to the physical boundaries that are lifted by the technological capabilities of the platform that encourage some line of action over another. For instance, looking at figure 1.3, one can indicate how hermeneutic relation fosters the multistable nature of the platform as the various user choices lead to the creation of an alternate reality which is constituted by the affordances of user interface arrangement and the preferences of the user.
The Jump In feature of the Decentraland can be highlighted as it allows users to navigate the virtual space with two clicks. As visualized in Figure 1.4, the user can initially display the whole Decentraland map constituted by a finite number of regional blocks that offer myriad ways of interaction within the virtual world. While the space is defined by this instructional map, the establishment of the time experience through the user interface arrangement is more subtle as it allows more customization based on the user preferences. Although the dynamic sky that changes over time hints to the user the passage of time, the hourly cycle of day and night can be adjusted through the settings. In this respect, user interface arrangement discourages the reduced time spent in the world by allowing more customization in terms of how the user can experience the space. By using the talk button, a user can talk to their immediate surroundings as well as by the chat functionality. Moreover, the UI structure allows background music to be played. Given this, the user interaction is enabled not only by clicking buttons but also through sensory experiences such as concerts or visual effects that are also monetized through blockchain-based marketplaces such as OpenSea, an online marketplace for NFTs.
Users can interact with “real” avatars as well as AI-generated characters as the UI structure of the platform encourages chatting with many actors within the world. The main guiding principle of the space experience in Decentraland is the idea of discovery of new territories such as “hot places” that are known by some users or private locations that are possible to be invited to only by nurturing relationships with other users. From this point, the platform diffuses the real and virtual world interaction by offering a hermeneutic relation that alters how the user should spend their time within the universe. The goal of gaining status within this world is not only accomplished by the purchasing power but also through collaboration in various contexts such as virtual casino games and participation in many events like fashion shows. Accordingly, it can be said that the interaction with the virtual space constitutes the intentionality of the artifact by informing both the user and the platform. In other words, the user actions are enabled by the user interface arrangement of the platform; however, this arrangement is also guided by the choices that the user makes when deciding what to “discover” next. Many virtual spaces offer external links to their designated webpage or social media accounts to extend the hermeneutic relation that underlines how both subject and object are intertwined by means of the technologic representation of the world.
4.2. Functions and Features
One of the primary functionalities of Decentraland could be named as territorial navigation within the platform. The functionality allows the establishment of space and time experience in Decentraland as it facilitates episodic memory. When explaining the mental travel in space and time, Buzsaki and Llinas mention in their research that “navigation and memory are deeply connected” (2017, 3). In this connection, it is emphasized that memorized facts (or semantic memory) and one’s personal experiences (episodic memory) are tied analogously to map and path-based navigation (Buzsaki and Llinas 2017). As the user interface arrangement of the platform reflects, the self-discovery and engagement with the immediate environment are requested by the fundamental design structure of the user interface (UI). The present encounter of the user with the virtual space gradually builds on previously repeated encounters with the elements of the metaverse through the embedded functions and features. In this vein, the sensory perception, that is microperception, is the bodily perception that occurs in the present moment of encounter with the virtual environment. In contrast, the previously repeated encounters build upon the “interpreted perceptions” that is macroperception.
In line with this, Buzsaki and Llinas highlight that “semantic knowledge emerges gradually after repeated encounters with the same thing or event by the episodic memory system” (2017, 3) (e.g. Nadel and Moscovitch 1997; Frankland and Bontempi 2005). Considering this intertwined relationship between semantic memory and episodic memory, mediated perception of the human-technology relations with the world can be contextualized with hermeneutic relations. Based on the postphenomenological grounds of material hermeneutics, the representation of the virtual world is drawn by the involvement of the user with the UI of Decentraland, which demands interpretation to be “read”. Verbeek points out that “in hermeneutic relations, the world is not perceived through the artifact but by means of it” (2005, 126). According to this logic, the interactive features of Decentraland encourage environment- dependent discoveries through the group of arrangements of the UI. For instance, looking at figure 2.1, this is enabled through the chat functionality that allows mediation of perception in which users experience the virtual world in microperception. In contrast, the chat feature of the UI transforms both user and embedded environment based on the user input and affordances of the virtual environment in macroperception. The human-technology and world relations are being configured by the affordances that bring material forces and intentions of the UI functions to the intersection between the mutual transformation of the human and technology. As Verbeek demonstrated, “humans and the world they experience are the products of technological mediation, and not just the poles between which the mediation plays itself out” (2005, 130). Suitably, the transformation of perception plays out by the amplification and reduction of certain aspects of reality (Verbeek, 2005).
Mediation of meaning through the transformation of perception has hermeneutical implications as the functions and features of Decentraland grant access to specific forms of reality. For example, Decentraland Marketplace offers a wide range of items that can unlock the ability of various activities within the platform. Land and collectibles can be named as the two main categories within the marketplace. Various features of collectible items are sold through decentralized marketplaces, and creators can determine the existing number of each unique item connected to an Ethereum blockchain-based wallet granting ownership to the user. These NFT items afford various visual effects and encourage users to expand their collection of items that could be seen by other members of the community as well. On the other hand, land plots follow a similar value creation logic by limiting the available land size and amount within the platform. Marketplace functionality demand users a particular set of actions that encourage users to mint a greater number of NFTs, essentially more digital assets being stored in the blockchain. Looking at figures 2.2 and 2.3, one can see how the affordances of the UI materialize the functionality of the marketplace through virtual encounters that shape both user behavior and the experience of space therein. Furthermore, the mutual encounter that is in microperception becomes a building block of themacroperceptionthat constitutes both user and the platform. As these two dimensions of experience are intertwined, the frameworks of interpretation for technological mediation are being established through the direct and indirect ways of mediation in hermeneutic relations.
Following this, the direct way of mediation that shapes how reality is interpreted in microperception is established through the sensory experience that guides how the user perceives possible ways of interpretation of the technology. In this sense, the conversation with a computer- generated bot that is seen in figures 2.2 and 2.3 show how these frameworks of interpretation are formed through the direct involvement of subject and object in meaning-making. In this case, the programmed bot utilizes a natural language processing method to create a mutual self- reinforcement between the user and platform. Technologically mediated meaning-making is fostered by the mutual interaction of the subject and object that are both shaped by this relation. Macroperception is constituted by the indirect interactions that inform how the world is being understood by the user.
The postphenomenological understanding of human-technology and world relations suggests that “the relation between subject and object always already precedes the subject and the object themselves, which implies that the subject and the object are mutually constituted in their interrelation” (Verbeek 2005, 130). From this perspective, NFTs are fundamental in the mediation of meaning within the platform as they request how the users can engage with one another as well as which activities are available for the user. Without the ownership of task-specific NFTs, some functions and features are being refused within the platform as the landowners can create immersive experiences that demands users to mint certain items such as wearable NFTs. Notably, this can be observed in activities that demand user involvement in a social setting, such as gambling, hunting, playing golf, or attending concerts. While navigation around Decentraland is free for participation, the increased time spent on the platform requests users to obtain NFTs. In return NFTs unlock certain lines of action that allow user to have immersive experiences. Furthermore, space and time experiences are configured by this mutual relationship between the user and the platform, which is informed by the available functions and features.
In their research, Burr and Morrone review that space and time are not processed separately in the brain, and instead, the spatial position can inform the time analysis, which implies a decentralized timing control by calibrating time across space (2006). Considering that the experience of time can be affected based on the gaze of the observer, the affordances of the user interface in Decentraland have a direct influence on the transformation of perception that mediates the experience. For instance, looking at figure 2.4. the UI of Decentraland demands a wearable NFT to be purchased before the user can participate in a casino game, regardless of their age. In this sense, the example shows that mediation of experience is being influenced by how the reality is being experienced by the user, as certain aspects of the reality are being amplified or weakened through NFTs.
Furthermore, the transformation of perception occurs in terms of how the space and time experience is being established through the mutual interaction between the user and the platform rather than a physical transformation of experience. Verbeek describes the hermeneutical implication of transformation of perception in terms of how artifacts contribute “[…] to shape human interpretations of reality not only because they play a role in interpretive frameworks, but also because of their role in sensory perception, which determines the very possibilities human beings have for interpreting reality” (2005, 132). Based on this, the sensory perception has direct implications on how the perception of reality is being shaped in microperception by introducing a perceptual transformation of the immediate environment. For instance, the user is not only granted participation by purchasing a wearable NFT but the mediation of meaning is established through the sensory experience that the NFTs allow.
Looking at figures 2.5 and 2.6, the examples of reality transformation can be seen as the wearable collectible items making the user avatar into something that can be visually interpreted. In this virtual context, the mediated perception can be understood in relation to the other users as the platform encourage a higher contrast in the perception of reality by deviating from unmediated perception. Verbeek explains the mediation of perception idea in hermeneutic relations by pointing out that the design of a hermeneutic technology “[…] predetermines which aspect of reality is to be made perceptible by it and in which ways” (2005, 134). From this perspective, it can be said that the functions and features of Decentraland predetermine the interaction ground between the user and platform through the establishment of space and time experience that is made possible by the affordances of the UI.
4.3. Textual Content and Tone
The textual content and tone of the user interface (UI) include the text embedded in the platform. According to Light et al., the order of UI, such as available options and categories, have their discursive power to shape the use practices (2016). In this sense, Decentraland makes use of a narrative text style that reinforces the idea of a virtual reality space where a storyworld is constructed. When developing a narrative theory, Herman and Jahn denote the storyworld as an “ecology of narrative interpretation” (2005). Herman and Jahn explain the notion of storyworld as “trying to make sense of a narrative, interpreters attempt to reconstruct not just what happened but also the surrounding context or environment embedding storyworld *existents, their attributes, and the *actions and *events in which they are involved” (2005, 570). From the perspective ofthe storyworldnotion, the textual content and tone ofDecentralandcan be understood based on how the space and time experience is informed by this ecology of narrative interpretation. In their research, Ayiter shows that convergence of temporal and spatial parameters is in line with the notion of a storyworld as “[space and time] hold equal value in the construction of an integrated narrative” (2019, 164). In line with this, integrated narrative textual content in Decentraland can be conceptualized through the macroperceptual frameworks of hermeneutic mediation. As Verbeek emphasizes that the hermeneutic dimension of mediation includes “the ways in which reality comes to be meaningful for human beings depend not only on their sensory relations with it but also on the contexts in which meaning arises” (2005, 135). According to this postphenomenological understanding, the textual content of Decentraland can be seen as the reflection of how the ideals of Web 3.0 are being reinforced across space and time.
For instance, NFTs, which can represent a variety of items such as artworks (see figure 3.1) made available to users through virtual installations that hint “post-Snowden” era in terms of the decentralized and accessible nature of the digital artifacts. Moreover, NFTs allow digital ownership mechanisms such as memberships, digital identities, and trade in the metaverse. Reinforcement of Web 3.0 ideals is one of the important building blocks of how cultural mediation plays out in macroperception. Considering the monetary value creation logic of Decentraland is on the basis of finite resource allocation to an infinite demand, it is vital for the mutual existence of the platform and users to establish a macroperceptual framework of cultural mediation that occurs through the textual content and tone of the UI. In this sense, the multistable nature of UI encourages “cultural embeddedness” to develop as the storyworld emerges through the mutual interaction between the platform and users. In other words, the textual content of the platform facilitates the cultural mediation that defines the multistable nature of Decentraland.
As Verbeek explained, “the insight that technologies cannot be separated from their use contexts implies that they have no “essence”; they are what they are only in their use. A technology can receive an identity only within a concrete context of use, and this identity is determined not only by the technology in question but also by the way in which it becomes interpreted” (2005, 117). Based on this definition of the multistable nature of artifacts, it can be inferred that the collectible NFTs become the tools of interpretation in the mutual interaction of the user and platform. In hermeneutical terms, this mutual interaction isencouragedby the storyworld that, in turn, is shaped by different use contexts and identities of users. User experience is constituted by the ways in which NFTs mediate access to the platform. From this perspective, “intentions of technologies” are formed at the cultural level that can unlock different “ways of seeing” as the multistability of the platform implies (Verbeek, 2005).
To exemplify, the textual content and tone of the platform demand live interaction with other users through the chat box feature (see figure 3.2) that allows users to chat with one another. The chat functionality has a narrative text style that encourages users to interact in real-time, while the essential discursive power of the feature relies on the spread of “cultural embeddedness”. For instance, as shown in figure 3.3, the users are able to display collectibles of others in the moment of interaction with each other. The multistability of the platform reinforces the cultural mediation that occurs through NFTs from a material hermeneutics standpoint. From this perspective, the storyworld of Decentraland allows how exchanges are made, and the daily practices of the users formed as the cultural mediation are facilitated by the encounters. Following this, the textual content in the platform can be regarded as the enabler of event reconstruction in the metaverse. Moreover, the content and tone of the narrative text refuse to provide what just happened but rather allow the uniformity of surrounding places and times in the perceptual configuration of the user. Narratives are “[...] cognitive tools for thinking and making sense of the world in situated contexts” (Eiranen et al. 2022, 4). Accordingly, textual narrative constructs a timeline that coexists through the interaction between the user and platform. This mutual interaction creates the macroperceptual framework that requests cultural mediation, which is facilitated by the textual content and tone of the UI. For instance, as the figure 3.4 suggests that the idea of “being at the right place at the right time” is the fundamental construct of the cultural mediation in Decentraland.
The textual content of the platform encourages users to move within the spatiotemporal patterns that are guided through self-discovery. In line with this, as the space and time experience is being constructed by the “cultural embeddedness” that informs both the user behavior and the tone of the platform, narration plays a central role in technological mediation. The mutually constructed space and time experience of Decentraland that is facilitated by the user interface allow interaction with other players and computer-generated bots by means of the repetition in the episodic memory system with every encounter. The mutual construction occurs as the user navigates around the virtual space that facilitates microperception; the textual content of the UI informs the storyworld that constructs macroperceptual context.
4.4. Symbolic Representation
Symbolic representation of the user interface (UI) includes the look and the feel of the platform that informs cultural connotations with respect to imagined users and ideal scenarios of use (Light et al. 2016). Symbolic representation of the UI can be deciphered on the grounds of background relations that shape the context of the experience without the conscious experience of the user. In this sense, Verbeek points out that “[…] technological artifacts in background relations do not play a central role in our experience. In background relations, we are related neither explicitly to a technology nor via a technology to the world […]” (2005, 128). Accordingly, the symbolic representation of the UI creates the background “field” where users have virtual experiences without explicitly experiencing the cultural connotations that are embedded. For example, a predetermined set of emotes (see Figure 4.1) which are the demonstration of self-expression in the platform being introduced to each user, provides a framework for interaction with the virtual world. Each emote allows a unique way of expression through the body language of the avatar. The set of emotes that are available for the users are restricted by the platform; therefore, the expression of the user in the virtual world is encouraged by the UI in a predetermined way. It can be pointed out that Decentraland introduced the first NFT emotes, which are released in the “wild” for users to encourage spatial discovery as the NFT emotes needs to be found in a recently introduced area of “Luxury District” (Decentraland 2022).
Based on this, the platform initially restricts the ways of expression within the platform while the users are encouraged to make self-discoveries. Next, the announcement of NFT emotes comes as a way of establishing space and time experience within the virtual world. The new NFT emotes can only be found by the “first come, first serve” principle that demands users to look for a statue that is hidden in the Luxury District. After, the users are expected to use money emote (see figure 4.1, emote 6) to be able to capture one of the three new NFT emotes. As the process suggests, the recent introduction of NFT emotes not only allows for a wider range of expression within the platform; rather, the task for the UI is to reinforce the macroperceptual framework in which cultural mediation occurs. In this light, the symbolic representation of the (NFT) emotes requests users to interact with the UI to establish a spatiotemporal experience. In other words, the symbolic representation of the platform operates having a background relation that becomes a building block of cultural mediation in macroperception.
As Verbeek highlighted, technologies that mediate a background relation are “[…] present and absent at the same time: without us noticing them, they give form to our experience by shaping a context for it. As such, they can have many of the same transformational characteristics […]” (2005, 128). Based on this; emotes can be conceptualized as a means of interaction that is not experienced by the user “as it is” but they have an “absent presence” that becomes self-evident only when they stop functioning. In other words, the emotes allow a designated motion to be activated in the virtual world so that other users can see and react. In their use case, the emote is used in a specific context by the user, such as meeting a friend and raising a hand; therefore, the motion that is displayed does not imply the experience between the user and emote; instead, the emote operates in the background relation that shape relation to reality by remaining as a mere tool of interaction.
The symbolic representation of the UI in Decentraland is not only limited to the use the emotes. As immersion and fusion are the central elements of the virtual world, the symbolic representation of the UI constitutes the building blocks by having a background relation in the occurrence of human-technology interaction. Figures 4.2 and 4.3 suggest that teleporting across space and time in Decentraland is the primary mode of transportation. The user is encouraged to “dive into” the virtual reality space, and the symbolic representation of the UI facilitates this ideal use of the scenario from the very start. The start point for every user is the Central Plaza, where the UI demands the user to teleport to another space by displaying the latest information, such as events (see figure 1.2). From this perspective, the symbolic representation of teleport functionality across the platform request users to “space warp” in the virtual world.
Apart from the fact that the user can navigate around the virtual world by using the map functionality, the fusion with the existing virtual land demands the user to navigate around the space. However, the macroperceptual framework that facilitates cultural mediation could create a “decisional burden” on the user in terms of where to look next. Decisional burden referred to by Verbeek as being “[…] less and less obvious that events or occurrences unfolding now will forever remain what they are because ever more things that hitherto seemed inescapable now are falling under human control, or at least influence, through technological developments […]” (2005, 138). In this vein, the symbolic representation of Decentraland can be regarded in the realm of reducing the decisional burden for users by encouraging a certain type of action when navigating the virtual space. Furthermore, while the user is expected to perform a self-discovery across time and space, the symbolic representation of the UI structure demands the ways in which these experiences are delivered.
As an instance of diminishing decisional burden for users, the plots of land have unique types of structures that allow users to make a choice towards these designated areas. As figure 4.3 suggests that the symbolic representation of these unique structures can be compared with the diving area (see figure 4.2) in terms of how main infrastructures are positioned in a landmass. While the material characteristics differ, the symbolic representation of the UI encourages users to follow an ideal scenario of use in the virtual space. Regarding the decisional burden, Ihde highlights that “[…] the very power of decision is felt and seen in its “Sartrean” inevitability. The one choice I do not have is the choice not to make a choice.” (1990, 181). From this perspective, it appears that the symbolic representation of the UI structure allows users to diminish the decisional burden risk during the discovery of a vast land area. As the technological mediation occurs through the mutual interaction of the user and the platform, the salient design choices guide user activity as well as being shaped by the decentralized nature of the platform structure.
5. Conclusion
In this research, the establishment of space and time experience in metaverse has been analyzed by evaluating Decentraland as a case study. The analysis applied a technical walkthrough methodology to discover how the affordances of the platform user interface technologically mediates the space and time experience. The affordances of the user interface were conceptualized through a model which includes six main components: request, demand, allow, encourage, discourage, and refuse (Davis and Chouinard 2016). Accordingly, Davis and Chouinard suggest that “the model provides a dynamic rendering of affordances, one that moves with shifting material and cultural landscapes, and with subjects who evolve and change in their own lives” (2016, 247). The conceptualization of user interface affordances has been used as the building block of the methodology, which specified four main mediator characteristics in terms of how “technical and cultural influences are conveyed” (Light et al. 2016, 13). Identification of the mediator characteristics facilitated the evaluation of design choice effects in the establishment of space and time experience. In this sense, the research applied a unique approach by analyzing the affordances of the user interface from a postphenomenological perspective. According to the postphenomenological perspective, the core epistemological idea that guided the research showed how human-technology relations are constituted in the “act” of the mediation. Moreover, the human-technology relations are conceptualized by looking at the metaverse “from the inside,” which shows the multistable nature of the technology. The research shows the multistability of the virtual worlds by examining how single-use contexts are intertwined through the “cultural embeddedness” in the platform. Consequently, the research applied mediation theory to examine how space and time experience is technologically mediated in the metaverse.
The research analysis utilized two relations of mediations to examine the multistable nature of Decentraland, namely, hermeneutic relation and background relation. Firstly, the user interface arrangement of the platform reflected the embedded connotations of Web 3.0 and how immersion and fusion are established. In this sense, the intertwined relation of subject and object has been shown through the hermeneutic relation that draws a representation of the world. Next, functions and features of the platform have been analyzed in relation to associated links between semantic memory and episodic memory. The association between different memory types working in tandem to create space and time experience has been conceptualized through the frameworks of microperception and macroperception. Based on this, the analysis revealed that the sensory perception in microperception becomes the building block for indirect interactions that constitutes macroperception. As a result, the analysis of functions and features revealed how the mediated perception is enabled and how the transformation of reality is facilitated to establish space and time experience. In the third section of the analysis, the textual content and tone of Decentraland have been identified in terms of how the storyworld is constructed through the narrative text style of the user interface. In this sense, it has been shown that the textual content and tone of the platform establish a macroperceptual framework of cultural mediation, which reflect the multistability of the artifact. The textual content and tone of Decentraland reflected “cultural embeddedness,” which is found to be the essential element in the emergence of the storyworld. Lastly, the symbolic representation and tone of Decentraland have been conceptualized through the background relations that create a background “field” which encompasses hidden cultural connotations. Reflecting on this, analysis of the user interface has shown that the immersion and fusion within the macroperceptual framework of operation can create a “decisional burden,” which is found to be diminished by the symbolic representation of the user interface.
By attempting to fill the academic gap, the research aimed to analyze the construction of space and time experience in metaverse from a postphenomenological understanding. While postphenomenology has been applied in various contexts of human-technology and world relations, the virtual worlds have recently started gaining prominence on the web. Therefore, the outcomes of the thesis research can be positioned in user interface design, new media studies, and from a broader perspective, the field of philosophy of science, technology & society.
One of the research limitations can be pointed out as metaverse platforms being in their infancy. Therefore, it can be expected that many of these virtual worlds will disappear, converge, or develop in new directions in the short term. Contradictorily, from a postphenomenological perspective, the future developments of the metaverse can be regarded as a feature of the multistable nature of the technological artifact. In this sense, the shortcoming of the research can be regarded as the manifestation of rapidly changing human-technology relations that constitute both subject and object in their relation. Another limitation of the research can be mentioned regarding the conceptualization of space and time experience as a debated topic in the academic field. While the thesis research attempted to establish the framework of the analysis from a broader field of disciplines, the main focus of the space and time experience remains limited to the user interface of Decentraland. Therefore, future research may consider establishing the space and time experience not only based on the affordance theory perspective but also by incorporating a multidisciplinary approach.
In this research, the space and time experience has been understood by means of the technological mediation that is facilitated by the affordances of the user interface. On the other hand, future research can further analyze the implications of space and time experience in terms of its effects on social network formation. Granovetter, a sociologist, known for his social network theory, conceptualizes social network formation based on how weak ties are more effective in bridging the social distance in a social network (1973). As this research bridged the conceptual tools of affordance theory and mediation theory, future research may build upon this theoretical approach and look for the relationship between the mechanisms of social network formation and the establishment of space and time experience.
6. Bibliography
Aagaard, Jesper, Jan Kyrre Friis, Cathrine Hasse, Jessica Sorenson, and Oliver Tafdrup. 2018. Postphenomenological Methodologies.
Ali, Qazi Ejaz, Naveed Ahmad, Abdul Haseeb Malik, Waheed Ur Rehman, Aziz Ud Din, and Gauhar Ali. 2019. “ASPA: Advanced Strong Pseudonym Based Authentication in Intelligent Transport System.” PLoS ONE 14 (8): e0221213. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221213.
Allen, Matthew. 2013. “What Was Web 2.0? Versions as the Dominant Mode of Internet History.” New Media & Society 15 (2): 260–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812451567.
Ankerson, Megan. 2010. “Web Industries, Economies, Aesthetics: Mapping the Look of the Web in the Dot-Com Era.” In Web History, by Brügger Niels, 56:173–94. New York, N.Y: Peter Lang. https://www.academia.edu/1558779/Web_Industries_Economies_Aesthetics_Mapping_ the_Look_of_the_Web_in_the_Dot_com_Era.
Ankerson, Megan Sapnar. 2015. “Social Media and the ‘Read-Only’ Web: Reconfiguring Social Logics and Historical Boundaries.” Social Media + Society 1 (2): 205630511562193-. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115621935.
Apple. 2020. “MacBook Pro 13” — Specificaties.” Apple (Nederland). October 2020. https://www.apple.com/nl/macbook-pro-13/specs/.
Athanere, Smita, and Ramesh Thakur. 2022. “Blockchain Based Hierarchical Semi- Decentralized Approach Using IPFS for Secure and Efficient Data Sharing.” Journal of King Saud University — Computer and Information Sciences, February. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2022.01.019.
Ayiter, Elif. 2019. “Spatial Poetics, Place, Non-Place and Storyworlds: Intimate Spaces for Metaverse Avatars.” Technoetic Arts : A Journal of Speculative Research 17 (1–2): 155–69. https://doi.org/10.1386/tear_00013_1.
Bamakan, Seyed Mojtaba Hosseini, Nasim Nezhadsistani, Omid Bodaghi, and Qiang Qu. 2022. “Patents and Intellectual Property Assets as Non-Fungible Tokens; Key Technologies and Challenges.” Scientific Reports 12 (1): 2178–2178. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05920-6.
Bradshaw, Paul. 2017. “Chilling Effect: Regional Journalists’ Source Protection and Information Security Practice in the Wake of the Snowden and Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) Revelations.” Digital Journalism 5 (3): 334–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2016.1251329.
Burr, David, and Concetta Morrone. 2006. “Time Perception: Space–Time in the Brain.” Current Biology 16 (5): R171–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.02.038.
Buzsaki, Gyorgy, and Rodolfo Llinas. 2017. “Space and Time in the Brain.” Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science) 358 (6362): 482–85. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan8869.
Centieiro, Henrique. 2022. “The Insane Future of Web 3.0 and the Metaverse.” Medium. February 21, 2022. https://medium.datadriveninvestor.com/the-insane-future-of-web-3- 0-and-the-metaverse-4cec3f13895a.
“Computer Prices over the Last 10 Years.” 2017. Statista. February 2017.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/203759/average-selling-price-of-desktop-pcs- worldwide/.
Davis, Jenny L., and James B. Chouinard. 2016. “Theorizing Affordances: From Request to Refuse.” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 36 (4): 241–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467617714944.
De Preester, Helena. 2010. “Postphenomenology, Embodiment and Technics: Don Ihde, Postphenomenology and Technoscience: The Peking University Lectures. State University of New York Press, Albany, 2009 and Embodied Technics. Automatic Press/VIP, 2010.” Human Studies 33 (2–3): 339–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746- 010–9144-y.
Decentraland. 2022. “NFT Emotes Are Coming to Decentraland — Get the First Ones at MVFW!” Decentraland. March 24, 2022. https://decentraland.org/blog/announcements/nft-emotes-are-coming-to-decentraland- get-the-first-ones-at-mvfw/.
Dijck, J. van, and T. Poell. 2015. “Social Media and the Transformation of Public Space.” Social Media + Society 1. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115622482.
Eiranen, Reetta, Mari Hatavara, Ville Kivimäki, Maria Mäkelä, and Raisa Maria Toivo. 2022. “Narrative and Experience: Interdisciplinary Methodologies between History and Narratology.” Scandinavian Journal of History 47 (1): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/03468755.2021.2019107.
Fowler, Hayden, Corwin Smith, Paul Wackerow, Sam Richards, Don Cross, Patrick Collins, and Ryan Cordell. 2022. “Consensus Mechanisms.” Ethereum.Org (blog). January 29, 2022. https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/.
Frankland, Paul W., and Bruno Bontempi. 2005. “The Organization of Recent and Remote Memories.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 6 (2): 119–30. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1607.
Gibson, James Jerome. 1979. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston ; Houghton Mifflin.
Granovetter, Mark S. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78 (6): 1360–80.
Gupta, Ashutosh. 2022. “What Is a Metaverse?” Gartner (blog). January 28, 2022. https://www.gartner.com/en/articles/what-is-a-metaverse.
Han, Sung-Hee, Jin-Woo Park, Sang Il Choi, Ji Young Kim, Hyunju Lee, Hee-Jeong Yoo, and Jung-Hee Ryu. 2019. “Effect of Immersive Virtual Reality Education Before Chest Radiography on Anxiety and Distress Among Pediatric Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA Pediatrics 173 (11): 1026–31. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.3000.
Helmond, Anne. 2015. “The Platformization of the Web: Making Web Data Platform Ready.” Social Media + Society 1 (2): 2056305115603080. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115603080.
Herman, David, and Manfred Jahn. 2005. Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory. London: Routledge.
Ihde, Don. 1990. Technology and the Lifeworld: From Garden to Earth. Place of publication not identified: Indiana University Press.
Kull, Steven, Clay Ramsay, and Evan Lewis. 2003. “Misperceptions, the Media, and the Iraq War.” Political Science Quarterly 118 (4): 569–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538- 165X.2003.tb00406.x.
Lashmar, Paul. 2017. “No More Sources?: The Impact of Snowden’s Revelations on Journalists and Their Confidential Sources.” Journalism Practice 11 (6): 665–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2016.1179587.
Latour, Bruno. 1994. “On Technical Mediation.” Common Knowledge 3 (2): 29–64.
Light, Ben, Jean Burgess, and Stefanie Duguay. 2016. “The Walkthrough Method: An Approach to the Study of Apps:” New Media & Society, November. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816675438.
Morozov, Evgeny. 2022. “Web3: A Map in Search of Territory.” The Crypto Syllabus (blog). January 13, 2022. https://the-crypto-syllabus.com/web3-a-map-in-search-of-territory/.
Nadel, L., and M. Moscovitch. 1997. “Memory Consolidation, Retrograde Amnesia and the Hippocampal Complex.” Current Opinion in Neurobiology 7 (2): 217–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4388(97)80010-4.
Norman, Donald A. 1999. “Affordance, Conventions, and Design.” Interactions 6 (3): 38– 43. https://doi.org/10.1145/301153.301168.
Pariser, Eli. 2012. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. London, England ; Penguin Books.
Ravenscraft, Eric. 2021. “The Metaverse Land Rush Is an Illusion.” Wired, December 26, 2021. https://www.wired.com/story/metaverse-land-rush-illusion/.
Rees, Michael. 2002. “Evolving the Browser Towards a Standard User Interface Architecture,” February. https://doi.org/10.1145/563997.563986.
Rimol, Meghan. 2022. “Gartner Predicts 25% of People Will Spend At Least One Hour Per Day in the Metaverse by 2026.” Gartner. February 7, 2022. https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-02-07-gartner-predicts-25- percent-of-people-will-spend-at-least-one-hour-per-day-in-the-metaverse-by-2026.
Ritter, Martin. 2021. “Postphenomenological Method and Technological Things Themselves.” Human Studies 44 (4): 581–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-021- 09603–5.
Rosenberger, Robert, and Peter P. C. C. Verbeek. 2015a. “A Field Guide to Postphenomenology.” Postphenomenological Investigations: Essays on Human- Technology Relations, 9–41.
Rosenberger, and Peter-Paul Verbeek. 2015b. Postphenomenological Investigations: Essays on Human–Technology Relations. Lexington Books.
Routley, Nick. 2017. “Visualizing the Trillion-Fold Increase in Computing Power.” Visual Capitalist. November 4, 2017. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualizing-trillion- fold-increase-computing-power/.
Scholte, Jan Aart. 2008. “Defining Globalisation.” The World Economy 31 (11): 1471–1502. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2007.01019.x.
Shao, Chengcheng, Pik-Mai Hui, Lei Wang, Xinwen Jiang, Alessandro Flammini, Filippo Menczer, and Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia. 2018. “Anatomy of an Online Misinformation Network.” PLoS ONE 13 (4): e0196087–e0196087. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0196087.
Statista. 2021. “Decentraland (MANA) Market Cap 2021.” Statista. January 10, 2021. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1266537/decentraland-market-cap/.
Stroud, Natalie Jomini. 2008. “Media Use and Political Predispositions: Revisiting the Concept of Selective Exposure.” Political Behavior 30 (3): 341–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-007-9050-9.
Vasudevan, Lalitha. 2010. “Literacies in a Participatory, Multimodal World: The Arts and Aesthetics of Web 2.0.” Language Arts 88 (1): 43–50.
Verbeek, Peter P. C. C. 2001. “Don Ihde: The Technological Lifeworld.” American Philosophy of Technology: The Empirical Turn., 119–46.
Verbeek, Peter-Paul. 2005. What Things Do: Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Verbeek, Peter-Paul. 2015. “Beyond Interaction: A Short Introduction to Mediation Theory.” Interactions (New York, N.Y.) 22 (3): 26.
Verbeek, Peter-Paul, Jan Kyrre Berg O. Friis, and Robert P. Crease. 2016. “Toward a Theory of Technological Mediation: A Program for Postphenomenological Research.” In Technoscience and Postphenomenology. Lexington Books. https://www.narcis.nl/publication/RecordID/oai:ris.utwente.nl:publications%2F9f7b5ef c-3cb2–4ed4–9b70–0fb8b716d6f0.
Winkie, Luke. 2020. “Inside Decentraland, the Surreal Second Life for Crypto True Believers.” PC Gamer, March 19, 2020. https://www.pcgamer.com/inside- decentraland-the-surreal-second-life-for-crypto-true-believers/.
Wood, Gavin. 2014. “ĐApps: What Web 3.0 Looks Like.” Insights into a Modern World (blog). April 17, 2014. https://gavwood.com/dappsweb3.html.
Zvyagin, L. 2019. “The Digital Economy and Crypto-Currencies: Challenge or Threat to Traditional Society.” E-Management, no. 2: 80–92. https://doi.org/10.26425/2658- 3445–2018–2–80–92.
