Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems (지능정보연구)

Korea Intelligent Information System Society (한국지능정보시스템학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

How do people verify identity in the Metaverse: Through exploring the user's avatar

메타버스 내 아바타 정체성 확인에 영향을 미치는 요인에 관한 연구

  • Received : 2023.05.20
  • Accepted : 2023.05.31
  • Published : 2023.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The metaverse is a virtual world where individuals engage in social, economic, and cultural activities using avatars, which represent an alternate version of oneself within the virtual realm. While the metaverse has garnered global attention recently, research exploring the identity manifested through avatars within the metaverse remains limited. This study investigates the influence of four IT artifact characteristics related to avatar usage in the metaverse-avatar representation, avatar copresence, avatar profiling, and avatar-space interaction-on perceived avatar identity verification. A survey was conducted with 196 experienced users of the Zepeto platform, and hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling. The analysis results indicate that the use of IT artifacts enabling avatar representation, avatar copresence, and avatar-space interaction has a positive impact on perceived avatar identity verification. This achieved self-verification indirectly influences the satisfaction and subsequent intention to continue using the metaverse. This study contributes to the academic field by empirically verifying the metaverse technological factors that influence the projected identity onto avatars within the metaverse. Furthermore, it is expected to provide effective guidelines for metaverse platform companies in designing and implementing the metaverse.

메타버스는 아바타를 이용하여 사회적, 경제적, 문화적 활동을 하게 되는 가상의 세계이며, 아바타는 가상 세계에서 나를 대신하는 '또 다른 자신'이다. 최근 메타버스는 전 세계적으로 관심을 받고 있으나, 메타버스 내에서 아바타를 통해 구현되는 정체성을 탐구하는 연구는 부족한 실정이다. 본 연구는 메타버스에서 아바타 사용 관련 네 가지 IT 아티팩트 특성(아바타 표현, 아바타 공현존감, 아바타 프로파일링, 아바타-공간 상호작용)이 지각된 아바타 정체성 확인을 매개하여 메타버스 사용에 대한 만족도와 지속 사용 의도에 미치는 영향에 대해 조사하였다. 이를 위해 제페토 플랫폼 유경험자 196명을 대상으로 설문을 실시하였으며 구조방정식 분석을 통해 가설을 검증하였다. 분석 결과에 따르면, 아바타 표현, 아바타 프로파일링, 아바타-공간 상호작용을 가능하게 하는 IT 아티팩트의 사용이 지각된 아바타 정체성 확인에 긍정적인 영향을 주는 것으로 확인되었다. 이렇게 충족된 자기 확인은 지속 사용 의도에 만족도를 거쳐 간접적으로 영향을 주는 것이 확인되었다. 본 연구는 처음으로 메타버스 내 아바타에 투영한 정체성에 영향을 미치는 메타버스 기술 요소들을 검증하였다는 점에서 학문적으로 기여를 한다. 또한 메타버스 플랫폼 기업에게 메타버스를 디자인하고 구현하는 데 있어서 효과적인 가이드를 제공할 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2022년도 연세대학교 연구비의 지원을 받아 수행된 것임(2022-22-0049)

References

  1. 고선영, 정한균, 김종인, 신용태. (2021). 메타버스의 개념과 발전 방향. 정보처리학회지, 28(1), 7-16.
  2. 김가야, 성옥진, 김숙진. (2022). 메타버스 플랫폼 '제페토' 이용자의 가상패션 스타일 선호도 및 구매행태 분석. 패션비즈니스, 26(3), 33-49. https://doi.org/10.12940/JFB.2022.26.3.33
  3. 김우빈, 허희진, 추호정. (2022). 패션 브랜드 메타버스 플래그십 스토어 사례연구-제페토 (ZEPETO) 내 패션 브랜드를 중심으로. 한국의류학회지, 46(3), 545-563.
  4. 김은진. (2022). The creator economy on the metaverse platform. 지능정보연구, 28(4), 275-286. https://doi.org/10.13088/JIIS.2022.28.4.275
  5. 매일경제. (2022). 제페토, 글로벌 가입자 3억명 달성. 2022.03.04. https://www.mk.co.kr/news/it/10240629.
  6. 박아름, 이경전. (2014). Critical success factor of noble payment system: multiple case studies. 지능정보연구, 20(4), 59-87. https://doi.org/10.13088/JIIS.2014.20.4.59
  7. 박혜선, 히라야마 다카쯔쿠, 마쯔야마 다카시. (2010). 사용자의 잠재적 흥미를 인식하기 위한 주시 모방 모델 기반의 지능형 정보 시스템. 지능정보연구, 16(3), 37-54.
  8. 손강민, 이범렬, 심광현, 양광호. (2006). 웹 2.0과 온라인 게임이 만드는 매트릭스 월드: 메타버스. ETRI CEO Information, 47(4).
  9. 송원철, 정동훈. (2021). 메타버스 해석과 합리적 개념화. 정보화정책, 28(3), 3-22. https://doi.org/10.22693/NIAIP.2021.28.3.003
  10. Samsung Securities. (2022, December 2) "메타버스, XR로 꽃피우다", https://www.samsungpop.com/common.do?cmd=down&saveKey=research.pdf&fileName=2020/2022020308315241K_02_02.pdf&contentType=application/pdf
  11. Acceleration Studies Foundation. (2007). Metaverse roadmap: Pathway to the 3D web. Acceleration Studies Foundation.
  12. Bailenson, J. N., & Yee, N. (2005). Digital Chameleons: Automatic assimilation of nonverbal gestures in immersive virtual environments. Psychological Science, 16, 814-819.
  13. Balsamo, A. (2000). The virtual body in cyberspace, in The cybercultures, Reader, D. Bell and B. M. Kennedy (eds.), London: Routledge, 489-503.
  14. Bessiere, K., Seay, A. F. & Kiesler, S. (2007). The ideal elf: Identity exploration in World of Warcraft. Cyberpsychology & behavior, 10(4), 530-535. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.9994
  15. Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS quarterly, 351-370.
  16. Brown, S. A., Thatcher, S. M. & Wilson, D. W. (2016). Measurement and outcomes of identity communication in virtual teams. In 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) 888-897.
  17. Bullingham, L. & Vasconcelos, A. C. (2013). 'The presentation of self in the online world': Goffman and the study of online identities. Journal of information science, 39(1), 101-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551512470051
  18. Burke, P. J. & Stets, J. E. (1999). Trust and commitment through self-verification. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62(4), 347-360.
  19. Chea, S. & Luo, M. M. (2008). Post-adoption behaviors of e-service customers: The interplay of cognition and emotion. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 12(3), 29-56. https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC1086-4415120303
  20. Chen, R. (2013). Living a private life in public social networks: An exploration of member self-disclosure. Decision support systems, 55(3), 661-668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.12.003
  21. Cheung, C. M., Lee, M. K. & Lee, Z. W. (2013). Understanding the continuance intention of knowledge sharing in online communities of practice through the post-knowledge-sharing evaluation processes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(7), 1357-1374. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22854
  22. Chou, S. W. (2010). Why do members contribute knowledge to online communities?. Online Information Review, 34(6), 829-854. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521011099360
  23. Chou, S. W. & Lu, G. Y. (2021). Content creation intention in digital participation based on identity management on Twitch. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1-18.
  24. Cui, J., Aghajan, Y., Lacroix, J., Halteren, A. V., & Aghajan, H. (2009). Exercising at home: Real-time interaction and experience sharing using avatars. Entertainment Computing, 1, 63-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2009.09.003
  25. Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Baabdullah, A. M., Ribeiro-Navarrete, S., Giannakis, M., Al-Debei, M. M., Dennehy, D., Metri, B., Buhalis, D., Cheung, C. M. & Conboy, K. (2022). Metaverse beyond the hype: Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 66, 102542.
  26. Ducheneaut, N., Wen, M. H., Yee, N. & Wadley, G. (2009). Body and mind: a study of avatar personalization in three virtual worlds. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 1151-1160.
  27. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
  28. Galanxhi, H., & Nah, F. (2007). Deception in cyberspace: A comparison of text-only vs. avatar-supported medium. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(9), 770-783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2007.04.005
  29. Gao, W., Liu, Z. & Li, J. (2017). How does social presence influence SNS addiction? A belongingness theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 347-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.002
  30. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51-90. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519
  31. Goel, L., Johnson, N. A., Junglas, I., & Ives, B. (2011). From space to place: Predicting users' intentions to return to virtual worlds. MIS Quarterly, 35(3), 749-771. https://doi.org/10.2307/23042807
  32. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life: Selections. in The production of reality: Essays and readings on social interaction, J. O'Brien (eds.) 262-271.
  33. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M. & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European business review, 31(1), 2-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
  34. Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. Wiley, New York
  35. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M. & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
  36. Hooi, R. & Cho, H. (2017). Virtual world continuance intention. Telematics and Informatics, 34(8), 1454-1464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.06.009
  37. Hung, S. W., Chang, C. W. & Ma, Y. C. (2021). A new reality: Exploring continuance intention to use mobile augmented reality for entertainment purposes. Technology in Society, 67, 101757.
  38. Iivari, J. (2013). Perceived sociability of use and individual use of social networking sites - A field study of Facebook use in the Arctic. Open Journal of Information Systems, 1(1), 23-53.
  39. Ipsos. (2022 December 2), What The Future: Identity. https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/WhatThe-Future-Identity.pdf
  40. Jones, E. E. & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions the attribution process in person perception. Advances in experimental social psychology, 2, 219-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60107-0
  41. Jordan, T. (1999). Cyberpower: The culture and politics of cyberspace and of the Internet, London: Routledge.
  42. JP Morgan (2022 December 2). Opportunities in the metaverse. https://www.jpmorgan.com/ content/dam/jpm/treasury-services/documents/ opportunities-in-the-metaverse.pdf.
  43. Jung, Y. (2011). Understanding the role of sense of presence and perceived autonomy in users' continued use of social virtual worlds. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 16(4), 492-510. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01540.x
  44. Kafai, Y. B., Fields, D. Α., & Cook, M. (2007). Your second selves: Avatar designs and identity play in a teen virtual world, Proceeding of the Digital Games Research Association (DiGRA), Tokyo, Japan, September (available online at http://www.gse.upenn.edu/~kafai/paper/whyvil le_pdfs/ DIGRA07_avatar.pdf).
  45. Kang H. S., & Yang, H. D. (2006). The visual characteristics of avatars in computer-mediated communication: Comparison of Internet relay chat and instant messenger as of 2003. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64, pp. 1173-1183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.07.003
  46. Khalifa, M. & Shen, N. (2004). System design effects on social presence and telepresence in virtual communities.
  47. Kim, J. Y., Son, S. J., Lee, J. E., Kim, J. H. & Jung, I. K. (2009). The effects of body image satisfaction on obesity stress, weight control attitudes, and eating disorders among female junior high school students. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 47(4), 49-59.
  48. Kim, H. W., Chan, H. C. & Kankanhalli, A. (2012). What motivates people to purchase digital items on virtual community websites? The desire for online self-presentation. Information systems research, 23(4), 1232-1245.
  49. Ko, D. W. & Park, J. (2020). I am you, you are me: game character congruence with the ideal self. Internet Research, 31(2), 613-634. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-05-2020-0294
  50. Koufaris, M. (2002). Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online consumer behavior. Information Systems Research, 13(2), 205-223. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.2.205.83
  51. Kuznetcova, I., Teeple, J., & Glassman, M. (2018). The dialectic of the avatar-developing in-world identities in second life. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds, 10(1), 59-71. https://doi.org/10.1386/jgvw.10.1.59_1
  52. Lee, L. H., Braud, T., Zhou, P., Wang, L., Xu, D., Lin, Z., Kumar, A., Bermejo, C. & Hui, P., (2021). All one needs to know about metaverse: A complete survey on technological singularity, virtual ecosystem, and research agenda. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.05352.
  53. Li, H., Liu, Y., Xu, X., Heikkila, J. & van der Heijden, H. (2015). Modeling hedonic is continuance through the uses and gratifications theory: An empirical study in online games. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 261-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.053
  54. Lin, H., & Wang, H. (2014). Avatar creation in virtual worlds: Behaviors and motivations. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 213-218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.005
  55. Loewen, M. G. H., Burris, C. T., & Nacke, L. E. (2021). Me, myself, and not-I: Self-discrepancy type predicts avatar creation style. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 1902.
  56. Loker, S., Ashdown, S., & Schoenfelder, K. (2005). Size-specific analysis of body scan data to improve apparel fit. Journal of Textile and Apparel, Technology and Management, 4(3), 1-15.
  57. Ma, M., & Agarwal, R. (2007). Through a glass darkly: Information technology design, identity verification, and knowledge contribution in online communities. Information Systems Research, 18(1), 42-67. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1070.0113
  58. Mantymaki, M. & Merikivi, J. (2010). January. Investigating the drivers of the continuous use of social virtual worlds. 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (IEEE 2010), 1-10.
  59. Messinger, P. R., Ge, X., Smirnov, K., Stroulia, E. & Lyons, K. (2019). Reflections of the extended self: Visual self-representation in avatar-mediated environments. Journal of Business Research, 100, 531-546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.12.020
  60. Milligan, M. J. (1998). Interactional past and present: the social construction of place attachment, Symbolic Interaction, 21(1), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1998.21.1.1
  61. Min, J., Yoo, Y., Hah, H. & Lee, H. (2020). Social network technology (SNT) as a tool and a social actor: from self-verification to SNT use. Internet Research.
  62. Mozumder, M. A. I., Sheeraz, M. M., Athar, A., Aich, S. & Kim, H. C. (2022). February. Overview: technology roadmap of the future trend of metaverse based on IoT, blockchain, AI technique, and medical domain metaverse activity. 24th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT 2022), 256-261.
  63. Nitzl, C., Roldan, J. L., & Cepeda, G. (2016). Mediation analysis in partial least squares path modeling: helping researchers discuss more sophisticated models. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(9), 1849-1864. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-0302
  64. O'Brien, L & Murnane, J. (2009). An investigation into how avatar appearance can affect interactions in a virtual world. International Journal of Social and Humanistic Computing, 1(2), 192-202. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSHC.2009.031007
  65. Ogara, S. O., Koh, C. E. & Prybutok, V. R. (2014). Investigating factors affecting social presence and user satisfaction with mobile instant messaging. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 453-459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.064
  66. Park, S. M. & Kim, Y. G. (2022). A Metaverse: Taxonomy, components, applications, and open challenges. Ieee Access, 10, 4209-4251. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3140175
  67. Petter, S., Straub, D. & Rai, A. (2007). Specifying formative constructs in information systems research. MIS quarterly, 623-656.
  68. Ray, S., Kim, S. S. & Morris, J. G. (2014). The central role of engagement in online communities. Information Systems Research, 25(3), 528-546. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2014.0525
  69. Ruyter, D. D., & J. Conroy. (2002). The formation of identity: The importance of ideals. Oxford Review of Education, 28(4), 509-522.
  70. Schau, J. H., & Gilly, M. C. (2003). We are what we post? Self-presentation in personal web space. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 385-404. https://doi.org/10.1086/378616
  71. Schlenker, B. R. (2003). Self-presentation. M. R. Leary, J. P. Tangney,eds.Handbook of Self and Identity. Guilford Press, New York, 492-518.
  72. Schlenker, B. R. (2003). Self-presentation. In M. R. Leary and J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 492-518). New York: Guilford.
  73. Shen, B., Tan, W., Guo, J., Zhao, L. & Qin, P. (2021). How to promote user purchase in metaverse? A systematic literature review on consumer behavior research and virtual commerce application design. Applied Sciences, 11(23), 11087.
  74. Shiau, W. L. & Huang, L. C. (2022). Scale development for analyzing the fit of real and virtual world integration: an example of Pokemon Go. Information Technology & People, 36(2), 500-531. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-11-2020-0793
  75. Slater, M., Sadagic, A., & Schroeder, R. (2000). Small-group behavior in a virtual and real environment: A comparative study. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 9(1), 37-51. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474600566600
  76. Smart, J. M., Cascio, J. & Paffendorf, J. (2007). Metaverse roadmap overview. Acceleration Studies Foundation, https://www.metaverseroadmap.org/
  77. Statista. (2022, December 2). What things would you do in the metaverse but never in real life?. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1288731/things-done-only-metaverse/
  78. Statista. (2022, December 2). Share of adults in the United States joining or considering joining the metaverse for various reasons as of December 2021. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1288048/united-states-adults-reasons-for-joining-themetaverse/.
  79. Suh, K., Kim, H., & Suh, E. K. (2011). What if your avatar looks like you? Dual-congruity perspective for avatar use. MIS Quarterly, 35(3), 711-729. https://doi.org/10.2307/23042805
  80. Swann Jr., W. B., & Read, S. J. (1981). Acquiring self knowledge: The search for feedback that fits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1119-1128. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.6.1119
  81. Swann, W. B., Pelham, B. W., & Krull, D. S. (1989). Agreeable fancy or disagreeable truth? Reconciling self-enhancement and self verification. Journal of Personality Social Psychology, 57(5), 782-791. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.782
  82. Swann, W. B. Jr. & Read, S. J. (1981), Self-verification processes: how we sustain our self-conception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 351-372. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(81)90043-3
  83. Swann, W. B., Milton, L. P. & Polzer, J. T. (2000). Should we create a niche or fall in line? Identity negotiation and small group effectiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(2), 238-50. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.2.238
  84. Swann, W. B., Polzer, J. T., Seyle, D. C. & Ko, S. J. (2004). Finding value in diversity: verification of personal and social self-view in diverse groups. Academic Management Review, 29(1), 9-27. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159006
  85. Talaifar, S. & Swann, W. B. (2020). Self-verification theory. Encyclopedia of personality and individual differences, 4813-4821.
  86. Tan, W. K. & Teo, H. H. (2011). Impact of blog design features on blogging satisfaction: an impression management perspective. International Conference on Online Communities and Social Computing, 130-139.
  87. Taylor, T. (1999). Life in Virtual Worlds: Plural existence, multimodalities, and other online research challenges. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 436-449. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027649921955362
  88. Teng, C. I. (2017). Impact of avatar identification on online gamer loyalty: Perspectives of social identity and social capital theories. International Journal of Information Management, 37(6), 601-610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.06.006
  89. The Economist. (2022, December 2). Metaverse is coming. Technology quarterly, https://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2020/10/01/the-metaverse-is-coming?utm_medium=cpc.adword.pd&utm_source=google&ppccampaignID=18156330227&ppcadID=&utm_campaign=a.22brand_pmax&utm_content=conversion.directresponse.anonymous&gclid=Cj0KCQjw6cKiBhD5ARIsAKXUdyausInGDjdXXMUtf2Kjjg2E3NJAFsek81Y_py-H2MIUCb1c0DWFZC8aAkmOEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds
  90. Triberti, S., Durosini, I., Aschieri, F., Villani, D. & Riva, G. (2017). Changing avatars, changing selves? The influence of social and contextual expectations on digital rendition of identity. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 20(8), 501-507. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0424
  91. Turkle, S. (1995). Ghosts in the machine. The sciences, 35(6), 36-39. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2326-1951.1995.tb03214.x
  92. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS quarterly, 157-178.
  93. Wilson, D. W., Brown, S. A. & Thatcher, S. M. (2015). Examining predictors and outcomes of identity communication in virtual teams. ECIS.
  94. Wired. (2021 February 1). The Metaverse is coming. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/metaverse.
  95. Wu, J. H., Wang, S. C. & Tsai, H. H. (2010). Falling in love with online games: The uses and gratifications perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1862-1871.
  96. Wynn, E., & Katz, J. E. (1997). Hyperbole over cyberspace: Self presentation and social boundaries in Internet home pages and discourse. Information Society, 13(4), 297-327.
  97. Yee, N., Bailenson, J., Urbanek, M., Chang, F., & Merget, D. (2007). The unbearable likeness of being digital: The persistence of nonverbal social norms in online virtual environments. Cyber Psychology and Behavior, 10(1), 115-121. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9984
  98. Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S. & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1816-1836.
  99. Zhou, Z., Fang, Y., Vogel, D. R., Jin, X. L. & Zhang, X. (2012). Attracted to or locked in? Predicting continuance intention in social virtual world services. Journal of management information systems, 29(1), 273-306.