Papers43 - Open Education Europa

Transcripción

July 2015
g
n
i
n
r
a
e
L
e ers
p
a
P
3
4
Applied Games and Gamification –
Drivers for Change
Editorial
Applied Games and Gamification – Drivers for Change
In-depth
Computerized Simulations of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and Attitude Change: PeaceMaker vs. Global Conflicts
http://openeducationeuropa.eu/en/article/Applied-Games-and-Gamification-Drivers-for-Change_In-Depth_43-1
Collaborative Digital Games as Mediation Tool to Foster Intercultural Integration in Primary Dutch Schools
A Room With a Green View – Using and Creating Games for Sustainability Education
To Game or not to Game – a pilot study on the use of gamification for team allocation in entrepreneurship education
From the field
An Experiment to Assess Students’ Engagement in a Gamified Social Learning Environment
http://openeducationeuropa.eu/en/article/Applied-Games-and-Gamification-Drivers-for-Change_From%20Field_43-5
What really works in gamification? Short answer: we don’t know, so let’s start thinking like experimenters.
The JamToday Network
Well-being Focused Gaming™: Individualized Engagement with Plush Toys, Avatars, and Personal Robots
Design paper
Design Principles for Social Impact Games
http://openeducationeuropa.eu/en/article/Applied-Games-and-Gamification-Drivers-for-Change_Design_Paper_43-9
eLearning Papers is a digital publication on eLearning by openeducationeuropa.eu, a portal created by the
European Commission to promote the use of ICT in education and training. Edited by P.A.U. Education, S.L..
E-mail: editorialteam[at]openeducationeuropa[dot]eu, ISSN 1887-1542
The texts published in this journal, unless otherwise indicated, are subject to a Creative Commons AttributionNoncommercial-NoDerivativeWorks 3.0 Unported licence. They may be copied, distributed and broadcast provided
that the author and the e-journal that publishes them, eLearning Papers, are cited. Commercial use and derivative
works are not permitted. The full licence can be consulted on http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
An initiative
of the
Editorial
Applied Games and Gamification –
Drivers for Change
In this issue of eLearningPapers we explore different approaches and models that spark
creative potential of people and bring together interdisciplinary teams to collaborate and
produce applied games and gamified apps. This issue is a collaboration with the ECGBL
mini track on the same theme (Pivec & Torrent, 2015).
The selected papers explore the basic requirements and success factors for applied games
and gamified approaches. We open with Kampf, who compares two games designed to
promote a better understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is followed by De la
Hera et al., who consider the potential of games for multicultural education. Both of these
papers illustrate the use of existing commercial games for education with the purpose of
driving change in perception, understanding and behaviour. By contrast, Coakley et al.
describe the design and development of a purpose built game and the associated pedagogy
aimed at promoting sustainable living; Green Games (Green Games, 2015) is another EU
funded project to develop skills and competences and areas of food, waste water and energy
management in tourism and hospitality area. The next three papers focus on gamification.
Basaiawmoit et al. demonstrate the value of gamification for allocating students to teams a hard problem in collaborative learning. Simões et al. consider the impact of gamification
on engagement in an online course. Lieberoth asks ‘what really works in gamification’
and comes up with some provocative answers. Crombie presents the Jam Today network
(JamToday, 2015), an initiative of 25 European Universities, Innovation Centers, Learning
Labs and Business Incubators financed by the EU ICT PSP programme. In 48 hour game
jams Jam Today activates creative potential of different stakeholders to produce games for
learning and resources for teachers on themes like eSkills, Health & Wellbeing and Maths.
Libin presents examples of the therapeutic potential of playful interaction for the elderly.
We conclude with Kayali et al., who offer design guidance for creating social impact games.
These papers demonstrate the potential of applied games and gamified approaches as
drivers of change in various organizations, in the field of education as well as in the society
as whole.
REFERENCES:
Green Games (2015). URL: http://greengamesproject.com/, [20.05.15].
JamToday (2015). URL: http://www.jamtoday.eu/, accessed 19.05.15
Pivec, M. (Ed.) (2014): Serious Game Design Summer School. FH JOANNEUM 2014.
Pivec, M.;Torrent, J. (2015), ECGBL Conference Mini track on Applied Games and Gamification
– Drivers for Change, http://academic-conferences.org/pdfs/ECGBL/ECGBL_2015-cfp_MTPivec_Torrent.pdf accessed: 24.07.15
SGDSS14 (2014). URL: http://sgdss14.engagelearning.eu/, accessed: 04.03.15
ng
i
n
r
eLeaers 3
4
Pap
Maja Pivec, Guest Editor, FH JOANNEUM, University of Applied Sciences, Graz (Austria)
Yishay Mor, eLearning Papers, Editor in Chief
Tapio Koskinen, eLearning Papers, Director of the Editorial Board
eLearning Papers • ISSN: 1887-1542 • www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/elearning_papers
n.º 43 • July 2015
2
In-depth
Computerized Simulations of the Israeli-Palestinian
Conflict and Attitude Change: PeaceMaker vs. Global
Conflicts
Authors
Ronit Kampf
[email protected]
Tel Aviv University Ph.D.
Tel Aviv, Israel
Two cross-cultural experimental studies examined the effects of PeaceMaker (PM) and
Global Conflicts (GC) on attitude change regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. PM
and GC are role-playing computerized simulations of this conflict. 248 undergraduate
students from Turkey, Israel, Palestine and the US participated in the two studies.
They filled in questionnaires measuring attitudes before and after playing the games.
Results suggested that participants playing GC became more impartial toward the
2012 Gaza operation than those playing PM. Second, participants playing GC became
more impartial regarding long lasting historical issues in the conflict (e.g., Jerusalem,
settlements, refugees) compared to those playing PM. Finally, stronger effects were
found in attitude change for secondary/third parties (i.e., Turks and Americans)
compared to directly involved parties (i.e., Israeli-Jews and Palestinians). The results
show that computerized simulations are useful as part of peace education training, but
the game characteristics may be crucial in determining whether the players gain the
perspective of both sides or not.
“I don’t know what an Israeli of my age thinks about the situation… This game opened my
mind to see other viewpoints concerning the conflict.’’ (Palestinian participant)
Tags
PeaceMaker, Global
Conflicts, Israeli-Palestinian
Conflict, Peace Education,
Computerized Simulations
“I have a definite attitude toward the “other side”….that`s interesting. I can`t say that my
views have changed completely but this game has raised many questions…It is impossible to
regard all Palestinians as one and the same, I suppose….once when I heard Arabs mentioned
I became afraid, but now I remember the enjoyable game …I have a dilemma.” (Israeli-Jewish
participant)
1. Introduction
Intractable inter-group conflicts are highly resistant to resolution, involve well-entrenched
hostile perceptions of the out-group, drag on for an extended period of time, and are prone
to escalation over and over again (Bar-Tal, 2013; Coleman 2000; Kriesberg, Northrup and
Thorson, 1989). In such conflicts, hostile attitudes and images of the enemy are passed on
from one generation to the next with the learning of the conflict narratives embedded in
various socialization agents. Conflict narratives often promote an ethnocentric view of past
or present events and people on the two sides hardly communicate with each other directly
(Bar-Tal, 1997).
Peace education is one of the key theories of change and practical tools that have been
developed by conflict resolution and political psychology disciplines to change attitudes
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
3
In-depth
and reframe conflict narratives in order to resolve conflicts
(Salomon, 2008; Salomon and Cairns, 2009). Peace education
often has the goals of reducing inter-group prejudice and
negative stereotyping, promoting inter-group empathy and
understanding, building trust, and creating awareness about
the root causes of the conflict and about non-violence.
Promoting and facilitating inter-group contact and educating the
participants on various aspects of conflicts and peace-building
are among the common activities used in peace education
initiatives in order to attain these goals (Salomon, 2008).
The prevalence of the Internet in the last two decades has
added a new dimension to peace education activities, and
provided a new set of tools intended to reduce inter-group
conflict. Web based role-playing games, computer chat rooms
and social media began to be used as another potential venue
to educate members of adversarial groups about one another.
These new tools can be an alternative medium to accomplish
the goals of peace education, as articulated by Salomon (2008).
With the help of computer mediated games and forums it may
be that people can learn to legitimate the other’s collective
narrative and see events through both lenses; critically examine
their in-group’s contribution to the conflict and challenge their
perception of sole victimhood; and perhaps develop empathy
in order to appreciate the other’s pain and loss and generate
mutual humanization.
The present studies examined the use and effectiveness of
technology in educating about peace building. There is very
little research on this question, and very few assessments have
involved cross-cultural experimental studies (e.g., Bhappu et al,
2009; Ebner, 2008; Matz and Ebner, 2010). Two cross-cultural
experiments were conducted using PeaceMaker (PM) and Global
Conflicts (GC) which are role-playing computerized simulations
of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (Buch and Egenfeldt-Nielsen,
2007; Burak, Keylor and Sweeney, 2005). The studies were
specifically interested in the following question: Will there be
differences in attitude change between GC and PM? Attitude
change is considered as one of the most important outcomes
in peace building activities as it is often regarded as the prerequisite of developing empathy toward the “other” (Bar-Tal,
1997; 2013; Maoz and McCauley, 2005; Suleiman, 2004).
Compared to traditional methods (e.g., face-to-face encounters),
digital methods such as GC and PM were found to be more
successful as tools for teaching about the “other” for youth,
particularly in conflictual contexts, because playful activities
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
can reduce the tension and charged atmosphere around this
issue (Weiss, Stock, Fondazione, Eisikovitz, & Koren, 2011). In
addition, play is naturally conducive to learning, focusing on
learning by doing and learning by experiencing, which were
found preferable as inter-group intervention methods (Maoz,
2011; Salomon, 2008). Finally, young people are native to
the online world, so they speak the digital language fluently
(Brenner & Smith, 2013; Palfrey & Gasser, 2008). Hence, young
people may prefer new media technologies as a source of
information about political issues, and consume online content
more efficiently (Gasser, Cortesi, Malik, & Lee, 2012).
In recent years, specific computer games have been
manufactured in order to teach students about different skills
pertaining to conflicts (see http://www.gamesforchange.org/
game_categories/conflict/). Still only few studies have been
undertaken on their effectiveness. Recently, Gonzalez, Saner,
& Eisenberg (2012), Cuhadar & Kampf (2014) and Kampf &
Cuhadar (in press) conducted experimental studies with PM
and GC to find out whether computer games can generate new
learning about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They found that
the two games were effective in teaching about this conflict,
showing that it is possible to use computer-based simulations
as a peace education tool in order to teach young people a less
stereotypical and less ethnocentric view of the conflict.
The present studies differ from the abovementioned ones for
a few key reasons. First, they provide empirical evidence for
the effectiveness of GC compared to PM in motivating learning
and teaching skills required for peace building. Second, as
mentioned earlier, previous studies have already indicated
GC’s and PM’s effectiveness as a pedagogical tool in teaching
conflict assessment and resolution (e.g., Buch & EgenfeldtNielsen, 2007; Gonzalez et al., 2012; Raphael et al., 2012), but
they mainly used self-reporting (e.g., “how much do you think
you learned from the game?”) and game score as measures of
learning outcomes, while the present studies use measures of
attitude change. Third, the present studies use two measures
for assessing attitudes and perspective taking in the conflict.
The first one examines long lasting historical issues in the
conflict (e.g., Jerusalem, settlements, refugees), while the
second focuses on events that were current at the time the
study was conducted, receiving extensive media coverage and
public debate (e.g., the Gaza operation in November 2012).
Finally, the present studies add a cross-cultural assessment
to the two games by having students from different cultural
n.º 43 • July 2015
4
In-depth
and political backgrounds. The two studies were conducted
with Israeli-Jewish, Palestinian, American, and Turkish
undergraduate students, assessing the effectiveness of the
games by differentiating between direct parties to the conflict
(i.e., Israeli-Jews and Palestinians) and secondary/third parties
(i.e., Turks and Americans), an issue that has hardly been
examined in the context of intractable conflicts like the IsraeliPalestinian situation. The studies expect that game effects with
regard to attitude change will be stronger for secondary/third
parties as opposed to directly involved parties.
Attitude change can occur through cognitive, affective, or
behavioural processes, with not all three required at the same
time (Eagly & Chaiken, 1998, p. 272). Until recently, research on
attitude change has focused more on cognitive processes such
as the link between attitude consistency and attitude change
(Eagly & Chaiken, 1998). An important finding has been that
people holding more extreme attitudes (e.g., direct parties
to the conflict) are more likely to resist change through social
influence (Eagly & Chaiken, 1998, p. 287). When attitudes are
linked to self-defining values and reference groups, which is
often the case in intractable conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian
situation, they are very resistant to change. Therefore,
secondary/third may have less salient and weaker attitudes
concerning the conflict, as opposed to directly involved parties
who have more salient attitudes which are more resistant to
change (Eagly & Chaiken, 1998).
As mentioned earlier, both GC and PM are role-playing
computerized simulations of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
which are seen as an especially preferable method for generating
new insight, empathy, and perspective taking (Baylouny, 2009;
Williams, 2006).Yet there are some key differences between the
two games which may impact their learning outcomes. First,
recent studies have indicated that role-playing computer games
that involve winning such as PM (unlike GC) enhance positive
learning outcomes, because they are highly motivating, capture
the learners’ attention and engage the players in the learning
activity (e.g., Bogost, 2007; Peng, Lee and Heeter, 2010). Second,
PM focuses on the perspectives of the Israeli Prime Minister and
the Palestinian President on the Middle Eastern situation, while
GC focuses on the hardships experienced by both Israeli soldiers
and Palestinian people in the conflict. The latter may provide
a more personal and human perspective on the situation than
the former. Therefore, young people like those participating in
the present studies may find it easier to identify and empathize
with, resulting in more positive effects on attitude change
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
(Bar-Tal, Halpern and Pliskin, in press; Schori-Eyal, Halperin
and Bar-Tal, in press). Finally, GC may be a more immersive
game environment than PM. The immersion effect creates an
environment in which the players submerge themselves and
progressively increase their attention and concentration in
this environment, resulting in more positive effects on attitude
change (Raphael et al, 2012; Yan and Cordry, 2011).
1.1. The PeaceMaker game
PM is a computer game inspired by historical real-world events
(http://www.peacemakergame.com/). A player can assume the
role of the Israeli Prime Minister or of the Palestinian President
and take various decisions with the aim of satisfying Israeli and
Palestinian constituents. PM developed by ImpactGames in
the US with the help of advisors in Israel, Palestine and the US
(Burak et al., 2005).
PM can be played in English, Hebrew, and Arabic. The player can
select between calm, tense, or violent conflict levels, differing
in the frequency of events that appear on the screen and are
beyond her control. In order to deal with these events a player
can select actions pertaining to three main categories: security,
political and construction, each branching into a variety of subcategories such as checkpoints and speeches.
Players accumulate points for both sides according to the actions
taken in the game. The scores, calculated by a function within
the game, are related to polls registering the level of satisfaction
of different nations, of political groups within the country and
around the world in response to the leader’s actions. In order
to resolve the conflict in the game, scores for both Israeli and
Palestinian sides must reach 100 points each. If either score
drops below -50, the player loses the game. Changes in the
scores were determined by the developers, based on a series of
tests carried out with international experts.
1.2. The Global Conflicts game
GC is an award-winning educational game developed by Serious
Games Interactive in Denmark (http://globalconflicts.eu/). The
game environment is based on real-life accounts reported to
human rights organizations and news agencies by victims and
witnesses, as well as various other sources.
The game consists of several different scenarios, each putting
the player in a different context and requiring the employment
of different skills. This study selected the one about the Israeli-
n.º 43 • July 2015
5
In-depth
Palestinian conflict, illustrating the tensions between the two
sides in a checkpoint scenario. The player is represented by
the avatar of a Western reporter who arrives in Jerusalem. Her
task is to write for one of the following newspapers: Israeli,
Palestinian, or Western. The player is expected to produce a
news report geared to the audience of one of these newspapers
based on the interviews she conducts with various characters at
the checkpoint. At the end of the game, the player chooses some
of the quotes she collected throughout the interviews, including
them in her final news report on which she is evaluated. This
evaluation indicates whether the report is placed in the front
pages of the newspaper or in the back, whether the quotes
reflect important pieces of information about the conflict, and
whether these quotes are a good fit for the newspaper selected
for the assignment.
The player is challenged to keep her work objective while
gathering important information to be used in the news report.
In the meantime, the player experiences the developments in
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and learns about the issues that
are important to this conflict. The student has to form an opinion
based upon her own actions and after meeting characters who
represent different attitudes towards the conflict despite the
fact that she writes for a specific newspaper.
2. Research hypotheses
H1: Participants playing GC will become more impartial toward
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict than those playing PM.
H2: Stronger effects will be found in attitude change for
secondary/third parties compared to directly involved parties.
3. Methodology
3.1. Participants
148 undergraduate students of political science participated
in the PM study, including 38 Turkish students from Bilkent
University, 50 Israeli-Jewish students from Tel Aviv University,
30 American students from Wichita State University and 30
Palestinian students from Al-Quds University. The four groups
did not differ in terms of gender (X2 (3, 144) =.40, p=.58). Israeli
students of Jewish origin were older (M = 25.12 SD =1.32) than
American students (M = 22.7 SD =2.39), Turkish students (M =
21.42 SD =1.59) and Palestinian students (M = 21.1 SD =1.17),
F(3, 144) =44.57, p=.0001. In general, Israeli students are older
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
than the latter three groups due to service of 3-4 years in the
army before studying at university.
140 undergraduate students of communication and political
science participated in the GC study, including 30 Turkish
students from Bilkent University, 40 Israeli-Jewish students from
Tel Aviv University, 40 American students from Wichita State
University and 30 Palestinian students from Al-Quds University.
The four groups did not differ in terms of gender (X2 (3, 136)
=.37, p=.76). Israeli students of Jewish origin were older (M =
25.12 SD =1.32) than American students (M = 22.04 SD =4.45),
Turkish students (M = 22.02 SD =1.94) and Palestinian students
(M = 21.17 SD =1.44), F(3, 163) =44.57, p=.0001.
The studies also included 30 Israeli-Jewish students of
communication from Tel Aviv University who did not play
the games (control group) (11 of whom were males), and 30
Palestinian students of political science from Al-Quds University
who did not play them (control group) (11 of whom were males).
3.2. Design and procedure
The data on the PM study were collected in Spring 2013 and the
data on the GC study were collected in Spring/Summer 2013.
No major event happened between the data collection of the
two studies that could bias the results.
Both studies were part of classes in political science and conflict
resolution, took up to three hours and included four parts.
First, participants were introduced to the game and played a
short demo. Second, they filled in a short questionnaire. Third,
participants played the game. In the PM study, they played
the Israeli role and the Palestinian role in random order at the
calm conflict level (i.e., low frequency of inciting incidents),
because the study examined learning outcomes rather than
game performance, which focuses on how well the player deals
with high frequencies of inciting incidents. In the GC study,
the participants were assigned to represent the Israeli or the
Palestinian newspaper. The GC game provides both Israeli and
Palestinian perspectives on the conflict no matter which role
was assumed, while the PM game provides either the Israeli
or the Palestinian perspective depending on the role played.
Therefore, participants played both Israeli and Palestinian
roles in the PM study in random order and either the Israeli or
the Palestinian role in the GC study. Finally, after playing the
game, the participants again filled in a short questionnaire.
The questionnaires used before and after playing the game
were almost identical in content with the exception of a few
n.º 43 • July 2015
6
In-depth
additional questions in the post-questionnaire deliberating
participants’ experience with the game.
The control condition was conducted in Spring/Summer
2013 as part of classes dealing with digital natives and news
consumption (not related to the conflict). It included three
parts and took up to three hours. First, participants filled in
a short questionnaire. Then they were given a lecture about
digital natives and news consumption. Finally, they again filled
in a short questionnaire. The two questionnaires were similar
to those used in the experimental condition (besides questions
deliberating participants’ experience with the game).
4. Results
4.1 Attitudes toward key issues in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
Global Conflicts vs. PeaceMaker
The interaction between time and game type was significant
(F(1,247)=32.13, p<.0001, η2= .26). Participants who played GC
got closer to thinking that both Israelis and Palestinians were
equally right regarding key issues in the conflict after playing
the game (M=2.28 SD=1.18 M=3.08 SD=1.04), unlike those who
played PM (M=2.48 SD=.79 M=2.65 SD=.81) (Figure 1).
3.3. Measures
The studies used two measures for assessing attitudes in the
conflict. The first one examined ‘how right is each side’ on
key issues in the conflict, including water, refugees, borders,
settlements, Jerusalem, and security, using the following scale:
1. Palestinians are absolutely right, 2. Palestinians are somewhat
right, 3. Both sides are equally right, 4. Israelis are somewhat
right, and 5. Israelis are absolutely right. After conducting a
factor analysis, the average of answers given on the six key
issues was used as a measure of attitude change about key
issues in the conflict before and after playing the game.
The second measure examined attitudes toward the Gaza
operation by asking ‘how right is each side’ on the Gaza
operation using the abovementioned scale. The studies referred
to the Operation Pillar of Cloud in November 2012. This measure
was used, because the Gaza operation was a recent event at the
time when the study was conducted, receiving extensive media
coverage and public debate, as opposed to the abovementioned
measure focusing on long lasting historical issues in the conflict.
No significant change was found in attitudes regarding key issues
in the conflict in the control group of Israeli-Jewish students and
of Palestinian students.
4.2. Attitudes toward the Gaza Operation: Global
Conflicts vs. PeaceMaker
The interaction between time and game type was significant
(F(1,247)=15.31, p<.0001, η2= .14). Participants who played GC
got closer to thinking that both Israelis and Palestinians were
equally right regarding the Gaza operation after playing the
game (M=2.21 SD=1.53 M=3.11 SD=1.33), unlike those who
played PM (M=2.52 SD=1.34 M=2.79 SD=1.29)(Figure 2).
3.4. Statistical procedures
To test the research questions, a three-way ANOVA was
conducted with game type (GC or PM) and nationality (Israeli,
Palestinian, American or Turkish) as between-subjects factors
and time (pre- and post-game) as a within-subjects factor. This
procedure investigated the effect of playing the GC or PM games
on attitude change at two separate time points: pre- and postgame intervention. The important point with this study design
is that the same participants are measured twice on the same
dependent variable. Therefore, this test detects any overall
differences between related means.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
7
In-depth
No significant change was found in attitudes regarding the Gaza
operation in the control group of Israeli-Jewish students and of
Palestinian students.
4.3. Nationality and game type effects on attitudes
toward key issues in the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict
The interaction between game type, nationality and time was
significant (F(3,245)=23.2, p<.0001, η2= .19). Americans playing
GC held a pro-Israeli view before playing the game and got closer
to thinking after playing it that both Israelis and Palestinians
are equally right regarding key issues in the conflict (M=3.92
SD=.65 M=2.72 SD=.66), while those playing PM did not change
their attitude after playing the game and held a pro-Israeli view
(M=3.51 SD=.79 M=3.39 SD=.75). Turks playing GC held a proPalestinian view before playing the game and after playing it
got closer to thinking that both Israelis and Palestinians are
equally right regarding key issues in the conflict (M=2.16 SD=.12
M=3.14 SD=.13), while those playing PM did not change their
attitude after playing the game and held a pro-Palestinian
view (M=2.42 SD=.63 M=2.51 SD=.65). Israelis playing GC held
a pro-Israeli view before playing the game and after playing it
got closer to thinking that both Israelis and Palestinians are
attitude after playing the game and held a pro-Israeli view
(M=3.47 SD=.83 M=3.35 SD=.84). Palestinians playing GC held a
pro-Palestinian view before playing the game, and after playing
it got closer to thinking that both Israelis and Palestinians are
attitude after playing the game and held a pro-Palestinian view
(M=2.03 SD=.31 M=2.21 SD=.36) (Figure 3).
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
4.4. Nationality and game type effects on attitude
change toward the Gaza operation
The interaction between game type, nationality and time was
significant (F(3,245)=14.12, p<.0001, η2= .12). Americans playing
GC held a pro-Israeli view before playing the game and got closer
to thinking after playing it that both Israelis and Palestinians are
equally right regarding the Gaza operation (M=3.92 SD=1.06
M=2.80 SD=.69). Similarly, Americans playing PM held a proIsraeli view before playing the game and got closer to thinking
after playing it that both Israelis and Palestinians are equally
right regarding the Gaza operation (M=3.4 SD=1.18 M=2.7
SD=1.26). Turks playing GC held a pro-Palestinian view before
playing the game and after playing it got closer to thinking that
both Israelis and Palestinians are equally right regarding the
Gaza operation (M=2.16 SD=.91 M=3.25 SD=1.10). Similarly,
Turks playing PM held a pro-Palestinian view before playing
the game and after playing it got closer to thinking that both
Israelis and Palestinians are equally right regarding the Gaza
operation (M=2.2 SD=1.05 M=2.9 SD=1.27). Israelis playing GC
held a pro-Israeli view before playing the game and after playing
equally right regarding the Gaza operation (M=3.95 SD=.95
attitude after playing the game and held a pro-Israeli view
(M=3.6 SD=1.07 M=3.6 SD=1.09). Palestinians playing GC held a
pro-Palestinian view before playing the game, and after playing
equally right regarding the Gaza operation (M=1.05 SD=.17
attitude after playing the game and held a pro-Palestinian view
(M=1.6 SD=.07 M=1.7 SD=.68) (Figure 4).
n.º 43 • July 2015
8
In-depth
5. Discussion and conclusions
The studies aim at assessing the impact of using technology
in motivating learning skills required for peace building. The
results are promising, albeit requiring further assessment. First,
participants playing GC acquired a more impartial perspective
toward the Gaza operation in 2012, unlike those playing PM.
In addition, participants playing the GC game shifted from
ethnocentric attitudes towards a more impartial attitude
regarding long lasting historical issues in the conflict, unlike
those playing the PM game.
A few explanations can be suggested for the different learning
outcomes of the two games which require further research
in the future. First, GC provides a more personal and human
perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian situation than PM.
Therefore, young players may find it easier to identify and
empathize with, resulting in more positive impact on attitude
change. In addition, GC may be a more immersive game
environment than PM, resulting in more positive effects on
attitude change (Raphael et al, 2012; Yan and Cordry, 2011).
Another possible explanation can be suggested for the different
learning outcomes of the two games with regard to attitude
change. Participants playing PM may have stronger attitudes
about the conflict than those playing GC. The studies were
conducted shortly after the Gaza operation in 2012, an event
which received extensive media attention and public debate.
The data on participants in the GC study were collected after the
data on participants in the PM study. Therefore, the latter may
have more salient attitudes about the conflict than the former,
and research on attitude strength suggests that salient attitudes
are more resistant to change and lead to selective cognitive
processing (e.g., Eagly and Chaiken 1998; Kelman, 1997;
Pettigrew, 1998). Furthermore, when one’s attitude is linked
to one’s ‘self’ concept or value system, the attitude is more
resilient to change (e.g., Pomerantz, Chaiken and Tordesillas,
1995). In the future, it would be interesting to compare the
short-term and long-term impact of game interventions on
attitudes and behaviors, particularly since the number of
studies on long-term effects of peace workshops in protracted
conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian situation is extremely limited
(e.g., Malhotra and Liyanage, 2005; Maoz and Bar-One, 2002;
Rosen and Salomon, 2011).
Results suggested stronger effects for secondary/third parties
compared to directly involved parties. Although all participants
playing the GC game acquired a more impartial perspective
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
toward long lasting historical issues in the conflict, the effect
was stronger for the secondary/third parties to the conflict. The
latter may have less salient and weaker attitudes concerning
the situation as opposed to Israeli-Jewish and Palestinian
participants who may have stronger and more salient attitudes
(Eagly & Chaiken, 1998). Very few assessments have involved
cross-cultural experimental studies about the effectiveness
and usefulness of technology in teaching about peace building,
particularly in the context of intractable conflicts like the IsraeliPalestinian situation, and this should be further explored in the
future.
Computer games like GC and PM facilitate the gaining by the
participants of a conceptually complex view of the conflict as
opposed to the simplistic and polarized view of the conflict
often presented in collective narratives and mainstream
socialization agents in a conflict environment (e.g., Wolfsfeld,
Frosh, & Awabdy, 2008). By achieving this, computer games
can thus be a tool, as indicated by peace education scholars,
for legitimating the other’s narrative in a way such that events
are seen from both perspectives (Bar-Tal, 2013). This is an
important step towards increasing learning about the “outgroup” and the conflict dynamics as indicated by social and
political psychologists working on inter-group conflict (Bar-Tal,
Halpern, & Pliskin, in press); a necessary step towards attitude
change and reducing inter-group tensions.
This leads in the direction of another goal articulated by peace
education scholars: liberating the parties from the perception of
“sole victimhood” in the conflict (e.g., Bar-Tal, 2013). The more
they understand and appreciate the perspective of the other
party in the conflict, the more likely that empathy will develop
and that they abandon a “victim” mentality (e.g. Kelman,
1997; Malhotra & Liyanage, 2005; Maoz & Bar-On, 2002). This
may also lead to “in-group reappraisal” where parties begin
to critically assess their group’s contribution to the conflict
dynamics (Pettigrew, 1998). Computer games and their effects
in this regard should be further explored in depth in future
research.
The results comparing the effectiveness of GC and PM are
promising in terms of showing that computer games can be used
as part of peace education training. They indicate that these
games are useful in engendering attitude change, especially
in the form of taking a more balanced perspective and being
able to look at the conflict through both lenses. However, it
is also important to note the different results obtained from
n.º 43 • July 2015
9
In-depth
the two games. The game characteristics may be crucial in
determining whether the players gain the perspective of both
sides or not. Further research is required to understand how PM
and GC achieve their learning effects, by singling out different
dimensions of the two games to provide a more in-depth and
comparative analysis of their impact.
Previous studies have already shown that Israeli and Palestinian
young people know almost nothing about what transpires on
the other side of the Israeli-Palestinian divide, except for the
limited and violent images constructed by the media and daily
incidents (e.g., Wolfsfeld et al., 2008). Moreover, since these
young people have never actually experienced a state of peace
they may not regard it as a significant value for which a price
should be paid. Therefore, the opportunity for young Israeli and
Palestinian people to learn about and to perhaps understand
the “other” party, even if through computerized simulations like
GC and PM, is an issue of great importance in any process of
reconciliation in the Middle East and an essential requirement
for obtaining public support and legitimacy for any peace
initiative.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
10
In-depth
References
Bar-Tal, D. (1997). Formation and change of ethnic and national
information systems: Challenges in e-HRM. Hershey, PA: Idea Group
stereotypes: An integrative model. International Journal of Intercultural
Reference Publishing.
Relations, 21, 491-523.
Gasser, U., Cortesi, S., Malik, M., & Lee, A. (2012). Youth and digital media:
Bar-Tal, D. (2013). Intractable conflicts: Socio-psychological foundations
From credibility to information quality. Berkman Center for Internet &
and dynamics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Society. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2005272. Accessed July 18th, 2015.
Bar-Tal, D., Halpern, E., & Pliskin, R. (in press). Why it is so difficult to
Gonzalez, C., Saner, L. D., & Eisenberg, L. (2012). Learning to stand in
resolve intractable conflicts peacefully? A socio-psychological explanation.
the other’s shoes: A Computer video game experience of the Israeli-
In M. Galluccio (Ed.), Handbook of international negotiation: Interpersonal,
Palestinian conflict. Social Science Computer Review, 31(2), 236-243.
intercultural and diplomatic perspective. New York: Springer.
Kampf, R., & Cuhadar, E. (in press). Do computer games enhance learning
Baylouny, A. M. (2009). Seeing other sides: Nongame simulations and
about conflicts?A cross-national inquiry into proximate and distant
alternative perspectives of Middle East conflict. Journal of Political Science
scenarios in Global Conflicts. Computers in Human Behavior.
Education, 5, 214-232.
Kelman, H. (1997). Social-psychological dimensions of international
Bhappu, A., Ebner, N., Kaufman, S., & Welsh, N. (2010). The strategic use
conflict. In W. Zartman & L. Rasmussen (Eds.), Peacemaking in international
of online communication technology to facilitate relational development
conflict. Washington, D.C., USIP Press.
in executive training courses on negotiation. In C. Honeyman, J. Coben &
G. DePalo (Eds.), Second generation negotiation teaching. DRI Press.
Bogost, I. (2007). Persuasive games. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Brenner, J., & Smith, A. (2013). 72% of Online Adults are Social Networking
Site Users. Pew internet & American life project, August 5, 2013. http://
www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/social-networking-sites.aspx.
Accessed July 18th, 2015.
Kriesberg, L., Northrup, T., & Thorson, S. (Eds.). (1989). Intractable
conflicts and their transformation. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
Malhotra, D., & Liyanage, S. (2005). Long-term effects of peace workshops
in protracted conflicts. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49(6), 908-924.
Maoz, I. (2011). Does contact work in protracted asymmetrical conflict?
Appraising 20 years of reconciliation-aimed encounters between Israeli
Jews and Palestinians. Journal of Peace Research, 48(1), 115-125.
Buch, T., & Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S. (2007). The learning effects of Global
Conflicts Palestine. Conference Proceedings, Media@Terra, Gaming
Realities: The Challenge of Digital Culture, Athens, October.
Burak, A., Kelor, E., & Sweeney, T. (2005). PeaceMaker: A video game to
teach peace. In Intelligent technologies for interactive entertainment (pp.
307-310). Berlin: Springer.
Maoz, I., & Bar-On, D. (2002). From working through the holocaust to
current ethnic conflicts: Evaluating the TRT group workshop in Hamburg.
Group, 26, 29–48.
Maoz, I. and McCauley, C. (2005). Psychological correlates of support for
compromise: A polling study of Jewish-Israeli attitudes toward solutions to
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Political Psychology, 26(5), 791-808.
Coleman, P. (2000). Intractable conflict. In M. Deutch & P. Coleman (Eds.),
The Handbook of conflict resolution. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.
Cuhadar, E., & Kampf, R. (2014). Learning about the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict and negotiations through simulations: The case of PeaceMaker.
International Studies Persectives, 15, 142-162.
Matz, D., & Ebner, N. (2010). Using role play in online negotiation
teaching. In C. Honeyman, J. Coben & G. De Palo. (Eds.), Venturing beyond
the classroom. St. Paul, MN: DRI Press.
Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: Understanding the first
generation of Digital Natives. New York: Basic Books.
Eagly, A., & Chaiken, S. (1998). Attitude structure and function. In D.T.
Gilbert, S.T. Fiske & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Peng, W., Lee, M., & Heeter, C. (2010). The effects of a serious game on
role-taking and willingness to help. Journal of Communication, 60(4),
723–742.
Ebner, N. (2008). Online dispute resolution: Applications for e-HRM. In T.
Torres-Coronas & M. Arias-Oliva (Eds.), Encyclopedia of human resources
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
11
In-depth
Pettigrew, T. (1998). Inter-group contact theory. Annual Review of
Weiss, P., Stock, O., Fondazione, B., Eisikovitz, Z., & Koren C. (2011).
Psychology, 49, 65–85.
Co-narrating a conflict: A technology to facilitate attitudinal shifts.
Pomerantz, E., Chaiken, S., & Tordesillas, R. (1995). Attitude strength and
Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 19(3), 1-30.
resistance processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(3),
Williams, V. C. (2006). Assuming identities, enhancing understanding:
408-419.
Applying active learning principles to research projects. Journal of Political
Raphael, C., Bachen, C. M., & Hernández-Ramos, P. F. (2012). Flow and
Science Education, 2, 171–186.
cooperative learning in civic game play. New Media & Society, 14(8), 1321-
Wolfsfeld, G., Frosh, P., & Awabdy, M. (2008). Covering death in conflicts:
1338.
Coverage of the Second Intifada on Israeli and Palestinian television.
Rosen, I., & Salomon, G. (2011). Durability of peace education effects in
the shadow of conflict. Social Psychology Education, 14, 135-147.
Salomon, G. (2008). Peace education: Its nature, nurture and the
challenges it faces. In de Rivera, J. (Ed.), Handbook on Building Culture of
Journal of Peace Research, 45, 401-417.
Yan, C., & Cordry, J. (2011). Increased game immersion by using life
player-mapped avatar evolution. In M. Chang et al. (Eds.), Edutainment
(pp.276-280). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Peace (pp. 107-122). New York: Springer.
Salomon, G., & Cairns, E. (Eds.) (2009). Handbook of peace education.
New York: Francis and Taylor.
Schori-Eyal, N., Halperin, E., & Bar-Tal, D. (in press). Three layers of
collective victimhood: Effects of multileveled victimhood on intergroup
conflicts in the Israeli-Arab context. Journal of Applied Social Psychology.
Suleiman, R. (2004). Planned encounters between Jewish and Palestinian
Israelis: A social-psychological perspective. Journal of social Issues, 60( 2),
323-337.
Edition and production
Name of the publication: eLearning Papers
ISSN: 1887-1542
Publisher: openeducation.eu
Edited by: P.A.U. Education, S.L.
Postal address: c/Muntaner 262, 3r, 08021 Barcelona (Spain)
Phone: +34 933 670 400
Email: editorialteam[at]openeducationeuropa[dot]eu
Internet: www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/elearning_papers
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Copyrights
The texts published in this journal, unless otherwise indicated, are subject
to a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivativeWorks
3.0 Unported licence. They may be copied, distributed and broadcast provided that the author and the e-journal that publishes them, eLearning
Papers, are cited. Commercial use and derivative works are not permitted. The full licence can be consulted on http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
n.º 43 • July 2015
12
In-depth
Collaborative Digital Games as Mediation Tool to
Foster Intercultural Integration in Primary Dutch
Schools
Authors
Teresa de la Hera
Conde-Pumpido
[email protected]
Postdoctoral researcher and
lecturer at Utrecht University
Utrecht, The Netherlands
Amanda Paz Alencar
[email protected]
Marie Curie Fellow
2013-2015 and post-doc
researcher at University of
Amsterdam
Amsterdam, The
Netherlands
In the Netherlands, the growing presence of immigrant children in schools has fueled
scholarly interest in and concerns for examining the process of integration in school
environments. The use of digital games has found to be an effective tool to reinforce
teaching/learning practices. Several studies have already shown the benefits of the use
of digital games in educational contexts. However, most of these studies are focused
on how digital games can be used as a mediation tool in the process of knowledge
acquisition. The present research proposes a new approach for the study of digital games
in the field of education. Drawing from collaborative learning methods, we explore the
potential of digital entertaining collaborative games to become a mediation tool in
the process of integration of immigrant children with different cultural backgrounds
in Dutch schools. This paper1 reports the preliminary results of an exploratory study
that sets out to evaluate the potential of digital games as a mediation tool to foster
intercultural integration in educational environments.
1. Introduction
Tags
Persuasive gaming, gamemediated persuasion,
intercultural integration,
collaboration with games,
educational practices.
In the Netherlands, the presence of students who have an immigrant background has
continuously increased since 2005. In 2014, the children of immigrants represents 11% of
the overall school population (OECD, 2014). The integration of immigrant children into the
host cultural environment is a major function of schools in the immigration country. This is
evident in the case of the Dutch educational system, in which specific measures have been
designed to ensure that migrant children achieve basic qualification and that their integration
is facilitated in the school environment. These include funding to secondary schools for newly
arrived immigrants. At schools, migrant children experience a very different atmosphere, and
this can be very difficult for parents to understand and very confusing for children who have
to live in two separate worlds. Problems of adaptation, identity formation and interaction
with native Dutch as well as with other migrant children and even with teachers are usually
experienced at Dutch schools. Most studies in the field have only focused on the educational
performance of migrant children (e.g., Traag & Velden, 2008; Ohinata & van Ours, 2012). This
indicates the need to examine the role of new educational interventions for the integration
of migrant children in European schools and societies. The present study is focused on
the potential of entertainment collaborative digital games to foster integration of migrant
children in Dutch schools.
1
This article was written within the project “Persuasive Gaming in Context. From theory-based design to validation
and back” funded by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). See www.persuasivegaming.nl. This study is
also in collaboration with the Research Project “Television News for Promoting Interculturalism. A Novel Step towards Immigrant
Integration” funded by the European Commission in the framework of Marie Curie Actions (327228-TVNPI).
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
13
In-depth
In recent years, mainly with the advent of new technologies,
the use of digital media tools has become an important and
exciting part of education instructional and learning processes
(see O’Maraa & Harris, 2014). In the framework of education
and migration, digital media technology is a catalyst for the
successful integration of immigrant children in European
schools and societies (Nguyen, 2010). On the other hand,
the use of digital games has found to be an effective tool to
reinforce teaching/learning practices. Several studies conclude
that by incorporating video games in the school practices,
pupil’s educational performance and motivation to learn is
improved (see González Sánchez et al., 2007; Padilla Zea et
al, 2009). However, the study of the potential of digital games
in the context of education has been mainly focused on their
use for knowledge acquisition and far too little attention has
been paid to the ways digital games can be used in educational
environments for other purposes different from acquiring
knowledge.
Consequently, the current study aims to fill a gap in the
literature by exploring the potential of digital games as a
mediating tool in the persuasion process for attitude change in
educational environments. Our study proposes the use of digital
games as an alternative for fostering integration of immigrant
children as well as for attenuating identity crisis/conflict among
children with different nationalities in the school environment.
Drawing from collaborative learning methods (Johnson and
Johnson, 2004), we explore the potential of digital entertaining
collaborative games to become a mediation tool in the process
of integration of immigrant children with different cultural
backgrounds in Dutch schools.
For this purpose we have conducted an explorative qualitative
study in a Dutch integration school in which three pairs of
children coming from different migrant backgrounds were asked
to participate in a collaborative digital game session. In this
game session players needed to collaborate in order to achieve
a common objective. An entertaining collaborative digital game
was used to facilitate a situation in which children forget about
cultural differences and interact in a digital environment in
which all of them are represented in the same way.
2. Promoting Integration in Culturally
Diverse Classrooms
Success in integrating the children of immigrants is of enormous
consequence for societies. The educational system plays a
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
crucial role in this process by integrating the child into sociocultural life of the host country and preparing children for the
real world. Relevant studies suggest that schools facilitate the
integration of migrant children, functioning as a doorway to host
societies and the key to enter a ‘new future’ (Eurydice, 2004;
Chomentowski, 2009; Steinbach, 2010). In the Netherlands, the
growing presence of immigrant children in schools has fueled
scholarly interest in and concerns for examining the factors
important in shaping their educational trajectories (Asher et
al., 2008; Traag & Velden, 2008). In general, several studies
suggest that problems of school adjustment and sociocultural
integration among immigrant children are usually associated
to their different cultural background (Lenoir et al., 2008; Crul
& Holdaway, 2009). During their school attendance, learning
and integration difficulties may occur, as the characteristics of
migrant children and their cultural background are highly varied.
In light of these considerations, it is important to highlight the
role of culture in major areas of integration outlined in the
initiatives launched by the Dutch government for the integration
of immigrant children. Such initiatives are mainly focused on the
implementation of integration or reception schools with special
programs for language instruction that can facilitate learning
and foster the integration process of migrant children in Dutch
schools. In this process of adaptation, language and friendship
are key elements for creating the sense of belonging to and make
them feel part of the life and activity of the class (Dusi et al.,
2015). Former research on the integration of migrant children
at schools have provided empirical evidences that language and
friendship are the two dimensions that color the experience of
migrant children entering a new world (Suarez-Orozco & SuarezOrozco, 2000). Similarly, Berry et al. (2006) have argued that
successful integration at schools is correlated to the acquisition
of linguistic-communication and socio-cultural competence.
In culturally diverse classrooms, more experienced teachers and
integration activities are fundamental to promote friendship and
stimulate higher grades and more participation among them.
Consequently, these skills, values and objectives are associated
with the intercultural outlook that should be developed
among pupils. Intercultural strategies for teaching culturally
diverse pupils are focused on the development of educational
interventions that support cultural dialogue in order to hinder
differences and protect cultural diversity, but at the same
time fosters the integration of immigrant children at schools.
In the Netherlands, the educational system does not provide
recommendations regarding the promotion of intercultural
n.º 43 • July 2015
14
In-depth
activities at schools, failing to address the real-life performance
of pupils in multicultural classrooms (Bauman, 1999). It is up
to schools to organize and implement curricular activities for
intercultural education.
One of the most effective educational practices for promoting
intercultural experiences among students and teachers at
schools is the so-called collaborative learning. This method has
gained fresh prominence among education scholars as a device
for managing diversity in multicultural classrooms (see Tielman
et al., 2009). In the sections that follow, it will be argued that
collaborative video games as a tool for collaborative learning
can help immigrant children develop the intercultural skills and
competences necessary to live and function well in their daily
lives in the school environment.
3. A Collaborative Approach
Intercultural Education
to
Although individualism and competition are usually prioritized
as student–student interactive patterns in educational
environments, previous research has shown that collaborative
interactive patterns have several positive effects (Padilla,
González & Gutiérrez, 2009, p.1251) that can benefit
intercultural integration among children in educational
environments. Students seem to be more positive about each
other when they work cooperatively regardless of differences
in ability, ethnic background, handicapped or not. Students also
seem to be more effective interpersonally as a result of working
cooperatively when cooperative interactive patterns are used
(Johnson and Johnson, 1988, para.13). Furthermore, when
collaborating, students seem to better develop their interaction
skills, and have a more positive expectation about working with
others than students from competitive or individualistic settings
(1988, para.14). As a result of collaborative interactive practices
in educational environments students can learn to work
together and different skills can be acquired and developed
regardless of their cultural backgrounds, fostering attitudes of
respect and tolerance.
Educational researchers Johnson and Johnson (1994) have
identified five collaborative components that according to the
authors should be encouraged when collaborative learning is
promoted:
•
Positive interdependence: Positive interdependence
happens when collaborating students are aware that they
are linked with others and that their success depends not
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
•
•
•
•
only on their performance, but also on the performance
of their partners. To put it differently, they understand
that their own performance benefits not only themselves,
but also their partners, and that their partners’
work also benefits them. Positive interdependence
is therefore related to socio-cultural competence:
students participating in activities that foster positive
interdependence learn that collaborating with others can
report personal benefits and that an egocentric behaviour
is not always beneficial. Positive interdependence has
also the potential to facilitate communication among
participants who need to understand other students and
communicate their individual needs.
Individual accountability: Individual accountability
happens when all the players can contribute in a specific
way with their personal knowledge, but also can benefit
from others’ personal skills. Individual accountability
is therefore related to socio-cultural competence:
students participating in activities that foster individual
accountability are encouraged to empathize with other
participants and acknowledge and value their individual
skills. Positive interdependence has also the potential to
facilitate communication among participants who might
be interested in learning the skills they observe on their
partners or ask them for help, for example.
Face-to-face promotive interaction: This is produced
when players share their knowledge, discuss different
points of view, help others who are finding it difficult,
etc. The benefits of face-to-face promotive interactions
are related to the cognitive activities and interpersonal
dynamics that only occur when players get involved in
promoting each other’s progress such as orally explaining
how to solve problems or teaching their own skills.
Social skills: This cooperative component is present when
in collaborative sessions students are encouraged to use
their social skills such as leadership, decision-making,
trust-building, communication and conflict management.
This component is then again strongly related to sociocultural competence and also facilitates linguisticcommunication.
Group processing (Self-analysis of the group): According
to Johnson and Johnson collaborative learning is also
more effective when group self-reflection is encouraged.
Students should be given the possibility to discover
whether their working relationships were effective and
if they were able to achieve their goals. Again, linguistic
n.º 43 • July 2015
15
In-depth
and socio-cultural competence can be derived from
learning practices in which group processing is promoted.
In light of the correlation between these five components and
the acquisition of linguistic and socio-cultural competences, they
have been used as guidelines to structure our exploratory study.
These five components are then considered here as indicators
of intercultural integration in educational environments.
4. Collaborative Video Games
Intercultural Integration
for
Considering the benefits of collaborative interaction for
intercultural integration, the present study explores the
potential of the use of collaborative digital games as a mediation
tool in designed gaming sessions that aim to foster intercultural
integration in educational environments. The use of a digital
game in a specific context as a mediation tool to foster attitude
change was coined by the game scholar Teresa de la Hera (2015)
as game-mediated persuasion. The practice of game-mediated
persuasion can be used, among other purposes, in a process
of persuasion in which the game is used as a tool of mediation
between transmitters and receivers. In this case, the game is not
used to convey a specific message, but to change or reinforce
specific attitudes or behaviours of players by providing an
experience that fosters specific interactive patterns to achieve
the attitude or behaviour pursued among participants. The
persuasive potential of this practice relies on the fact that while
playing the game players are not only situated as avatars in a
virtual world but are also situated as human beings in a particular
physical space, sometimes surrounded by other people that
can or cannot be playing the game (Hung, 2007, p. 248). In this
respect, game scholar Chia-Yuan Hung (2007) has found that
offline interaction among players and the locally constructed
and contingent factors of the context in which games are played
have an important role in the process of persuasion. As well,
the relationship between integration and adjustment is also
moderated by the context of integration (Berry et al., 2006). The
relevant dimensions and elements of the environment where
integration occurs need to be considered, as they exert great
influence on intergroup attitudes towards intercultural practices
(Ward, 2013). Because the school environment provides the
conditions for intercultural interactions among students from
different migrant backgrounds, playing the game at school
moderates the persuasive effects of the game on intercultural
integration.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
This exploratory study is based on the hypothesis that the use of
collaborative video games as mediation tool in sessions in which
intercultural integration is sought and fostered can facilitate
verbal and non-verbal communication and social interaction
among immigrant students. These social communication
practices can increase players’ language and socio-cultural
competences, which in turn will positively rebound on their
sense of belonging, fostering the process of integration. As
previously stated, the five components identified by Johnson
and Johnson (2004) are considered in this study as indicators
of intercultural integration. The study of Padilla Zea et al (2008)
has analyzed how these five collaborative components can be
encouraged via collaborative digital games:
•
Positive interdependence. Collaborative games can foster
positive interdependence by:
- Establishing a common goal for all players.
- Including a “group life” system to achieve team
accountability.
- Establishing an evaluation process on the group
rather than on each player.
•
•
•
•
- Providing a player score and a group score.
Individual accountability. Collaborative games can foster
positive interdependence by balancing players’ activities
in a hidden way in order to help participants with
difficulties.
Face-to-face promotive interaction. Collaborative video
games encourage players to play together to achieve their
goals in the game. Interaction among players becomes
then essential to progress in the game. Sharing their
knowledge, discussing different points of view and orally
teaching their own skills become essential to progress in
the game.
Social skills. Players of collaborative games must organize
their tasks and make decisions that help them show their
leadership and conciliation abilities.
Group processing (Self-analysis of the group). A group
analysis of the gaming session allows us to examine
the effectiveness of each player’s contribution and
how targets are being achieved. This could be a useful
way to enforce an individual player’s abilities and
enhance the group commitment to common targets.
Up to this point we have discussed the theory that helps us
support the claim that collaborative digital games used in
designed gaming sessions in educational environments can
n.º 43 • July 2015
16
In-depth
be an effective mediating tool in the process of persuasion. In
the following sections, we present the design and results of
a qualitative study that aims to be a first step to explore the
potential of this practice.
5. Explorative Study Design
In this section we present the design of the study conducted
with the aim of exploring the potential of designed gaming
sessions in which collaborative digital games are used to foster
intercultural integration in educational environments. This
research is qualitative in nature and therefore it does not seek
for generalizable results. Accordingly, the purpose is to serve as
a preliminary step for an eventual follow-up study.
Methodology and Sampling
The methodological approach of this study is the triangulation
of methods. Methodological triangulation is defined as
“the use of two or more methods of data collection in the
study of some aspect of human behaviour” and it is used to
“attempt to map out, or explain more fully, the richness and
complexity of human behaviour by studying it from more than
one standpoint” (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2000, p. 141)
and to overcome the problem of ‘method boundedness’ (see
Gorard and Taylor, 2004). We have combined methodological
triangulation with investigator triangulation, engaging two
independent investigators for data collection and interpretation
(see Silverman, 1993). Investigator triangulation has been used
to increase the reliability of results as the use of two or more
participants has been proven to lead to more valid and reliable
data (see Smith, 1975).
For this study we have used the combination of two methods:
semi-structured interviews and observation during designed
gaming sessions. As a methodological technique, an interview
is a “flexible tool for data collection, enabling multi-sensory
channels to be used: verbal, non-verbal, spoken and heard”
(Cohen et al., 2000, p. 350) used for “an interchange of views
between two or more people on a topic of mutual interest”
for knowledge production (2000, p. 349). In this case, we
conducted semi-structured interviews, i.e. “with a given
agenda and open-ended questions” (2000, p. 97). Semistructured interviews should be conducted on a ‘critical case’
basis, selecting participants who are in key positions and have
insightful knowledge about the information that is going to be
collected. We held interviews with the director of the school
and the teacher of the students participating in the study. These
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
interviews have been conducted as a first step with the objective
of collecting information about the real situation of the school,
present practices that are being used to foster integration and
students’ profiles that could be interesting for the project.
In a second stage, we conducted observation of designed gaming
sessions (see Cohen et al., 2000, p. 401). The observation was
direct and known by students but non-participant in nature (see
Cooper and Schindler, 2001, p.375). The investigators did not
intervene during the game sessions, avoiding conversations and
eye contact with participants. Observational techniques were
used to collect verbal and non-verbal data on the human setting
and the interactional setting of the gaming sessions conducted
with students. During the gaming sessions the gameplay and
the conversations among players were recorded. Furthermore,
both researchers present during the game sessions took notes
about students’ performance in the game, verbal and nonverbal communication and any other details that could be
relevant for the study.
Three pairs of students were selected to participate in the
gaming session. The selection of participants was done after
collecting information during the interviews about their cultural
background, linguistic competence in Dutch, time living in The
Netherlands, social profile and school performance. Among the
participants, we formed three pairs of students between 6 and 8
years old according to the following criteria: participants of pair
one had good relationship in the classroom, participants of pair
two had scarce relationship in the classroom and participants
of pair three had a bad relationship in the classroom (See table
1). The criteria used for the selection of participants and pairs
sought after the configuration of a sample that represented
a variety in linguistic and social competences. As this was a
qualitative research it was not the purpose of this study to look
for a representative sample, as general conclusions will not be
made from the results of the analysis.
Once the game sessions were finished the researchers
conducted a short structured interview consisting of the
following questions:
1. Did you enjoy playing the game?
2. Did you enjoy playing with your partner?
3. If you were asked to play again, would you like to play again
with the same partner?
n.º 43 • July 2015
17
In-depth
This short interview was used to triangulate its results with
some of the observations of the researchers regarding the
evolution of the relationships among the pairs.
Integration schools in the Netherlands
The field site was located in one of the integration schools based
in the city of Amsterdam. This school was chosen because it
introduces newly arrived immigrant children to the challenges of
adapting to a new school system where they have to learn a new
language and integrate with other pupils coming from culturally
diverse backgrounds. The main goal of integration schools is
to provide new immigrant children with a good understanding
of Dutch language in terms of speaking, reading and writing
before they engage in regular public schools. The classes in
these schools are smaller (10-15 pupils), and they often have an
extra-school assistant and appropriate teaching methods and
books that focus on the special (language) needs of children
of immigrants. They cover children between 6 and 13 years
old, as these children are defined as the most critical groups
when arriving in a new school environment. New immigrant
children attend the integration schools on a temporary basis,
which means that after a year and a half of intensive education
in Dutch language they are prepared to start regular schools.
The promotion of educational practices that support
intercultural integration is stimulated in integration schools. In
the interviews conducted with the director of the school and the
teacher of the students participating in the study, the informants
provided a description of the types of activities conducted with
the students and how they contribute to improve respect and
mutual understanding, which is a fundamental element of
knowledge and understanding of other cultures. For example,
films and programs are used as a way to promote knowledge
of their home country and at the same time stimulate their
interesting in learning more about their classmates’ culture.
Games also play a very important part in their learning process.
When used in the classroom, they aim to create ways for
students to collaborate with each other and help each other
with their tasks during the class. Their teacher reported that
when they play together, they are more motivated to speak with
each other and work together. Another interesting activity is the
“telling stories about their home country”. This practice consists
of giving immigrant children the opportunity to talk about their
country of origin in their classroom and sharing their different
cultural experiences with their schoolmates.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
The Game
Little Big Planet 3 (Media Molecule, 2015) is a puzzle platform
console game created by Media Molecule and published by Sony
Computer Entertainment on multiple PlayStation platforms.
The series follows the adventures of Sackboy and has a large
emphasis on gameplay rather than being story-driven. The
play component involves players taking control of Sackboy and
navigating him through various levels. The game is suitable for
those aged six and older.
The gameplay consists primarily, but not entirely, of platforming
like jumping and avoiding obstacles to successfully navigate to
the end of a level to win. The game involves a player playing
co-operatively with other players to navigate through a level
whilst collecting various “bubbles” along the way. There are
also numerous co-operative parts of levels whereby certain
prize bubbles can only be collected with the help of at least one
player or more depending on the number of players stated in
the level.
The Gaming Sessions
We have conducted two hours designed gaming sessions with
the three pairs of students described above. The pairs were
asked to play the first level of the collaborative entertaining
game Little Big Planet 3 (Media Molecule, 2015). Children were
asked to play the game but did not receive any information
about the objective of the study. Two researchers observed the
gaming sessions without intervention.
The gaming sessions were conducted in a special room in the
school and scheduled according to the school availability.
The first level of the entertaining collaborative digital game
Little Big Planet 3 was used in this study because it is a tutorial
level in which players are taught how to play. It follows that all
participants, with or without experience playing video games in
general and/or this one in particular, are given the possibility to
learn how to play while playing. Furthermore the collaborative
nature of this game allows encouraging the five collaborative
components identified by the educational researches Johnson
and Johnson (1994) in the following manner:
•
Positive interdependence:
- Little Big Planet 3 is a game in which players need
to collaborate in order to pass the different levels.
One of the players cannot progress alone; therefore,
competitive play is pointless. The common goals
n.º 43 • July 2015
18
In-depth
and the required collaboration lead to positive
interdependence.
- Furthermore, all the players in the game are guiding a
character with the same characteristics. The only thing
that differentiates elements from one another is the
customs they select for their particular character. This
means that all players are equally represented in the
game and physical or racial differences do not matter in
this environment.
- Individual achievements and rewards in Little Big
Planet 3 benefit all players in the game. This means
that players acknowledge not only how their personal
achievements can bring benefits to others, but also how
sometimes they can benefit from others’ achievements.
- In Little Big Planet there is also a “group life” system
that helps to achieve team accountability. A single
player can die at certain moment, but if other players
progress in the played level, the dead player comes
back to the game. There is also a number of lives that
all players share, so at certain moment all of them
cannot continue anymore, this means that each player
needs to take care from the rest if he or she wants to
continue playing.
•
•
•
•
Individual accountability: Little Big Planet 3 is a game
in which different skills are necessary to progress in
the game. The game requires from analytical skills, to
problem-solving capacities or good hand-eye coordination
among other skills. This allows different players to shine
in different moments of the game fostering individual
accountability.
Face-to-face promotive interaction: The collaborative
nature of Little Big Planet 3 stimulates in a natural
manner the face-to-face interaction among players. At
certain moments, the players need to teach their skills to
other players, reflect together on how to solve a certain
problem or even share or celebrate together an achieved
goal.
Social skills: The different nature of the goals of Little Big
Planet 3 encourages players to take different roles while
playing. While some of them take the leadership, for
example, others play more in silent or even show their
ability to conciliate when problems show up.
Group processing (Self-analysis of the group): In this case
the context in which the game was played facilitated
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
group processing after the gaming sessions. The short
interviews conducted with the participants at the end of
the session facilitated this reflection.
6. Results and Discussion
The analysis of the data collected during this exploratory study
has been structured using the five components of collaborative
learning previously discussed in the theoretical framework of
this paper. Each of these components has been considered
an indicator of the potential of the practice proposed in this
study to foster intercultural integration. These five components
are discussed in relation to the development of linguisticcommunication and socio-cultural competences.
Positive interdependence
As previously stated in this paper Little Big Planet 3 is a game
in which players need to collaborate in order to pass the
different levels. This is also the case of the tutorial level that
students were asked to play during the game sessions. As to
positive interdependence, the most striking observation to
emerge from data analysis is the evolution of collaborative
behaviour among the three different pairs in the game. The
three different couples started with different playing behaviour
patterns. The first pair of students who had a good relationship
in the classroom performed collaborative interaction in the
beginning of the game. The second pair of students who did
not have any relationship in the classroom started with an
individualistic playing behaviour, without paying attention to
their partner’s performance in the game and trying to progress
by themselves. It is important to note that this second pair was
also the one with more limitations in terms of language, a factor
that may have precipitated linguistic and social interaction
between them. Finally, the third pair of students, who had a
difficult relationship in the classroom, started the game with a
competitive playing behaviour.
There is a first key moment in the game in which the attitudes
of the three couples change from competitive to collaborative
attitude. This is a moment when the two participants need
to collaborate to pass a specific obstacle in the level. At this
moment, all participants realize that they need to collaborate
with their partners to progress in the game and positive
interdependence arises for the first time.
We also identify a second key moment in the game and it is the
one in which the participants realize that they can rescue their
partners when they die in the game if they keep progressing in
n.º 43 • July 2015
19
In-depth
an individual manner. Interestingly, this moment leads to a new
change in the behaviour of the three couples; in the three cases,
they shift from collaborative to individualistic playing behaviour.
This is the point in the game when they seem to perceive that
they do not need their partners as much as they previously
thought, as they can individually progress in the game and
rescue their partners in a later stage.
There is, however, a third key moment in the game that again
turns the attitude of all the players. In this case, it changes from
individualistic to again collaborative playing behaviour. In the
three cases, the collaborative playing behaviour is maintained
from this moment until the end of the session. This new change
in behaviour is determined by the moment when players
discover that there is a limited number of times they can die
and be recovered in the game, and when this limited number of
lives is reached, both players die in the game and need to start
the level from the beginning. This key moment seems to foster
positive interdependence again, and as previously stated, the
collaborative playing behaviour is definitively settled.
Highlighted moments: Positive Interdependence
Group 1
Group 2
1: Do you have an idea for
that?
They discover they can save
each other when one of them
dies. Then 1 starts playing
alone and leaving 2 behind to
save her later
2: I think I understand it. We
should do this together
2 starts learning from 1 by
watching what she does.
Finally 1 surprises 2, they start
playing together and finish the
level together.
Overall, the analysis of the evolution of behaviour in the three
couples suggests that Little Big Planet 3 as a collaborative digital
game has the potential to foster positive interdependence.
Individual accountability
There is also a specific key moment in the game in which it
is possible to see how individual accountability arises in the
three cases. This is a moment when different skills need to be
combined to pass an obstacle. It is not obvious in the game how
this obstacle needs to be passed and the three couples need
to think for a while how to pass it. In this case, good problemsolving capacities are useful to overcome the obstacle. However,
when the players discover how to pass the obstacle, good handeye coordination is also needed to achieve it. In both verbal and
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
non-verbal communication emerging from that moment, it can
be appreciated how participants recognize and value the skills of
their partners and also enjoy when their partners discover and
value their own skills. It is can also be observed that the pairs
become more interactive at this point (i.e., they ask for help
and offer help). It is notable the example of a pair who really
struggled with language barriers. In this case, both players used
non-verbal communication and interaction via their characters
in the game in order to help each other.
Highlighted moments: Individual accountability
Group 1
Group 3
2: I do not understand it. Do
you see how I do it?
2: Listen to me, listen to me,
we have to do it like this
1: Can you please help me?
1: I can help you
2: This is better
They solve a problem together
They bump fists to celebrate
Face-to-face promotive interaction
As previously stated, the collaborative nature of Little Big
Planet 3 stimulates in a natural manner the interaction among
players. In all the key moments described above, it can be noted
how verbal and non-verbal communication increases. The
participants seem to feel the need to communicate in order to
solve the different challenges of the game. Again, we would like
to highlight the case of group 2. In this case, it is interesting to
observe the use of gestures to establish communication as a way
to overcome language barriers. This factor led them to evolve
from an individualistic playing behaviour to a collaborative
playing behaviour.
Highlighted moments: Face-to-face promotive interaction
Group 1
Group
1 takes 2’s control, teaches 2
how to pass the obstacle, this
way she draws her attention,
and then gives 2 her control
back and let her do it
1: I am here
2: How I get there?
1: Do it like this (points the
button in the control)
They celebrate together by
touching each other and
smiling
Social skills
It is interesting to observe the ways in which the players adopt
a clear role in the game in relation to their social skills. In the
three cases, for example, it is possible to see from the very
beginning that there is a leader in each pair and that the other
n.º 43 • July 2015
20
In-depth
member quickly assumes his/her secondary role. Another
interesting pattern refers to the way they behave according to
social conventions fostered in the school, such as apologizing
when they do something wrong or being thankful when they
receive help.
Highlighted moment: Social Skills
Group 1
Group 3
When they are not able to
continue together, 2 decides
to kill himself, 1 passes the
obstacle and he gets 2 back
later
When they realize they have
to play together they start
helping each other from their
own benefit. 2 starts teaching
1 how to do things
At certain moment 1 starts
leaving 2 continuously behind,
killing him several times
Then 1 discovers how to do
something and 2 realizes that
he needs from 1. They solve
together a problem
2 starts crying
2: Well done! Thank you!
1 offers his control to 2 for him
to play
Then 2 takes the control of 1
and helps his character to save
an obstacle to keep playing
together
They finally find the way to
finish the level together
Group processing (Self-analysis of the group)
As previously explained, group processing has been fostered via
short interviews conducted after the gaming sessions in which
questions were focused on making participants reflect on the
value of collaborating with their partners during the game. It
needs to be highlighted in this section that the six participants
in the study manifested their will to play again if the possibility
would be given to them. The overall response to this practice was
very positive. Interestingly, all the six participants manifested
their desire to play again with the same partner and reported
that playing in collaboration was more fun than competitive or
individual play.
7. Conclusions and Directions for Further
Research
After analyzing the data collected during the exploratory
study presented in this paper we can conclude that the results
suggest that collaborative video games might have the potential
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
to become an effective mediation tool to foster intercultural
integration in schools. As it has been discussed in the
previous section, we have found in the three gaming sessions
conducted for the study examples of the five components of
collaboration identified by Johnson and Johnson (1994). These
five components have been showed to have a direct correlation
to the development of linguistic-communication and sociocultural competences, considered in this paper as indicators of
intercultural integration.
It is interesting to note that the three couples, who had
completely different playing behaviours at the beginning of
the session, experienced similar changes in playing behaviour
throughout the session triggered by specific key moments in the
game. The need of collaboration and combination of different
skills in the game to pass the proposed level were the key game
elements that not only fostered a collaborative attitude, but
also encouraged communication among players and increased
social interaction. During the sessions, it was also possible to
appreciate how participants learned to value their partners’ skills
and learned the value of their own skills. These findings suggest
that collaborative games may serve as a way to foster players to
see differences between each other from a positive perspective.
The positive consequences of these game interactions for
integration can be illustrated by assessing the third couple’s
performance in the game. Both students started with a really
competitive behaviour, and eventually learned to value each
other’s competences, which were not only appreciated via
their linguistic and non-linguistic communication codes during
the game, but also verbally manifested by them in the short
interview after the gaming session.
Furthermore, collaborating in a digital environment in which
visual communication played a main role seems to serve as
a tool to overcome language barriers. It is interesting to note
here how in the second gaming session of this study problems
stemming from language barriers that at the beginning of the
session affected their capability to express their difficulties and/
or explain different mechanisms of the game, were overcame
during the session by the use of other types of communication,
such as interaction of characters in the digital environment.
In short, the results of the current study support the idea that
game-mediated persuasion via collaborative digital games can be
an effective practice to foster multicultural integration. Further
research including a larger group of participants and evaluation
of the evolution of the relationships beyond the gaming should
n.º 43 • July 2015
21
In-depth
be conducted in order to evaluate the effectiveness of this
practice.
Of relevance to our study was also the fact that integration
schools in Amsterdam allow for a curriculum that includes
activities aimed at the improvement of intercultural dialogue
and mutual understanding of the culture of immigrant children
attending these schools. Despite the lack of incentives by the
Dutch government towards the adoption of policies to manage
cultural diversity, schools receiving children with immigrant
backgrounds recognize the importance of implementing
innovative practices that can help students successfully
negotiate their cultural differences.
Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional
schooling. London: Routledge.
González Sánchez, J. L., Cabrera, M., Gutiérrez, F.L. (2007). Diseño de
Videojuegos aplicados a la Educación Especial. In: Proceedings of eighth
congreso internacional de interacción persona, Ordenador, Zaragoza, Spain.
Gorard, S. and Taylor, C. (2004) Combining Methods in Educational and Social
Research. London: Open University Pres
Hung, C.-Y. (2007). Video games in context: An ethnographic study of situated
meaning-making practices of Asian immigrant adolescents in New York City
Paper presented at the Situated Play. DiGRA 2007 International Conference,
Tokyo, Japan.
References
Asher, S. A., MacEvoy, J. P., & McDonald, K. L. (2008). Children’s peer relations,
Johnson, RT and Johnson, DW (1988). Cooperative learning: two heads learn
social competence, and school adjustment: A social tasks and social goals
better than one. Transforming Education: In Context; 18:34. Available from:
perspective. In M. L. Maehr, S. Karabenick & T. Urdan (Eds.), Advances in
http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC18/Johnson.htm.
motivation and achievement. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Johnson, RT and Johnson, DW (1994). Learning together. In: Sharan S, editor.
Baumann, G. (1999). The multicultural riddle: Rethinking national, ethnic, and
religious identities. Psychology Press.
Handbook of cooperative learning methods. Connecticut: Greenwood Press.
Lenoir, A., Lenoir, Y., Pudelko, B., & Steinback, M. (2008). Le discours québécois
Berry, J. W., Phinney, J. S., Sam, D. L., & Vedder, P. (2006). Immigrant youth:
sur les relations entre l’école et les familles issues de l’immigration: un état de
Acculturation, identity, and adaptation. Applied psychology, 55(3), 303-332.
la question. Les Dossiers des sciences de l’éducation, 19, 171-190.
Brennen, B. S. (2013). Interviewing. In Qualitative Research Methods for Media
McFarlane, A., Sparrowhawk, A., and Heald Y. (2002). Report on the
Studies (pp. 26-58). New York: Routledge.
educational use of games; 2002. Available from: http://www.teem.org.uk/
publications/teem_gamesined_full.pdf.
Chomentowski, M. (2009). L’échec scolaire des enfants de migrants: l’illusion
de l’égalité. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Media Molecule (2015). Little Big Planet 3 [Console Game].
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education.
Nguyen-Cruz, T. (2010). Integrating digital media to engage under-resourced
New York: Routledge.
English language learners in public high schools. Unpublished manuscript.
Côté, J. E. (1996). Sociological perspectives on identity formation: The culture–
Nussbaum, M., Rosas, R., Rodríguez, P., Sun, Y., and Valdivia, V. (1999). Diseño
identity link and identity capital. Journal of adolescence, 19(5), 417-428.
desarrollo y evaluación de video juegos portátiles educativos y autorregulados.
Ciencia al Día 1999;3(2):1.
Crul, M., & Holdaway, J. (2009). Children of immigrants in schools in New York
and Amsterdam: The factors shaping attainment. The Teachers College Record,
OECD (2014). Reviews of evaluations and assessments in education
111(6), 1476-1507.
Netherlands,
file:///Users/amandapazalencar/Documents/Videogames%20
Project/OECD-Evaluation-Assessment-Review-Netherlands.pdf, accessed 4 July
De la Hera Conde-Pumpido, T. (2015). A Typology of Persuasion through Digital
2015.
Games. Unpublished manuscript.
Osterman, K. F. (2010). Teacher practice and students’ sense of belonging.
Dusi, P., Messetti, G., & Falcón, I. G. (2015). Belonging: Growing up between
In International research handbook on values education and student
Two Worlds. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 171, 560-568.
wellbeing(pp. 239-260). Springer Netherlands.
Eurydice (2004) ‘Integrating immigrant children into schools in Europe’,
O’Mara, B., & Harris, A. (2014). Intercultural crossings in a digital age: ICT
http://www.indire.it/lucabas/lkmw_file/eurydice///Integrating_immigrant_
pathways with migrant and refugee-background youth. Race Ethnicity and
children_2004_EN.pdf, accessed 4 July 2015.
Education, (ahead-of-print), 1-20.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
22
In-depth
Ohinata, A., & Van Ours, J. C. (2013). How immigrant children affect
Suárez-Orozco, M., & Suárez-Orozco, C. (2000). Some conceptual
the academic achievement of native Dutch children. The Economic
considerations in the interdisciplinary study of immigrant children. Immigrant
Journal,123(570), F308-F331.
voices: In search of educational equity, 17-36.
Padilla Zea, N., González Sánchez, J. L., Gutiérrez Vela, F. L., Cabrera, M., &
Tielman, K., den Brok, P., Bolhuis, S., & Vallejo, B. (2012). Collaborative learning
Paderewski, P. (2009). Design of educational multiplayer videogames: A vision
in multicultural classrooms: a case study of Dutch senior secondary vocational
from collaborative learning. Advances in Engineering Software, 40, 1241-1260.
education. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 64(1), 103-118.
Sen, A. K. (1992). Inequality examined. Oxford.
Traag, T., & Van der Velden, R. K. (2008). Early school-leaving in the
Netherlands. The Role of Student-, Family-and School Factors for Early School-
Silverman, D. (1993) Interpreting Qualitative Data. London: Sage
Leaving in Lower Secondary Education. Maastricht: Research Centre for
Education and the Labour
Smith, H. W. (1975) Strategies of Social Research: The Methodological
Imagination. London: Prentice Hall.
Ward, C. (2013). Probing identity, integration and adaptation: Big questions,
little answers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 37(4), 391-40
Steinbach, M. (2010). Eux autres versus nous autres: Adolescent students’
views on the integration of newcomers. Intercultural Education, 21(6), 535-547.
Steinkuehler, C. (2004). Learning in massively multiplayer online games. In Y. B.
Kafai, W. A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon & F. Herreras (Eds.), Proceedings
of the sixth international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 521-528).
Erlbaum: Mahwah.
Appendix
Pair 1
Pair 2
Pair 3
Students
Age
Country of
origin
Time in NL
School
group
School Performance
(General information)
Boy 1
7
Greece
12 months
3-4
Regular child
Boy 2
6
Serbia
5 months
3
Very talkative and curious, performs well at school
Boy 3
8
Israel/Italy
6 months
4-5
He’s very smart, performs well at school, but he has lots of
trouble at home, sometimes he finds it difficult to express
himself.
Boy 4
8
Egypt
6 months
4-5
He is very active, likes sports and he performs well in the
activities.
Girl 1
8
Poland
6 months
4
She performs well at school
Girl 2
8
Great
Britain
6 months
5
No special remarks, she performs well
ISSN: 1887-1542
Phone: +34 933 670 400
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Copyrights
n.º 43 • July 2015
23
In-depth
A Room With a Green View – Using and Creating
Games for Sustainability Education
Authors
Darragh Coakley
[email protected]
Cork Institute of Technology,
Technical Officer:
Department of Online
Delivery
Cork, Ireland
Roisin Garvey
[email protected]
Technical Officer:
Delivery
Cork, Ireland
This paper offers a qualitative review of the types of learning computer and video games
have been shown to support and goes on to focus in on the specific area of games
which are aimed at fostering knowledge and skills related to sustainable development,
in addition to cultivating a range of important generic metacognitive and 21st century
skills. The authors outline a number of theories related to sustainability education and
identify how games can be used to help support sustainable development education
through conventional skills and knowledge facilitation while also discussing the use of
games to help promote a shift in fundamental attitudinal dimensions by constituting a
form of procedural rhetoric (Bogost, 2007) based around the learner experiences of rulegoverned variables related to sustainable development. A variety of games which can
be used for sustainable development education from a spectrum of existing commercial
and serious video game titles across a wide range of game genres are presented and
their potential for sustainability education is discussed. An analysis of a game designed
to facilitate sustainability education which is currently under development as part of
an EU project - “Green Games” - is analysed and a number of conclusions are offered.
Gearoid O Suilleabhain
[email protected]
Head of Department:
Delivery
Cork, Ireland
Maja Pivec
[email protected]
FH JOANNEUM,
Professor: Dept. of
Information Design
Graz, Austria
Tags
Serious Games, Game
Based Learning, Games
for change, Gamification,
Sustainability
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
1. Serious Games for education
Digital games, regardless of their intended use, can be seen to aid in the development of
a range of specific competencies, social skills, cognitive abilities, motivation, strategic
thinking, problem solving skills, hand-eye coordination, motor skills and memory. Notably,
the pedagogical model and methods used within serious games environments are based
on authentic constructivist approaches of promoting collaborative learning and active
participation in order to build meaning. Shaffer (2007) notes that games build situated
understandings, effective social practices, powerful identities and shared values and ways
of thinking, and Whitton (2010) states that games facilitate “good learning activities are
intrinsically challenging – but achievable – and stretch and engage the learners through
gradually increasing levels of difficulty”.
One extremely beneficial characteristic of an educational game, for example, is the manner
by which instructional content can be integrated with general game characteristics. With
repeated use of a game, the learner is expected to elicit desirable behaviours based on
emotional or cognitive reactions which result from interaction with and feedback from game
play - in particular constant evaluation and assessment, evidenced in the progression in
difficulty in games, and feedback which is elicited by interactions & actions taken in the game.
In this manner, game-based learning helps to facilitate learning through authentic activities
and environments, a concept similar to the use of Cognitive Apprenticeship.
n.º 43 • July 2015
24
In-depth
While theory provides an extremely good basis for learning,
situation or context-based experience is where authentic
learning can be implemented and higher-level metacognitive
activities such as planning and evaluation, and critical and
creative thinking can take place and can help to facilitate
the application of knowledge and skills. The movement
towards this reflective and focused utilisation of knowledge
and skills, as a goal of the learning process, can be seen in
learning theories such as Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom et al.,
1956) and Sternberg’s Developing Expertise Models (1999)
(see Figure 1 below). The immersive nature of games are
a means to offer simulated environments in which players
can lose themselves for extended periods of time, of their
own volition, and can facilitate learning within a generated
context or situation in a way few other approaches can offer.
2. Games for sustainability education
Sauvé (1999), described sustainability education as being
similar to 3 spheres, one within the other - “The “space” of
environmental education corresponds to the third of the
following three interpenetrated spheres of interaction where
the basic development of a person occurs” (see Figure 2 below).
Figure 2. Sauvé’s three interrelated spheres of personal and social
development.
Figure 1: Sternberg’s developing expertise model
An additional key factor in the use of an educational game
is motivation. The game environment is motivating, so that
the learner repeats cycles within a game context. As noted
in “Intelligence as Developing Expertise” (Sternberg, 1999;
Sternberg, 1985): “Motivation drives metacognitive skills, which
in turn activate learning and thinking skills, which then provide
feedback to the metacognitive skills, enabling one’s level of
expertise to increase”. Games, built upon a constant loop of
activity and feedback, are intrinsically rewarding, and good
game design determines that a game offer the right amount of
challenge throughout to the user. This “right amount” refers to
a level of challenge designed to try the player’s abilities without
exceeding what the player is capable of and which adjusts the
challenge as the game progresses, allowing the player a sense
of personal control over the game activity.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
The core or central sphere refers to the learner’s own identity,
the second sphere refers to the learner’s interactions with
other individuals or groups. The third sphere, then, refers to the
biophysical environment which the learner is part of and the
relationship the learner has with this environment, as conveyed
through the sphere of interpersonal and social relations.
Sauvé noted of this third sphere that: “We also find here the
integration of ecological education and economic education,
both related to an individual’s and a society’s relationship to
the “home”— oikos...Economic education helps to manage our
relationships of consumption, organization, and exploitation of
the environment as a “home” (it is not, in fact, a question of
managing the environment but of “managing” our own choices
and behaviours in relation to it).”
Tragazikis et al. (2009) noted that Sauvé’s concept for
sustainability education as appropriate for the world of video
games, noting that: “In a game a player adopts three different
identities, the real one, the representation of the real one on the
avatar and finally the avatar itself on the digital environment”.
They identified that, from an educational point of view, learners
n.º 43 • July 2015
25
In-depth
should, through this process, develop a kind of “environmental
morality” which can influence the learner’s thoughts and
actions and through which learners should become aware of
the effects which their personal and social perceptions and
actions have on their environment through their personal ingame investigations. In this fashion, players can access a context
for understanding complex systems related to environmental
awareness. Tragazikis et al also drew comparisons between this
process of learners adopting particular roles and perspectives
in playing games and players occupying the zone of proximal
development.
An additional important element with regards to education
on sustainability is to illustrate the catastrophic results of bad
sustainability practice, such as global warming and deforestation,
as a way of increasing the learner’s “environmental morality”
- e.g.: environmental concern and/ or knowledge of same.
Malone and Lepper (1987) noted that imagined scenarios,
such as those found in digital games, can offer the learner
representations of real-world elements that allow the user to
experience resulting scenarios or effects from such elements
from multiple perspectives. Tragazikis et al seem to agree with
this finding, noting that “material may be learner more readily
when presented in an imagined context that is of interest than
when presented in a generic or decontextualized form”.
A useful additional element with regard to this scenarioorientated approach is also that it encourages to players to “think
outside the box” in confronting problems and creating solutions.
As noted by (Thomas and Brown, 2009, such approaches
require players to carefully examine situational potentials. Kelly
and Nardi (2014) see this as an extremely beneficial educational
element in games, in particular for games that deal with issues
of “futures of scarcity” in which environmental issues such
as climate change, resource depletion and pollution must
be considered by the player. Kelly and Nardi also note that
“Playfulness itself can be an asset for approaching the serious,
daunting problems that modern civilization faces...Games can
model making tough choices and cycles of scarcity, and games
are pushing beyond current mechanics to incorporate more
intellectually challenging options”.
This transformative learning experience can help to both
spark curiosity and foster persistence, opening students’
minds to new possibilities. Furthermore, this ability, to “play
out” representations of real-life scenarios (including, in the
case of sustainability training, scenarios which would result in
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
damaging real-life consequences such as global warming and
deforestation) resembles one Gee’s learning principles (2005),
the “Psychosocial Moratorium Principle”, whereby learners
can take risks in a space where real-world consequences are
lowered.
Bogost (2007) identified that a key element to teaching and
learning with games was not necessarily changing behaviours,
but fostering frequent deep thinking and having the learner
consider both the positive and negative results of actions.
The persuasive power of games can be used to elicit deep and
lasting emotional responses or critical reflections in the player.
Bogost identified these “Persuasive games” as a natural choice
for many bodies such as advocacy groups and lifestyle brands
who wish to persuade the player of a certain argument, noting
that such games not only deliver messages, but also stimulate
experiences - becoming rhetorical tools.
Indeed, this use of rhetoric is a key element for the use of
games for sustainability education. Bogost, speaking on the
ability of “persuasive games”, makes the case for what he terms
“procedural rhetoric” within games, which posits that games
can make powerful representations of real-world practices,
concepts and happenings, not only through the use of media,
but also through the use of processes which they embody
and models which they present. Bogost noted that a game
need not have an obvious political or ideological message to
do this, however, as he identifies that all games facilitate this
simply by the manner in which they reward some actions while
discouraging others, creating their own procedural rhetoric in
doing so.
Games concerned with sustainability education, therefore
can make strong rhetorical arguments that encourage
more sustainable lifestyles, or can outline the dangers of
unsustainable actions. Arora & Itu (2012) note that the trend
in many games concerned with educational elements are
able to indirectly affect players of their learning objectives by
“attracting, engaging and sustaining the players in this game
world and, through constructed narratives, fostering empathy
for the characters and creating shared knowledge about the
issue at hand, with the overall aim for personal involvement and
activism towards the issue.”.
Writing on the use of virtual tools and e-campaigns by INGOs to
inform, communicate, educate and raise funds, Arora & Itu also
noted that these methods “could be considered an innovative
idea of using a non-mainstream channel (which, nevertheless,
n.º 43 • July 2015
26
In-depth
has a wide potential public) to disseminate information about
social causes and reach the INGOs purpose of raising awareness
and enhancing social change.”. It is also worth noting that the
use of games as a medium for education brings with is an
additional, external factor, which is the community of gamers
who play games. Gamers, as a community, have a strong history
of activity and generativity outside and inside of games. Players
engage in modding, fan-fiction, screencasting, streaming,
producing and reviewing games and have, over the past number
of years, developed extremely strong communities of practice
around games. Players of the hugely popular MMOG “World of
Warcraft” have developed a Wiki community around the game,
for example, which at one point in time was the largest wiki
after Wikipedia. This willingness to engage in activity outside of
the game environment is an element which can be harnessed to
affect positive change in terms of activism.
The case for the use of games for sustainability education,
therefore, is a strong one. Adding credibility to this case is
a range of games, in a variety of game genres and formats,
currently available which facilitate education on sustainability.
This range of games includes both large-budget commercial
games as well as serious games whose aim is to provide training
on a specific area of sustainability education.
2.1. Commercial games
The primary advantage of the use of commercial games for
sustainability education typically (though not necessarily) lies in
the strength of these games “as” games. Commercial games tend
to possess larger budgets, more experienced and intellectual
individuals for development and the most up-to-date technical
hardware and software, creating games which provide players
with premium gameplay experiences. Furthermore, commercial
games and commercial game developers often command a
strong audience of followers and can access avenues of popular
culture which may be beyond serious games and developers of
serious games. Commercial games, however, as they are focused
strictly on providing the most engaging gameplay experience of
the player, tend to lack the specific objective of serious games.
Nonetheless, commercial games, even without this focus, are
able to facilitate education on issues related to sustainability.
Indeed, as noted by Jenkins et al (2003), serious games may
often fail to engage players due to a less enjoyable playing
experience (as a result of sacrificing rhetoric for gameplay),
whereas commercial games, with their focus specifically on
enjoyable game mechanics, can overcome this.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Games such as Sim City were early (and still are) examples
of games which confronted the player with choices and
responsibilities related to sustainability and environmental
morality. Decisions in games such as Sim City required the player
to decide what sources they would use to provide energy to
their virtual cities and necessitated that players adopt a realistic
viewpoint with regard to the advantages and disadvantages of
each - whereas renewable energy sources, for example, in the
game such as wind turbines reduced pollution and provided
energy, they required a comparatively large amount of real
estate and produced less power compared to other sources.
Fossil fuels in the game provided more energy and took up less
space, but would create pollution, impacting on the health of
residents. Nillsson (2008), for example, as part of a study which
involved using Sim City 4 to get students to create sustainable
cities, noted that: “When deciding which power plant to install
the students considered relationships between cost, amount
of power generated, and environmental damage. They got
to experience consequences of their actions and how they
influenced the development of the city, e.g. citizens moving in
or out, level of pollution, budget and tax problems, factors that
in this paper are referred to as simulated real world problems.”
Another commercial game for sustainability education is
Ludwig, a futuristic physics adventure game requiring the player
to learn about the need for renewable energy and the dangers
of depleting fossil fuels. The player must explore a futuristic
environment and discover ways of creating energy from
that environment. The game’s website provides educational
information for parents and teachers as the game is targeted
towards children between the ages of 10 and 14. This game
was developed in tandem with research undertaken as part of
a project studying motivation and learning transfer in serious
games - “Research on motivational aspects and knowledge
transfer in digital educational games for children aged 10 to 14
years”.
2.2. Serious Games
Serious games that are designed specifically for educational
purposes are often suitable for use alongside traditional teaching
methods in order to achieve various curriculum objectives.
Games for sustainability education are no different allowing
students, both formally and informally, to learn or revise content
related to this important area. While the advantages of serious
games often lie in the quality of the content within, they can
also make good use of the motivational and engaging effects of
n.º 43 • July 2015
27
In-depth
games while also allowing users to explore the development of
other skills (De Freitas, 2006). This motivation and engagement
in turn increases the potential for knowledge acquisition
and retention (Connolly et al., 2006) potentially leading to a
change in real-life habits or increased awareness of important
environmental issues.
Serious games for sustainability have taken many forms, from
simulations to turn-based strategy games and the recent
focus on sustainability and environmental education has seen
a steady rise in the development of serious games in this
genre. Simulations have their advantages for learning, as they
require critical thinking rather than putting an emphasis on any
traditional rote learning. Students engage in decision-making
and can test these decisions in risk free environments void
of real world consequences. But simulations are, in essence,
overly simplified versions of environments and, games like
Sim City and Civilisation in particular, are vastly complex ingame environments where users can essentially roam free. An
old case study on the benefits of Sim City and Second Life as
planning tools had pointed to a lack of fidelity in the responses
and actions of the characters as a significant flaw but noted the
use of evaluation tools such as graphs as aiding the analysis of
decisions (Devisch, 1998).
SimCityEdu: Pollution Challenge! addresses these and other
issues by adding structure and constraints to the environment to
enhance learning and by chunking information and tasks into 10
minute sessions to make them more suitable for the classroom.
The game, modified from the popular SimCity game series was
developed as an educational game to teach students about
environmental issues and pollution in cities and to provide an
integrated assessment methodology for the students. The game
encourages students to plan ahead but also take risks, and they
become invested in the town they’re creating, thus encouraging
them to analyse the decisions they have made and plan for a
more successful town in the future.
ElectroCity, a turn-based strategy game follows a similar model
whereby users in the role of mayor manage a virtual town
with gameplay involving the particular management of issues
relating to energy. The game development was funded by the
New Zealand energy company, Genesis Energy with a view to
increasing awareness of consequences of energy consumption
and misuse. The larger aim of this game is to use critical thinking
and decision making strategies to develop a town into a large
metropolis all the while maintaining the satisfaction of the
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
population. Catchment Detox is another turn-based strategy
game but with a focus on water and the environment in and
around catchment areas. The game requires the player to
manage a virtual river catchment over a set period of time
(100 “turns”) whereby the player must make decisions on
changing the landscape to facilitate activities and/ or deal with
environmental problems. The overall aim of the game is to
create an environmentally happy catchment with a sustainable
and thriving economy. These games takes advantage of the
particularly addictive nature of turn-based strategy games,
using simplistic gameplay mechanics in order to challenge the
user to improve their outcome. Both games are offered along
with supplementary educational material for teachers to use
the games in the classrooms. Generally, these games allow for
risk free, experimental learning to take place as the user takes
control of their virtual world under the guidance of their teacher.
Climate Defense is a “tower-defense” mobile strategy game
designed to specifically target environmental issues by teaching
students about the absorption of CO2 by plant life (and
elements which can reduce Co2). The game requires the player
to reduce the amount of CO2 approaching the top of the screen
by placing obstacles such as buds, flowers, fruit, each of which
absorbs CO2. There are two modes of play within the game –
one “ideal world” version where it is possible to reduce CO2
levels and another “realistic” version where the CO2 levels
increase and cannot ultimately be slowed by player actions,
ultimately aiming to highlight the real world implications of CO2
in the atmosphere.
PowerUp is a 3D action strategy game that focuses on energy,
engineering and diversity, with the objective of the game being
to generate clean energy while racing to save the planet from
ecological disaster. Each area of the energy- themed worlds
- water, solar and wind - has a major challenge to be solved,
all with four objectives and clear measures of success. The
game also allows players to interact with non-player character
“engineer guides”, whose personal experiences are provided
by professional engineering societies from various diverse
backgrounds. The gameplay is designed for classrooms with the
minimum age of 10 years; the recommended age is 12-16 years.
The homepage has teacher resources and recommendations for
planning the order of the lessons. The two lessons based on the
Orientation Center (Lessons 1 and 2) review concepts that are
integral to the game’s back story and provide students with an
insight into the diversity of the Engineering field.
n.º 43 • July 2015
28
In-depth
3. Green Games Project Game - The Great
Green Hipster Hotel
Seeking to build upon the characteristics and lessons of many
of the aforementioned games, the central aim of the Green
Games project (www.greengamesproject.com) is to develop
an online digital game and game-based-learning methodology
for the understanding and implementation of knowledge, skills,
strategies, tools and regulations related to food and water waste
and energy management specifically within the Tourism and
Hospitality sector, the game in addition advocates attitudinal
change and endorsement of relevant environmental values.
In keeping with the notion of a “persuasive game”, the developed
game invites players to interact with a complex system which not
only facilitates conventional skills and knowledge development
but also addresses the more fundamental attitudinal dimension
by constituting a form of procedural rhetoric based around the
learner experiences of rule-governed variables to do with food
waste, water waste and energy management within the Tourism
and Hospitality sector.
The game-based learning approach environment is seen as
an appropriate and innovative method for this, providing an
immersive, manipulable environment for education, which
allows for the tuning of the learning content to the relevant
learning group - as indicated by many of the games described
previously which addresses education in sustainability. This
game-based learning approach will also help modernize the
area of green-oriented skills, knowledge and regulation in
the Tourism and Hospitality sector. The game does not aim to
replace any current environmental sustainability education, but
rather offers an engaging means of complementing learning
and allowing lifelong learners to improve or retain knowledge
in the area.
3.1. Challenges of Applied Game Design
The specific game requirements required for fulfilling the
purposes of the Green Games project aims were varied,
involving the design of a game which would:
•
•
Facilitate the teaching of and acquisition of skills and
competences in the areas of food waste, water waste,
energy management related to tourism and hospitality.
Facilitate transfer of in-game skills and competences
developed to player’s real-life activities (both in a tourism
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
•
•
•
and hospitality context as well as for regular household
activities).
Provide an experiential learning occurrence.
Be fun to play and have a short and effective learning
curve.
Offer the right amount of challenge to the user throughout
their progression in the game, while also remaining easily
accessible/ playable to casual gamers.
A key element in this process was the selection of the game
genre. As outlined in the earlier description of games which offer
sustainability education, the blending of gameplay mechanics
with the educational elements of each game is frequently
closely tied to the genre which the game occupies. An additional
important additional element to this genre selection process
was that the associated game genre mechanics would ensure
that the game, to the player, would be engaging and enjoyable
to play - e.g.: that the game would be a “fun” game. This “fun”
factor constitutes an essential element for ensuring learner
motivation - as noted earlier by Connolly et al, motivation and
engagement in turn increases the potential for knowledge
acquisition and retention. A further consideration undertaken
was also the platforms which the game should be made available
on - the selection of which would determine the “spread” of the
game to ensure it reached the maximum number of players.
The genre chosen for the Green Games project game was that of
a mobile and tablet-based Business management game (e.g.: for
iOS and Android smartphones and tablets). This genre of games
is also often-referred to as “resource-management” (although
the two terms are not equivalent). In a similar fashion to other
games in this genre, such as the hugely popular games “Hay Day”
and “Middle Manager of Justice”, the player must effectively run
a business by hiring and training staff, managing and spending
resources and building and upgrading their premises. The game
addresses the issue of sustainability education by ensuring that
players are required to learn about effective sustainability in
tourism and hospitality (as well as in their own homes) by having
to build and manage their hotel while attempting to ensure that
they minimize food, energy and water waste through decisions
in terms of building and upgrading, staff training and spending
of resources.
The decision to develop the game in question as a business
management game was based upon a number of advantages
offered by the genre. Business management games typically
place the player in a management role – as a CEO or a manager
or a trainer - a position many of the target audience (tourism
n.º 43 • July 2015
29
In-depth
and hospitality students) will go on to occupy. Business
management games usually involve high fidelity to the business
in question, with a focus on a realistic experience of inhabiting
the role of a manager and the use correct and adequate sport
terminology - an element which facilitates effective transfer
when attempting to educate players on realistic challenges and
solutions which they may encounter in real-life. Furthermore,
business management games typically involve making a series
of strategic decisions and allowing the results to unfold, which,
as outlined previously, allow the player to engage in and
consider, at their own pace, the results of their own decisions in
relation to bad and good sustainability practice. In this capacity,
the competences of business management games are based
around problem-solving skills, meta-cognitive competences
and the player’s sense of agency - appropriate elements for
education on effective sustainability practice.
Business management games also tend to provide information
on the current state of the subject area, institutions and
individuals and to some extent, provide information and
demonstrate knowledge about specific business techniques.
As with the developed project game, business management
games emphasize primarily resource management, e.g. using
resources to hire staff, purchase equipment, etc.; followed by
engaging the player to a high extent in problem-solving and
decision making activities around their choices and developing
and testing hypotheses thus improving players strategy to
achieve better performance. In this way, games in this genre
support the development of meta-cognitive competences by
demonstrating interconnections between different elements of
the game and how player’s decisions affected profit and loss.
Business Management Games also provide a good learning
platform for business students to learn about sustainability
related aspects from a managerial point of view, and can develop
a rhetoric around the influence and importance of various
management factors necessary for a successful business. In
this manner, this genre can therefore be used to highlight social
issues (such as sustainability) in a realistic manner.
3.2. Strategies for
Objectives
Reaching
the
Learning
Within the context of a mobile business management game, the
Green Games Project game aims to provide players with a quirky,
humorous learning experience, in which the task of the player
is to create a successful, environmentally-sustainable, hotel for
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
a variety of “hipster” guests. To achieve this goal, players must
build and upgrade a range of bedrooms, bathrooms, restaurants
and other features to meet guest requirements and must also
hire staff to manage these facilities (see Figure 3 below). By
meeting guest demands and managing their available resources,
players can grow their hotel effectively, constantly improving its
size, capacity and reputation.
Figure 3. Gameplay graphic of a player’s hotel
In addition to building the hotel, players must also ensure that
they run their hotel in an efficient and sustainable way if they
wish to be successful in the game. Players begin with a limited
amount of water and energy (until the hotel as a whole can be
upgraded). In order to keep expanding their hotel, players must
therefore minimize the amount of water & energy that rooms in
the hotel use. This can be done through improving rooms with
upgrades that reduce energy/ water waste, such as energyefficient lights and tap aerators (see Figure 4 below), or through
training hotel staff on how to reduce waste and improve
sustainability. Players must also upgrade their restaurant to
serve all manner of dishes – primarily “hipster” meals such
as veggie burgers and kimchi tacos - and train staff in how to
avoid food waste. Players must also order food without ordering
too much which results in waste, or too little which results in
unhappy guests. These sustainability actions require players to
reflect upon and critically evaluate their decisions with regard
to the necessity of balancing the expansion of their hotel and
their ability to generate income with the need to maximize
sustainable practice in order to facilitate expansion and income
generation. This process requires players to engage in strategic
decision-making which can involve a course of trial and error
and which also calls upon players to assess their decisions in
terms of effectiveness and to consider alternative courses of
action.
n.º 43 • July 2015
30
In-depth
Figure 4. Optional upgrades for a bedroom to reduce energy/ water
waste
Figure 5. An upgraded bedroom in the process of receiving additional
upgrades to reduce energy/ water waste
objects and associated assessment, the developed game utilizes
an approach similar to the “freemium” mechanic implemented
by hugely successful mobile games such as “Hay Day”, “Clash
of Clans” but subverts this model for pedagogical purposes.
Within commercial freemium games such as Hay Day/ Clash
of Clans, players pay microtransactions to access additional
features, or to speed up aspects of the game (e.g.: time required
for construction of new in-game elements, training of in-game
character for improved performance, etc.). In the developed
Green Games project game however, players can speed up certain
in-game events (such as construction of a room, or upgrading of
upgrades of equipment to reduce energy/ water waste, or staff
training in some element of improved sustainable practice) not
with microtransactions, but by watching training animations and
correctly answering the accompanying assessment questions.
Figure 6. An educational animation which can be viewed to speed up
the process of upgrading a bedroom’s light bulbs
For further implementing education on sustainability, the
developed game also provides training on the implementation of
specific equipment, practices and opportunities related to food,
water and waste management. This is facilitated through the
provision of animated content in-game which is focused on the
specific practice/ equipment being implemented (e.g.: swapping
standard light bulbs in a bedroom for energy-efficient light
bulbs, or training staff on the correct way to separate waste in
the kitchen). Each of these educational animations also involves
a series of assessment questions which the player is required
to answer to demonstrate learning. If the player answers the
question correctly, the process of upgrading is sped up, if the
player answers incorrectly, the process of upgrading does not
happen. To incentivize the player to engage with these media
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
31
In-depth
The animation sequences and additional resources (in-game or
as separate resource) to support achieving learning objectives.
Figure 7. An assessment question related to the animation in figure
6 which the player is required to answer to complete the process of
speeding up the upgrading of the bedroom’s light bulbs
In this way, there is a genuine, game-related incentive for players
to engage in and demonstrate learning, as demonstrated by the
success of game mechanics used by successful freemium games.
The educational element of the game is therefore targeted both
to provide the player with:
•
•
The ability to partake in trial and error regarding decisions
resource management for real-life scenarios (e.g.:
the expansion and management of the hotel against
generated income and limitations in energy, food and
water), requiring deep thinking and the evaluation of
decisions made against positive and negative outcomes.
The option to undertake “direct” training and assessment
on specific elements of practical sustainability through
the provision of structured, media-rich media (training
videos and animations related to specific equipment
upgrades or staff training) and accompanying assessment
and feedback on same.
In addition to the developed project game, associated guidelines
and training for students, vocational teachers and others
receiving, providing or participating in vocational training in the
tourism and hospitality sector is offered by the Green Games
project to facilitate the deeper learning process. This additional
learning content is offered in the form of:
•
•
•
Information packs for teachers and materials and that are
based on the research phase
PowerPoint introductions for teachers to present the
game and outline the learning objectives
Lesson plans outline that can be further adapted to
individual setting
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
In addition, several possible applications of the use of the
game for educational purposes are provided along with the
developed game, primarily focused on three steps: preparation,
playing, and debriefing. In the “preparation” phase, topics
and their importance are outlined along with learning goals.
The “playing” session can be carried out as part of the class
activities, or as additional homework, or a combination of inclass and after class activities, following the inverted classroom
pedagogy. In the “debriefing” phase the in-game experiences
need to be related to and transferred to real life context. To
support better learning and discussion in this phase, students
can also be asked to prepare for this phase in form of written
reflections and play experience journal.
4. Conclusion
Sustainable development education remains a hugely relevant
and indeed urgent pursuit in the developed and development
world alike. It is a challenge to us as educationalists and to those
of us who promote the transformative potential of games for
learning.
The immersive nature of games in this context is seen
as particularly interesting as a means to create learning
environments in which learners as players can lose themselves
for extended periods of time, and begin to think from the “inside
out” gaining situated understanding and, ultimately, a kind of
“environmental morality” (Tragazikis et al., 2009).
In the Green games project this basic notion has been linked
to Sauvé’s theoretical framework for sustainability education
as well as Bogost’s (2007) recconceptualisation of games as
procedural rhetoric to address hard to get at attitudinal learning
and, ultimately, learning transfer.
To date a range of games with varying levels of resonance
with the above and with varying degrees of success have been
developed. The range again includes a variety of genres and
formats, and incorporates both commercial games as well
as more niche market serious games. The former of course
includes the hugely influential and often imitated game SimCity
which can be seen as an early example of a recreational game
which confronted the player with choices and consequences
with regard to sustainability and, arguably, this notion of
environmental morality. It is moreover a direct antecedent to
n.º 43 • July 2015
32
In-depth
serious game titles such as SimCityEdu: Pollution Challenge!
And ElectroCity.
The Green Game project seeks to build upon the characteristics
and lessons of some of these games in developing an online
digital game for the understanding and implementation of
knowledge, skills, strategies, tools and regulations related to
food and water waste and energy management. In keeping with
the theoretical frameworks indicated at the outset, the game
is intended as a form of procedural rhetoric based around the
learner experiences of rule-governed variables to do with food
waste, water waste and energy management within the chosen
Tourism and Hospitality industrial sector.
Rather than following the template established by SimCity and
its serious game clones the Green Game looks to the popular
mobile and tablet-based Business management game genre
to create a compelling and immersive gaming experience. A
number of reasons for this choice are noted and includes the
way in which such games can be seen to facilitate a sense of
agency and to require, inter alia, certain problem-solving skills,
and meta-cognitive competences.
In addition to the challenges of creating a game that is both fun
and educational the project has faced the challenges typical
of a multidisciplinary project, including attitudinal resistance,
differing work and research methods and related communication
barriers. The project has had to draw on expertise in, variously,
ecology and sustainable development, business management,
hospitality and tourism studies, game design and development,
instructional design, user experience, e-learning etc. As is
typical of successful interdisciplinary projects, however, all
members, whatever their original background, have gained
from the experience. The common theoretical, methodological
and technical groundwork has moreover, the project team
believe, made the effort more than worthwhile. All have been
joined in the common belief in the need for a greater focus on
the promotion of sustainable development education both for
the well-being of the citizens of our world but also – a point
often missed --for the development the economy.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
33
In-depth
References
Malone, T., and Lepper, M. (1987). “Making learning fun: A taxonomy of
Arora, P., & Itu, S. (2012). “Arm chair activism: Serious games usage by
no. 1987: 223-253.
intrinsic motivations for learning”, Aptitude, learning, and instruction 3,
INGOs foreducational change”, International Journal of Game-Based
Nilsson, E. (2008). “Simulated real worlds: science students creating
Learning, 2(4), 1-17.
sustainable cities in the urban simulation computer game SimCity 4”,
Bloom, B., Englehart, M. Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956).
ISAGA 2008 Conference.
“Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational
goals”, Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, Toronto: Longmans,
Sauvé, Lucie. “Environmental education between modernity and
postmodernity: Searching for an integrating educational framework”,
Green.
Canadian Journal of Environmental Education (CJEE) 4, no. 1 (1999): 9-35.
Bogost, I. (2007) Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames,
Shaffer, D. W. (2007). How Computer Games Help Children Learn. New
Cambridge: MIT Press
York: Palgrave
Connolly, T., Boyle, E., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T. and Boyle, J. (2012) “A
systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games
and serious games”, Computers & Education, Volume 59, Issue 2, 661-686
De Freitas, S. I. (2006). “Using games and simulations for supporting
learning”, Learning, Media and Technology, 31(4), 343–358.
Devisch, O. (2008). “Should Planners Start Playing Computer Games?
Arguments from SimCity and Second Life,” Planning Theory & Practice,
Sternberg, RJ (1999). “Intelligence as Developing Expertise”, Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 24(4): 359-375
Sternberg, R. J. (1985): Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence,
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Thomas, D. and Brown, J. (2009). “The play of imagination: Extending the
literary mind”, In: K. Leidlmair (editor), After cognitivism: A reassessment
of cognitive science and philosophy. Dordrecht: Springer, 99–120.
9:2, 209-226
Gee, J. P. (2005). “Good video games and good learning”, Phi Kappa Phi
Forum, 85(2), 33-37. Retrieved from http://www.phikappaphi.org/web/
Tragazikis, Panagiotis, and Michael Meimaris (2009). “Engaging kids with
the concept of sustainability using a commercial video game–a case study.”
In Transactions on Edutainment III, . 1-12. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Publications/PKP_Forum.html
Jenkins, H., Squire, K. and Tan, P. (2003). ‘You can’t bring that game to
school!’ Designing Supercharged! In B. Laurel (editor), Design research:
Whitton, N. (2010). Learning with Digital Games: A Practical Guide to
Engaging Students in Higher Education. New York: Routledge
Methods and perspectives. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, . 244–252.
Kelly, S. and Nardi, B. (2014). “Playing with sustainability: Using video
games to simulate futures of scarcity”, First Monday 19, no. 5.
ISSN: 1887-1542
Phone: +34 933 670 400
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Copyrights
n.º 43 • July 2015
34
In-depth
To Game or not to Game – a pilot study on the use of
gamification for team allocation in entrepreneurship
education
Authors
Rajiv Vaid Basaiawmoit
[email protected]
Aarhus University
Aarhus, Denmark
Eszter Somos
[email protected]
University of Hull
Hull, United Kindgdom
Ervin Szalai
[email protected]
GraviTalent
Budapest, Hungary
Kata Szabo
[email protected]
GraviTalent
Budapest, Hungary
Taru Deva
[email protected]
Biosymfonix
Skanderborg, Denmark
Tags
Teamwork, gamification,
serious games, team
allocation, business
education
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
“A need for a well-balanced team” is a well-known adage, be it in sports, organizations
or startups. There are numerous studies that suggest which type of teams perform
better than others for a certain task, but the process of that team formation itself is
rather unexplored and next to non-existent in the educational literature. Furthermore,
educators burdened by course loads and schedules tend to opt for the easiest method
of team formation – a random allocation or self-selection by the participants. Taking
into account well known benefits of diversity in teams, we have tried to explore team
allocation by educators and the use of gamification to try and answer the question
- Is it possible to make team allocation easier for the educators as well as more fun
for the students? We compare a serious gaming solution with an intensive instructorselection method for team allocation. This pilot study finds that the game-allocated
teams performed equally as the instructor-selection method, but the former saved time
for the educator while being fun for the students. While there were some hints that
the game-allocated teams performed marginally better than the instructor-selectionallocated teams, further studies need to be done to confirm our hypothesis.
1. Introduction
The importance of teamwork on learning in both organizational and educational settings is
well established (Stevens & Campion, 1994; Henke et al 1988). From an entrepreneurship
education perspective, the concept of teamwork is even more essential as it is increasingly
evident that most venture creation processes are team-based and not individual-based
(Forbes, Borchert, Zellmer-Bruhn, & Sapienza, 2006). While entrepreneurship research has
largely been “individual” focused (Forbes & Miliken, 1999), a growing body of research is now
forming around the study of entrepreneurial teams (Clarysse & Moray, 2004; Ruef, Aldrich
and Carter, 2003). Nevertheless, a lot of these studies tend to study the process within these
entrepreneurial teams and not necessarily the process of the entrepreneurial team formation
itself (Forbes et al., 2006). There is even less evidence available for studies on team formation
for entrepreneurial teams in a “classroom” setting (Huang-Saad, 2009) which serves as our
starting point for this pilot study. Nevertheless, this is not a theoretical study on what criteria
one should choose for the formation of entrepreneurial teams but rather an exploratory
approach on studying entrepreneurial team formation and the use of gamification as an aid
to known approaches. We first define certain background information on team-performance
and team allocation and then report on the intervention following a 7 week entrepreneurship
course. This, being a pilot study, takes an exploratory approach into team allocation methods
and tries to correlate certain interventions with overall team performance measured at the
end of the course.
n.º 43 • July 2015
35
In-depth
What do we call a good performing team?
Although the positive effect of any kind of team-work has long
been established in educational settings (Henke et al., 1988),
an additional aspect is how well the teams perform. Apart from
the benefits of team-work itself (improving communication
and cooperation skills), one would expect students to also
experience effective team-work with a good outcome at the
end of a project.
For reaching this goal and maximizing learning opportunities,
a good task has to be found which is similar enough to a real
world environment to give usable knowledge and experiences
to the students but is also feasible in the learning environment
and allows a fair comparison between the teams. An established
way of implementing this concept is the use of synthetic task
environments (Cooke & Shope, 2004). In the synthetic task
environment, participants use similar cognitive skills and
behaviours as in the real world analogue which makes it a
valuable teaching tool.
Measuring the quality of work of real life groups is usually
aided by objective outcomes (e.g. technician repair and
response times: Wageman, 1995; sales: Gladstein, 1984; client
complaints: Cohen and Ledford, 1994). When these kind of
self-evident proofs are not available, like in the case of some
project groups, a frequently used measure is the opinion of the
manager or supervisor (Pina, Martinez & Martinez, 2008). In our
synthetic task environment this was actualized by a jury ranking
the teams’ overall performance over the course of 7 weeks by
judging their final performance. The use of an external panel
of judges is quite common within the entrepreneurship area.
Much of start-up success is attributed to convincing investors/
stakeholders about the potential of the team and the venture to
obtain investment. In a classroom setting, the entrepreneurship
education method used by the lead author tries to simulate this
approach by taking students through a mock-entrepreneurial
journey in the course of 7 weeks where they have to work in
teams, come up with an idea/venture and a business plan/
model to support it and then defend the idea in front of a mock
jury consisting of academic and business leaders. While the
jury has only a 15 minute window to judge the teams in, their
combined experience and business acumen should be able to
evaluate an idea and contrast it with good team performance as
in real-life where venture jury panelists not only select a good
idea but also a good team.
How should we allocate members?
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
When assigning students to teams for a project, a fundamental
question is what to the allocation should be based on. There
are three basic methods commonly used when assigning
student teams: methods using random, self-selected (student)
or instructor/facilitator-selected approaches (Bacon, Stewart, &
Anderson, 2001). Random assignments are generally the most
commonly used methods for experiments with student teams
and are also considered the fairest as they replicate experimental
design conditions the best (Bacon et al., 2001). Another study
of 40 instructors in large-scale business simulations found a
higher prevalence for self-selection as a method (Decker, 1995).
Engineering design research on the other hand suggests that
instructor chosen teams are more effective in the academic
environment (Felder, Woods, Stice, & Rugarcia, 2000).
Considering that the population of students used in the study
is a mix of engineering and natural science students (clubbed
as STEM students) and due to literature that promotes the
prevalence of diversity in teams (Bacon, Stewart and StewartBelle, 1998; Comer 1995; Ruef et al., 2003), the lead author’s
classroom normally uses the instructor-assignment method.
Team composition theories use the participants’ knowledge,
skills, abilities and other characteristics (KSAO) as a starting point.
Mathieu et al. (2014), in their review, differentiated between
two basic methods of team composition. They examined how
much a method used the individual or the team as the basis for
team allocation. While the individual-based models focused on
each person’s KSAO alone, the team-based models considered
how KSAOs complemented each other. For example, when trying
to maximise all team members’ team-generic competencies
(e.g. conflict management, Marks, Mathieu, and Zaccaro, 2001)
would be an individual-based solution. In contrast, with a teambased perspective the distribution of KSAOs is considered. For
example, when examining retail assistant teams, Neumann,
Wagner & Christiansen (1999) found that job performance
was better in teams with more diverse extroversion and
emotional stability traits. Similarly, Humphrey et al. (2011)
reported that big variance in extroversion combined with
similar levels of consciousness among team members led to
the best performance in MBA teams. In another study focusing
on innovation (Miron-Spektor, Erez & Naveh, 2011) it has been
shown that including both creative and conformist members in
a team enhanced team performance.
Thus, there is ample evidence of instructors or business units
using several methods such as the ones aforementioned to
compose teams. However, there is no comprehensive review
n.º 43 • July 2015
36
In-depth
on the outcomes or pros and cons of all such facilitatordriven team allocation methods. For example, an instructor
in Copenhagen Business School uses the Danish self learning
styles inventory based on Sternberg’s Theory of Mental Self
Government (Sternberg, 1997) to form teams with different
learning styles across the teams as an overall strategy (Nielsen
T, 2009). The Kolbe Conative Index (KCI) gives a psychometric
system that can be used to form successful teams (Kolbe, 1989;
1993). Another frequently employed metric is the social-style
implement, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Hammer
and Huszczo (1996) review its use in improving and predicting
team performance. Hermann (1996) confirms that teams of
individuals with diverse thinking styles obtain better results than
homogeneous teams. When considering team composition the
type of task also needs to be taken into account. It has been
suggested that while diverse groups outperform homogenuous
groups in complex tasks, routine problems are solved easier
by homogenous groups (Watson, Kumar & Michaelsen, 1993;
Higgs, Plewnia & Ploch, 2005).
How could games help in measuring characteristics?
Although measuring psychological characteristics has
traditionally been done through paper based tests, it is not the
only possible way. In recent years, games have been used in
increasing number of areas in science, business and education.
The term serious games refers to “any form of interactive
computer-based game software for one or multiple players to
be used on any platform and that has been developed with
the intention to be more than entertainment” (Ritterfeld &
Worderer, 2009, p. 6). Serious games preserve the fun and
engagement features of traditional games (here referring to the
entertainment & game perspective provided in video games as in
the definition by Ritterfeld & Worderer, 2009) while also serving
“serious” goals (e.g. teaching, informing, assessing and drawing
attention to issues). Serious games have been used in a huge
variety of domains from military to healthcare, serving various
functions from teaching to assessment (Susi, Johannesson &
Backlund, 2007). We would like to acknowledge the current
constraints of the “serious game” definitions as even fun-games
or games designed without any serious-game intent have led
to “serious” effects such as positive development of sensory,
cognitive and/or social skills (Ritterfeld & Weber, 2006). While
this extends the debate of where the domain boundaries of
serious games lie, discussing this is beyond the scope of this
study and as there is a general consensus to the aforementioned
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
definition, this is the definition that provides the context for the
serious game intervention in this study.
Furthermore, the validity of psychometric assessments such as
those of the MBTI or JTI and their usage to form teams is still not
established and has recently also attracted increased scrutiny
amongst researchers (Michael, 2003; Pittenger, 2005). This also
opens up the arena for exploration for alternate methods – one
of them being serious games.
When speaking about assessment in the context of serious
games, the most common use is assessing a just-learned skill or
knowledge (Belotti et al., 2013). However, using the same logic,
more general characteristics can be measured through gaming
as well. For example, several studies have examined players’
behaviors in commercial online games and categorized them
into different player types like aggressive or social player (for
review, see Hamari & Tuunanen, 2014).
In the present experiment, a serious game was used to measure
cognitive characteristics of students to serve as a base for team
allocation. There are definite advantages of using games for
cognitive assessment instead of other methods. First of all, we
can look at the experience of the student. Playing a game is fun
and engaging while filling out questionnaires can be unexciting
and they are also often transparent. Questionnaires measure
what the participants know about themselves and are willing
to reveal and are susceptible to faking attempts or matching/
presenting an “idealized self”, as studies by Mahar et al. (1995)
showed that respondents using an MBTI inventory had identical
fake-job and stereotype typologies (Mahar et. al., 1995).
In contrast, during play it is easy to forget about the assessment
situation and thereby make it difficult to fake skills. While,
technically, expert gamers are known to be able to “game a
game” (and in this way be similar to respondents “gaming a
questionnaire”), studies of these incidences have found that
these are transitionary phases and are difficult to do willfully
(Frank, A., 2012). This is even more difficult when the “true”
objective of the game is obscured. A game, with an agenda
intentionally hidden to the participiants, thereby presents a more
reliable method to evaluate a candidate’s skills. Furthemore,
analysing the gameplay itself can shed light on hidden
characteristics which players are not necessarily conscious
of. Additionally, from an educator’s perspective, traditional
psychological assessments take a long time to evaluate. The
gaming solution (the Virtuoso game by GraviTalent) used in this
study doesn’t burden academic staff as the results are calculated
n.º 43 • July 2015
37
In-depth
with predefined algorithms. It is important to highlight that the
Virtuoso game profiles are “individual”. However, depending on
a certain task need, one can overlay multiple profiles to see if
the task criteria are fulfilled.
Research question
Based on the above background and the fact that the gamebased digital solution for generating “individual” psychometric
profiles had a short game-play time of 20 minutes, we decided to
explore the option of allocating teams using the Virtuoso game
and comparing it to the manual instructor-selected method.
Thus, our research question is: “Are there any differences in
overall team performance and team dynamics in instructorselected teams versus a gamified approach to team selection?”
2. Background Context
We have earlier explained the reason for the instructor-selected
method over the two other methods of random-assignment
and student self-selection. It is important to contextualise
this a little further in context of this exploratory design. The
instructor-selected method is atypical within Aarhus University
and especially so within entrepreneurship education practice.
When the lead author contacted other teaching teams and did
an arbitrary survey within the university, he found out that the
main method in use was the random or self-selection method.
The lead author also observed that the formation of the selfselected teams led to teams formed of either - all-male, or allfemale teams. Another course (not taught by the lead author),
using “constrained” self-selection (i.e. the imposition of a topic
of interest as an amalgamation point for individuals with an
interest in the topic/problem), also indicated that teams formed
over similar interests were low in gender and professional
background diversity. Self-selection seems to be the most
popular team assignment method in simulations (Decker, 1995).
It is easy, requiring no action on the teacher’s part except when
remainders emerge (as discussed later), and it often leads to
higher initial group cohesion, expediting group development
(Mello, 1993; Strong & Anderson, 1990). Although not all selfselected teams are initially cohesive (some players may simply
choose people sitting close by for teammates; see Norris &
Niebuhr 1980), early cohesion apparently gives a group a leg
up in performance. Minimal instructor effort and positive team
cohesion results clearly make this an “easier” method from
both practical and methodological considerations. However,
the distinct disadvantage of this method such as selection of
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
friends, prevalence of remainders and at a cost of reduced
diversity or higher homogeneity (also known in theory as in
Bacon et al, 2001) were readily observed as described above.
Thus, the instructor-selected method was experimented as an
alternative to achieve the diversity gains despite the higher
practical/resource costs.
About Virtuoso
Virtuoso, the game used for team allocation in this study is the
product of GraviTalent (www.gravitalent.com). Virtuoso is in
commercial use as a selection tool in the hiring process (please
read details about the game below in the Methods section). By
exploring cognitive and other psychological skills, this serious
game offers help in assessing how well the applicant would fit
the job and the organizational culture. Recently, Virtuoso has
also been used to examine the composition of existing work
teams. The lead author after meeting the GraviTalent team at
their demo stand at a gamification conference and trying out
the game came up with the idea to test its use for making teams
in his classroom as an alternative approach to the instructorselection method that he uses. This resulted in collaboration
between GraviTalent and the lead author of Aarhus University
to explore this new use case.
3. Methods
Participants
The participants were 36 STEM students at Masters Level from
Aarhus University who were enrolled for an entrepreneurship
course run by the lead author. The participants were mostly
Danish students barring one exchange student from Spain.
The participants were divided into two sets based on gender,
academic discipline and JTI profiles, such that each set had
more or less equal number of different profiles. This was done
to remove any biases due to inequality between the sets. One
set was allocated to the instructor-selection method (labelled as
R-teams, where R=Rajiv, the instructor & lead author) and the
other to the game-based method of team formation (labelled
as G-teams, where G=GraviTalent, the firm behind the Virtuoso
game). The detailed distribution of the two sets is available at
http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1494666
Instructor-selection method (for teams R1-R5)
In the present study we focused on the composition of the
teams rather than on each individual alone. As the students
participated in the same course, we presumed similar level of
n.º 43 • July 2015
38
In-depth
knowledge and abilities. The focus of the team allocation was
the measured skills and other characteristics. The overarching
goal of the instructor-selected method that the lead author
employs in his teaching practices is of increased diversity from
multiple fronts. Thus, the method achieves this mix by combining
team-formation literature of strong-ties and weak-ties (Ruef,
2002), gender mixes (Ruef, Aldrich and Carter, 2003), cultural
background (Davidsson, 2006), Jung’s theory of personality
types - JTI (Budd, 1993) which is similar to the MBTI (Myers’
1962). While an interesting combination in itself and results in
high-performing teams (as observed from team engagement
and overall performance, subjective though) in a short 7-week
course (spring semester, 2015), the mixed use of these methods
requires both time and resources. The JTI workshop normally
takes place in a 3-hour time span with an additional feedback
session on a following day. To be able to identify, to some extent,
the students’ knowledge of weak/strong ties the students are
also asked to submit a 2 page assignment on “Who they are”
that combines information about their social and professional
networks with their skills. Finally, this is coupled to a half-a-days
work of assigning mixed teams based on gender, cultural and
professional diversity and ties. This then results in an arguably
well-balanced team.
The GraviTalent method (for teams G1-G4)
The Virtuoso Game
All participants played the Virtuoso game at the start of the
course and informed that this was one of many methods used in
this course to form diverse teams. They received an invitation for
the game which they opened individually from their computers
at any time convenient to them. In this game, their goal was to
build a structure to reach the target point positioned at the top
of the screen (Figure 1.). A training level was used to familiarize
the participants to the building of structures and procedures.
After completion of this short training they had twenty minutes
to find a solution for the measured challenge. The gameplays
were recorded and analyzed.
Based on their gameplay participants were scored along four
dimensions. The first dimension (with the two endpoints
intuitive and analytical) measured how much one was likely to
make extensive plans before acting and how much one preferred
a keenly structured and precise solution. The second dimension
(with the two endpoints experimenting and focused) showed
how much one aspired solely for the goal and tried to avoid
unnecessary and potentially wasteful attempts in the process.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
The third dimension (with the two endpoints conventional and
innovative) depended on how much one preferred original and
unconventional solutions over safe and conventional ones.
The fourth dimension (with the two endpoints specialist and
generalist) indicated if one’s profile had a few disproportionately
dominant features or if it was more well-balanced.
Figure 1. Screenshot of the Virtuouso game
The participants in the game-based group were allocated
into teams using the GraviTalent method. The main focus
during team allocation was to create teams with maximum
potential for effective work. Each team needed students
towards the endpoints innovative and experimenting in the
first two dimensions for creative input and people towards the
analytical end to deliberate the different ideas. Also needed in
each team were members who are closer to the focused end
on the second dimension and closer to the conventional end
on the third dimension to make sure that the project finishes
on time and the ones towards the generalist end of the forth
dimension who communicate well with everybody and who
can fill in the missing roles. The allocation process was based
on the algorithmic solution of the stable roommate problem
(Irving, 1984). All 16 participants in the GraviTalent group were
measured along all four dimensions using an ordinal scale from
1 to 10 (10 being the endpoints analytical, focused, innovative
and generalist respectively). The final teams had similar mean
values in all dimensions (see Table 1).
n.º 43 • July 2015
39
In-depth
Table 1. Descriptives of the four dimensions in the four teams.
Team performance measures
instrument can be accessed here: http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/
m9.figshare.1494671
2. Results
Individual
Workload & blind trial conditions
All participants in the course who work in teams and even come
up with team solutions at the end of the course are subject to
a final individual 20 minute oral examination that measures
their understanding of the entrepreneurial process they have
experienced and theoretical considerations of their individual
and team-performance. The grades are based on individual
performance in an oral examination of 20 minutes where the
student pitches the idea for 2 minutes and then defends his idea
in a Q&A format where the instructor and an external examiner
are present. The grades are assigned in a 7 point scale (-3 to 12)
according to the Danish Grade Assessment scale.
Team-based
All participants in this course have to present their team
idea at the end of the course to an external 4-member jury
panel comprised of business and academic experts. These
jury members are unaware of the students’ processes and
backgrounds and the students are informed about the jury
panelists just 3 days before their final pitches in front of the
jury. The students are expected to present their cumulative
experience of the past 6 weeks of the course and the resultant
“product/business idea” in a 3-minute pitch and 7 minute
business model explanation followed by a 5 minute Q&A with
the jury. The standardized jury criteria to rate the teams can be
accessed here: http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1494670
The business ideas always relate to the student’s background (in
this case Science & Tech and IT) and involve the students finding
a problem of their own within a defined arena (for example food
waste) and then coming up with a solution that they can solve
with their skill sets in diverse teams (for example a nano-based
food spoilage detector that send you a message on the phone).
All students were informed that they will be grouped based
on their individual profiles, background, psychometric profiles
and interests. The students were grouped into teams by the 2nd
week of the course. They participated in active team-work in the
course for a total of 5 weeks (meeting bi-weekly for 4 hours per
teaching session per week). Thus the total in-class interaction
time pre-team formation was 16 hours. The total in-class
interaction time in teams (excluding the final jury presentation
day) was 36 hours. While there was some off-class interaction
required, this was not measured and it was dependent upon the
teams to find time for tasks as they deemed fit. It was observed
that some teams worked more than the others while some others
made more effective use of the time and decided to focus most
of their activities and meetings within the class-hours owing to
official scheduling differences that were a result of them being
from two different disciplines (Engineering vs Basic Sciences).
The students were blind to the team allocation intervention
experiment and most believed that the only tool used was the
JTI and to some extent their discipline and gender mixes. They
totally forgot about the game that they played after the first
couple of weeks and in their final report (a reflection assignment
over the entire process they went through) none acknowledged
the use of the GraviTalent game. This could be attributed to the
fact that it was just a short 20-30 min game session very early
on in the course done individually, thus indicating low impact
at a conscious level. This can be an indicator that the subjects
were “blind” to the experiment at a conscious level and that the
experiment has not been biased by the participants’ knowledge
of differences in the team formation.
Team assessment questionnaire
Grades
At the end of the semester, students completed a shortened
version of the Team Assessment Questionnaire (Simmering &
Wilcox, 1994). One or two items were selected from the subscales Team foundation, Team functioning, Team performance,
Team skills, Team climate and atmosphere and Team identity
and two items were added about the distribution of work within
the team. All questions used a 5-point Likert scale. The survey
One student from the instructor-selection group did not receive
a final grade due to a no-show at the exam and was therefore
excluded from the analysis. The average of the grades in the
GraviTalent group was 10.31 (SD=2.63) and 9.58 (SD=3.37) in
the instructor-selection group. As the number of cases was low
in both groups, a Mann-Whitney test was conducted. According
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
40
In-depth
to this test the final grades of the two groups did not differ
significantly (U=141.5, z=-0.38, p=0.7) as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2. The final grades received by the members of the
GraviTalent and instructor-selection teams. The error bars represent
confidence interval.
Jury ranking
The jury selected the three best performing teams and gave out
one reward for the best pitch. The first and the second place
went to teams allocated by the GraviTalent method (G2 and G1
respectively). The best pitch award was won by the instructorselection team (R3). The team-survey average response data,
the team ranking as rated from survey responses and the jury
ranking are shown in Table 2.
analysed data can be accessed here: http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/
m9.figshare.1494849. Significant differences between the two
groups (G-teams Vs. R-teams) were found in the responses to
Q1-“Everyone on the team had a clear and vital role” (p=0.023)
and Q8 “I was pleased to be in this team” (p=0.021). For the other
questions, though the averages indicate some differences, they
were not significant enough. A more in-depth team analysis was
conducted on the survey responses. The first surprising result is
already documented in Table 2, where the cumulative average
mean of all responses (excluding Qs. 2 & 9) indicates that the
highly positive team-work score ranks the teams according
to the student’s self-assessment and that this ranking closely
correlates with the jury ranking.
While the above results may suggest that the G-teams have
performed relatively better than the R-teams and also cite
good team-work experience, it is still too early to call this result
definitive in any way. This is further seen when the data is
analysed by contrasting individual responses with each of the
team-members as shown in Table 3. We focus on 3 of the G-teams
that feature in the top-5 ranked teams to further analyse if the
differences seen between the two methods are meaningful.
Team G3 had only two respondents which was too low for any
meaningful pattern analysis and therefore was not included in
this analysis. Table 3 highlights the individual responses of the
team-members to four survey questions – Q2 & 9 on the right
hand side (green-to-cream color scale) and questions 3 & 8 on
the left hand side (yellow-to-red color scale). Qs 2 & 9 were not
included in the team work average shown in Table 2 as these are
“subjective type responses”. Qs 3 & 8 were selected to correlate
in more objective terms with the parameters being measured
in Qs 2& 9.
Table 2. Average data of the team-work survey instrument (excluding
the responses from Qs. 2 and 9 due to their subjective nature) and
comparison of rankings from students self-assessment of how well
the team worked with jury ranking.
Questionnaire
The questionnaire was completed by 29 students of which 13
belonged the G-teams and 16 belonged to the R-teams. For
each team there was a minimum response from at least two
students and an overall response rate of 80.5%. For comparing
the two groups a Mann-Whitney test was conducted as
the number of cases in both groups were low. The detailed
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Table 3. Individual responses of the G-team members to four survey
questions – Q2 & 9 on the right hand side (green-to-cream color
scale) and questions 3 & 8 on the left hand side (yellow-to-red color
scale) correlating the subjective answers to the objective ones.
Green is positive for team work while cream is not. Similarly, red is
considered negative for team-work while yellow is positive.
n.º 43 • July 2015
41
In-depth
Team G2 that won the external jury 1st rank and also topped
the team-work rank (as shown in Table 2 earlier) indicates
coherence and agreement from all team members on shared
work-load distribution and good team-work in general. Team G4
by contrast shows a slight disagreement by one of the teammembers on equal sharing of the work-load even though there
is a general consensus that the team worked well together. The
sharpest insight, however, comes from team G1 where there
is a clear disagreement by one team member (highlighted in
red – red indicating a negative outcome for team work) w.r.t.
work-load sharing, a fact that is supported by two others and
negated by one. The same person also does not agree that the
team has worked well together nor does he think there was a
good team work – despite the team performing well overall.
While statistical measures may be inclined to consider this an
outlier, in terms of team-work analysis, this is data to be further
explored. A more detailed comparison (also for the R-teams
that consist of 3 respondents or more) in similar fashion as
shown in Table 3 can be accessed as open-access data here:
http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1494857
collects a mini-CV, a network base and the students’ JTI profiles
coupled to subjective information based on initial interactions
with the students. However, students can be sensitive sharing
some of this personal information and even though the method
is entirely optional, the lead author has seen some students
raising a few concerns or declining to share information like, for
example, their JTI profiles (which they have the right to). As the
students were not aware of the Virtuoso game test – gauged
by their final reflection assignments and anonymized evaluation
forms – and did not raise any concerns about the game or
acknowledge its presence – indicates that the method was
unobtrusive. However, the lack of bias and “perceived fairness”
criterion of the game-based method for team allocation has not
been evaluated directly through interviews in this preliminary
study. This will be evaluated in future studies.
Teams of students, allocated by two different methods, worked
together through a semester and created a business project.
The outcome of their work was measured by two means: the
students received a final grade and the teams were judged by
a jury. The instructor-selected team formation has been the
method of choice for the lead author – with historically good
results observed both by self-reporting and anonymized student
evaluation reports. However, there is a significant resource
cost and unconscious bias risk with this method which is why
it is not that widely used in addition to an overall recognition
of “fairness” that is generally accompanied with a randomly
assigned method (Bacon et al., 2001). Thus, exploring alternate
methods of team formation gave rise to the opportunity to
test an in-market-available game - developed for soft skill
assessment in the hiring process – as a tool for team allocation
in an educational setting.
We then looked at the grades of the individual students.
The grades do not measure team performance and even if
the students have worked in groups, they have to defend
their knowledge individually. Why are we including a grade
assessment then if it does not measure team performance in
any direct way? This is primarily to establish a baseline of the
knowledge level of the individuals within the teams and looking
at the grades (as seen in Figure 1) there was no difference
between the achievements of the team members (individually)
from either of the two sets (G or R). This result may reflect
the fact that all teams have, in general, performed well in the
course – which would positively impact knowledge uptake
and retention. Experiential learning in teams is known to work
against some common pitfalls of team-work such as groupthink,
social loafing, under-delegation etc. and enhance learning and
knowledge uptake (Kayes, Kayes and Kolb, 2005). It is thus not
a far cry that the experiential learning approach has impacted
the grade distribution. The equal grade distribution across both
team-sets indicates a relatively even academic level and points
to the fact that any difference that would come up in the team
sets would probably stem from team composition effects rather
than from students with variant abilities being assigned to the
different team sets.
The method of allocation itself – individuals play a short game,
game generates a profile and the profiles are used to create
well-balanced teams can be viewed as inherently “fair” or
comparable to the “fairness” criteria of a “random” method.
This stems from – a) the teacher is blind to the student profiles
per se and b) Gravitalent gets very basic information about
the student. In the instructor-selection method, the instructor
However, for arguments sake, if we accept that similarly
skilled students were placed in all teams then the difference
in the performance could well be based on how well the team
worked together. As mentioned in the introduction it has been
proposed that heterogeneous groups could profit from their
diversity (Humphrey et al., 2011; Miron-Spektor, Erez & Naveh,
2011) especially when the task is ill-defined or where a solution
3. Discussion
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
42
In-depth
is unknown. The unknown solution context is relevant within
the mentioned entrepreneurship course and thus the focus
on setting up diverse teams congruent with what theory also
calls for. The educator also requested that GraviTalent prioritize
diversity and skill spread in their allocation method. Thus, more
than the game itself, it was the complementary diversity that
the Virtuoso game facilitated that could be the underlying
success factor here. However, it must be stated here that a
look at the detailed team composition (as accessible here:
http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1494666 ) – shows that
the winning team (G2) is an exceptionally well-balanced team
also in terms of the JTI profiles. This, of course, is pure coincidence as Gravitalent did not have access to the JTI profiles
of the participants. Nevertheless, it supports the argument
that a well-balanced team is not only a function of diversity
– i.e. more diversity is not necessarily better but balanced
diversity is (Pierce & Aguinis, 2013). This assumption is also
marginally supported by the results from the questionnaires.
Team members from GraviTalent teams reported often that
they felt the division of labour was satisfactory. This could be
because a more heterogenous team made it easier to find a
role for everyone. This is also shown by high agreement that
everyone had a clear and vital role in the team. This could be
the reason that GraviTalent team members were more pleased
to be in their teams than instructor-selection teams and that
they received the highest rankings from the jury. However,
the analysis of the results (Table 2) also showcase that the R3
team was also well balanced and had a higher team satisfaction
score than the other 3 GraviTalent teams. Again this could be
a co-incidence but the matching of the jury results with the
top 3 student-self-assessed team-work functions are striking
indeed and are a strong indicator of further investigation into
this interesting phenomenon of game-based facilitation. Gamebased facilitation does not necessarily have to be viewed
as a replacement of current methods – whether random or
instructor-facilitated – but can certainly be a supplement to
current methods and especially helpful under time and bias
constraints.
The opinion of a higher ranked/experienced person is often
used as the measure of performance when more objective
measures are not avaliable (Pina, Martinez & Martinez,
2008), which in this case comprised of an external jury panel
composed of 4 panelists – 2 from academia within technology
and entrepreneurship domains whereas 2 others from the
industry. The jury ranked the top 3 teams in terms of idea,
business model and pitching/communication (most pitches
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
were team-pitches). Two of the three top-ranked teams fell in
the G-set while 1 in the R-set. Is this co-incidence or indicative
of a gamified solution being better if not equal to the instructorfacilitated team formation? At this stage the data set is too small
to justify a clear answer and we will have to repeat the studies
on a larger data set. Also, as Table 3 shows, the “team-work”
measure itself could be doubtful even if one person in a survey
indicates poor team work. While we offer no clear answers
as no follow-up interviews or analysis were done (and ideally
needed to corroborate this observation), this indicates that we
take the aforementioned correlations with a grain of salt until
more definitive studies are done to investigate this further.
4. Conclusion and limitations
The study shows that there is no major or significant difference
between the instructor-selected teams and the game-selected
teams when viewed at an aggregate level. Any purported
differences, like that of the GraviTalent teams bagging the
two best jury awards could also be pure co-incidence and not
necessarily representative of team-work or team performance.
However, this goes on to show that the instructor-selection
method with its higher resource cost is a more expensive teamallocation method than the game-based cost with the latter
having an additional element of entertainment and fun.
Limitations to be noted:
a. Results of the jury can be totally coincidental: It can be
argued that the winning teams were in the G-team by
coincidence. One could speculate as to what the results
would have been, had the students from the winning
teams been in the R-team albeit in possibly different
conformation.
b. Jury can be biased to ideas that they like: Bias towards a
more interesting idea compared to team dynamics could
skew the results.
c. Subjective bias of the teacher while forming teams using
the manual method: There is a possibility that unknown
to the teacher, he selected some students over others
based on his understanding and perception of the
students. Additionally, time pressure biases could exist as
well.
d. Team survey done retrospectively (after 3 months):
This could possibly introduce retrospective bias (false
memory) and winners’ bias (winning makes you think you
had a good team experience). This argues for the next
study to conduct a survey before the jury presentation.
n.º 43 • July 2015
43
In-depth
e. Small sample size
f. Unproven method of GraviTalent: This is a new use-case
and the method needs to be proven theoretically and
tested more rigorously.
g. Game-play biases: Negative bias against game-play does
exist and there is a possibility that the students just
participated in the game just because they were asked
to. On the other hand, there could also be perceived
performance pressures by some students that could
affect their performance. More studies are therefore
needed from field or other researchers into this as this is
a new field.
h. Scheduling issues of students from different disciplines
put pressure on the students’ abilities to meet often.
There thus could be an artificial factor on student team
performance or perception.
References
Bacon, D. R., Stewart, K. A., & Anderson, E. S. (2001). Methods of
Assigning Players to Teams: A Review and Novel Approach. Simulation &
Gaming, 32(1), 6–17. doi:10.1177/104687810103200102
Bacon, D. R., Stewart, K. A., & Stewart-Belle, S. (1998).
Exploring
predictors of student team project performance. Journal of Marketing
Education, 20(1), 63-71.
Bacon, D. R., Stewart, K. A., & Anderson, E. S. (2001). Methods of
assigning players to teams: A review and novel approach. Simulation &
Gaming, 32(1), 6-17.
Bellotti, F., Kapralos, B., Lee, K., Moreno-Ger, P., & Berta, R. (2013).
Assessment in and of serious games: an overview. Advances in HumanComputer Interaction, 2013, 1.
Budd, R. J. (1993). Jung Type Indicator: The technical manual. Letchworth:
Psytech Intemational Ltd.
Clarysse, B. and Moray, N. (2004). A process study of entrepreneurial
team formation: the case of a research based spin-off.” Journal of Business
Venturing, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp 55-79.
Cohen, S.G., Ledford, G.E. (1994) The effectiveness of self-managing
teams: a quasi-experiment, Human Relations, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 13-43.
Comer, D. R. (1995). A model of social loafing in real work groups. Human
Relations, 48(6), 647-667.
Cooke, N. J., & Shope, S. M. (2004). Designing a synthetic task environment.
Scaled worlds: Development, validation, and application, 263, 278.
Davidsson, P. (2006). Nascent entrepreneurship: empirical studies and
developments. Now publishers inc.
Decker, R. (1995). Management team formation for large scale simulations.
In J. D. Overby & A. L. Patz (Eds.), Developments in business simulation &
experiential exercises (22) (pp. 128- 129). Statesboro, GA: Association for
Business Simulation and Experiential Learning
Delgado Piña, M. I., María Romero Martínez, A., & Gómez Martínez,
L. (2008). Teams in organizations: a review on team effectiveness. Team
Performance Management: An International Journal, 14(1/2), 7-21.
Felder, R. M., Woods, D. R., Stice, J. E., & Rugarcia, A. (2000). The future
of engineering education II. Teaching methods that work. Chem. Engr.
Education, 34(1), 26–39.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
44
In-depth
Frank, A. (2012). Gaming the Game: A Study of the Gamer Mode in
Mahar, D., Cologon, J., & Duck, J. (1995). Response strategies when faking
Educational Wargaming. Simulation & Gaming, 43(1), 118–132.
personality questionnaires in a vocational selection setting. Personality
Forbes, D. P., & Milliken, F. J. (1999). Cognition and corporate governance:
and Individual Differences, 18(5), 605-609.
Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups.
Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Donsbach, J. S., & Alliger, G. M. (2014).
Academy of management review, 24(3), 489-505.
A review and integration of team composition models moving toward a
Forbes, D. P., Borchert, P. S., Zellmer-Bruhn, M. E., & Sapienza, H. J.
(2006). Entrepreneurial team formation: An exploration of new member
dynamic and temporal framework. Journal of Management, 40(1), 130160.
addition. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 30(2), 225–248.
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based
doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00119.x
framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of management
Gladstein, D.L. (1984), “Groups in context: a model of task group
effectiveness”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, pp. 499‐517.
Hamari, J., & Tuunanen, J. (2014). Player types: A meta-synthesis.
Transactions of the Digital Games Research Association, 1(2).
Hammer, A. L., & Huszczo, G. E. (1996). Teams. In: A. L. Hammer, MBTI
Applications. Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Henke, John W., Jr., William B. Locander, John T. Mentzer, and George
Nastas, III. (1988) Teaching techniques for the new marketing instructor:
Bringing the business world into the classroom. Journal of Marketing
Education 10 (summer): 1-10.
review,26(3), 356-376.
Mello, J. A. (1993). Improving Individual Member Accountability in Small
Work Group Settings. Journal of Management Education, 17(2), 253–259.
Michael, J. (2003). Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as a Tool for
Leadership Development? Apply With Caution. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 10(1), 68–81. doi:10.1177/107179190301000106
Miron-Spektor, E., Erez, M., & Naveh, E. (2011). The effect of conformist
and attentive-to-detail members on team innovation: Reconciling the
innovation paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 54(4), 740-760.
Neuman, G. A., Wagner, S. H., & Christiansen, N. D. (1999). The
Hermann, Ned (1996). The Whole Brain Business Book, New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Higgs, M., Plewnia, U., & Ploch, J. (2005). Influence of team composition
and task complexity on team performance. Team Performance
Management: An International Journal, 11(7/8), 227-250.
Huang-Saad, A. (2009). Fostering the Entrepreneurial Mindset in
relationship between work-team personality composition and the job
performance of teams.Group & Organization Management, 24(1), 28-45.
Nielsen, T. (2009). A collaborative perspective on learning transfer. Journal
of Workplace Learning, 21(1), 58-70.
Norris, D., & Niebuhr, R. E. (1980). Group variables and gaming success.
Simulation & Games.
the Engineering Classroom. In 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education
Pierce, J. R., & Aguinis, H. (2013). The Too-Much-of-a-Good-Thing Effect in
Conference. San Antonio, TX.
Management. Journal of Management, 39(2), 313–338.
Humphrey, S. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., Meyer, C. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2011).
Piña, M. I. D., Martinez, A. M. R., & Martinez, L. G. (2008). Teams
Personality Configurations in Self‐Managed Teams: A Natural Experiment
in organizations: A review on team effectiveness. Team Performance
on the Effects of Maximizing and Minimizing Variance in Traits. Journal of
Management, 14, 7-21.
Applied Social Psychology, 41(7), 1701-1732.
Pittenger, D. J. (2005). Cautionary comments regarding the Myers-Briggs
Irving, R. W. (1985). An efficient algorithm for the “stable roommates”
Type Indicator. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,
problem.Journal of Algorithms, 6(4), 577-595.
57(3), 210–221.
Kayes, A. B., Kayes D. C. & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Developing teams using the
Ritterfeld, U., Cody, M., & Vorderer, P. (Eds.). (2009). Serious games:
Kolb team learning experience. Simulation and Gaming. 36 (3): 355-363
Mechanisms and effects. Routledge.
Kolbe, K. (1989). Wisdom of the Ages. Kolbe Corp, Phoenix, AZ.
Ritterfeld, U. & Weber, R. (2006). Video Games for Entertainment and
Kolbe, K. (1993). Pure instinct: business’ untapped resource. Crown.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Education. In P. Vorderer & J. Bryant (Eds.), Playing Video Games-Motives,
n.º 43 • July 2015
45
In-depth
Responses, and Consequences (pp. 399-413). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Watson, W. E., Kumar, K., & Michaelsen, L. K. (1993). Cultural diversity’s
Erlbaum, Inc.
impact on interaction process and performance: Comparing homogeneous
Ruef, M. (2002). Strong ties, weak ties and islands: structural and cultural
and diverse task groups. Academy of management journal, 36(3), 590-602.
predictors of organizational innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change,
11(3), 427-449.
Ruef, M., Aldrich, H. E., & Carter, N. M. (2003). The structure of founding
teams: Homophily, strong ties, and isolation among US entrepreneurs.
American sociological review, 195-222.
Simmering MJ, Wilcox IB. (1994) Team Assessment Questionnaire. Bryn
Mawr (PA): I.B. Wilcox.
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Thinking styles. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Stevens, M. J., & Campion, M. A. (1994). The Knowledge, Skill, and
Ability Requirements for Teamwork: Implications for Human Resource
Management. Journal of Management.
Strong, J. T., & Anderson, R. E. (1990). Free-riding in group projects:
Control mechanisms and preliminary data. Journal of Marketing Education,
12(2), 61-67.
Susi, T., Johannesson, M., & Backlund, P. (2007). Serious games: An
overview.
Wageman, R. (1995) Interdependence and group effectiveness,
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol 10. Pp. 145-80.
ISSN: 1887-1542
Phone: +34 933 670 400
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Copyrights
n.º 43 • July 2015
46
From the field
An Experiment to Assess Students’ Engagement in a Gamified
Social Learning Environment
Authors
Jorge Simões
[email protected]
Adjunct Professor at Instituto
Superior Politécnico Gaya
This paper presents a research work conducted to address students’ disengagement
by investigating if gamification can make a contribution to solving this problem. The
disposition to experience flow, a psychological state, was used as a measurement of
engagement. An experiment allowed testing a research hypothesis concerning flow in
a gamified environment.
Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal
Sérgio Mateus
[email protected]
Teacher at Escola EB Eng.
Fernando Pinto de Almeida
Leça da Palmeira, Portugal
Rebeca Redondo
[email protected]
Associate Professor at
University of Vigo
Vigo, Spain
Ana Vilas
[email protected]
Associate Professor at
University of VigoWashington,
DC; USA
Vigo, Spain
Tags
Gamification, Social Learning
Environment, Engagement,
Flow
1. Introduction
While schools are struggling with the lack of motivation and engagement of many of their
students, digital technologies and video games are part of most children and teenagers lives
in today’s societies. Gamification, the use of game elements in non-game contexts (Deterding
et al., 2011), is a way to take advantage of digital technologies and use the video games’
power to increase people’s engagement and motivation.
Although education is pointed for some time as an important field to apply gamification
principles, further research was needed to investigate the impact of gamification on students’
engagement and how to measure that impact. The tendency to experience flow was chosen
as a measure of engagement. Flow is a psychological state felt by people when they act with
total involvement (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975).
A Social Learning Environment (SLE) is technological platform including or allowing the access
to different tools and applications, namely Web 2.0 applications. These tools help students to
learn and socialize. An SLE includes some social elements that provide an open environment
for students to work, co-create, communicate and learn collaboratively. But, like with most
technology-enhanced environments, SLEs need motivated and engaged users to be effective.
To investigate if gamification can make a contribution to improving students’ engagement,
while users of a SLE, a controlled experiment was envisioned. This experiment was designed
to test the hypothesis that a gamified version of a SLE causes in its users an increase in their
disposition to experience flow than the non-gamified version. A high tendency to reach the
flow state while performing an activity was considered in this research as a high engagement
with the activity.
The experiment used Schoooools, a fully functional K-6 SLE (Simões and Aguiar, 2013a). It
follows a wiki-way philosophy for the co-creation of contents. Schoooools combines Web
2.0 features relevant for schools, simplified and integrated in a single platform, like easy-touse content editors, wikis, blogs, private social networks, image galleries, calendars, private
messages, chat, shared files, and micro-blogging.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
47
From the field
2. Participants
The subjects in the experiment were 26 students from a
Portuguese Primary School. From these 26 students, 14 were
girls (53.8%), and 12 were boys (46.2%). The majority of them,
18 students (69.2%), reported that they spend part of their
free time playing video games. All the subjects had previous
experience using the SLE Schoooools.
3. Procedure
To measure flow it was chosen a psychometric survey by using
a questionnaire based on the Portuguese version (Gouveia et
al., 2012) of the Dispositional Flow Scale-2 (DFS-2), proposed
by Jackson and Eklund (2002). This scale assesses the tendency
of experiencing flow and is also a widely used instrument to
measure flow (Hamari et al., 2014). The DFS-2 has been applied
to the study of various physical activities, education, arts and
digital gaming and has also been used in the research of flow
in gamification (Hamari and Koivisto, 2014). DFS-2 assess the
nine flow dimensions identified by Csikszentmihalyi (1975):
challenge-skill balance, merging of action and awareness, clear
goals, unambiguous feedback, concentration on the task at hand,
sense of control, loss of self-consciousness, transformation of
time, and autotelic experience.
A set of learning activities was proposed in Schooooools
as homework using traditional and gamified versions of
Schooooools. The experiment followed a one group pre-test
and post-test design: the subjects used a non-gamified version
of Schooools to perform a set of activities and then they used
the gamified version for similar activities. In between, they
answered the questionnaire, and after they had performed
the activity in the gamified version, the subjects answered
the questionnaire a second time. The effect was taken to be
the difference between the pre-test and the post-test scores
regarding DFS-2. Only 24 questionnaires were considered to
process the results. The experiment used, as a statistical test,
the t distribution, also known as the t-Student distribution. This
test is suited for small sample sizes (less than 30). Since the
samples are not independent, they were paired.
The setup of the experiment started with several interviews
with the subjects’ teacher. The teacher received an informal
description about what was intended with the experiment: a
set of gamified learning activities must be initially chosen. The
activities must take place for a few hours or days. Each activity
must be split into several tasks. Each activity is a mission in the
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
gamified setting and each task is level within the mission. Each
mission must have an overall goal and the mission’s levels must
have intermediate goals concerning the mission’s goal. All goals
must be quantified.
The concept of gamification and how it could be used in learning
settings was also detailed. The flow concept was also presented,
and a list of game elements (available in Schoooools) and some
game techniques were provided to the teacher (Table 1). These
elements and techniques (Table 1) are part of a gamification
framework developed as a result of previous research (Simões
et al., 2013b). They are some of the most used game elements
and game techniques found in existing gamified systems, mainly
according to the studies from Dicheva et al. (2015), Seaborn
and Fels (2015), Thiebes et al. (2014), Hamari et al. (2014), and
Thiebes et al. (2014).
Game elements are game components that are found in several
different kinds of games. These elements are normally visual
components that the players are aware of when they play
and correspond to the game interface design patterns from
Deterding et al. (2011). Game techniques create the gamelike environment that promotes the target behaviors. Game
techniques are implemented by game elements and by the way
they are used. Rules govern how the game elements work, how
they interact and how they implement the game techniques.
Table 1. Framework’s Game Elements and Game Techniques
Game Elements
Game Techniques
Points
Clear and intermediate goals
Badges
Content unlocking
Leaderboards
Time pressure
Levels
Fun failure
Progress bars
Multiple paths
Social graphs
Social interactions
Virtual currency
Virtual economy
To set up the gamified learning activities, the subjects’ teacher
followed a reference guide with a sequence of well-defined
steps (Table 2).
Steps
1. Activity and context
characterization
What to do
Describe the context nature,
characterize the players, define
the target behaviors and the
corresponding target activities.
n.º 43 • July 2015
48
From the field
2. Define the activity
goals
Define which are the goals for the
target activities and how they are
quantified
3. Apply the game
techniques
Set the game techniques with a clear
view on how to apply them
4. Apply the game
elements
Apply game elements to meet the
game techniques
5. Set the rules
Define the rules to apply to game
elements and game techniques
6. Deploy the solution
Insert the rules in the system, define
the rewards schedule and start the
activity
7. Evaluate the results
Observe the target behaviors and
readjust the activity if the behaviors
are not observed
possible value for the DFS-2 total score is 45. In the pre-test,
the mean value of the subjects’ total score was 36.73 (with a
standard deviation of 3.70). In the post-test, the mean value of
the subjects’ total score was 37.85 (with a standard deviation
of 3.84). The post-test median (38.38) was slightly higher than
the pre-test median (37.50). The post-test lower quartile was
also higher than the one found for in pre-test (Figure 1). In the
statistical test, the test value, t, was calculated was equal to
1.57. From t-test tables, a critical value of 1.32 was used (df =
23, α = 0.10). Since the t value was higher than the critical value,
the research hypothesis was accepted.
Regarding Steps 1 and 2 from Table 2, the teacher defined
the missions’ activities and for each one, a goal was set. Each
mission’s overall goal was also quantified. For example, in one
activity each student (the player) must choose a country and
then identify the country’s capital in an activity created in the
platform; the player should write a text related to the country,
make a drawing of the country’s flag, and share a photo of the
capital and a link about the country or its capital; the player
must complete the activity, at least, once.
In Steps 3 and 4 the framework’s elements and techniques were
applied (Table 1). Some rules for gamified activities were set in
Step 5:
•
•
•
•
•
•
When a mission ends, the player earns a badge;
When the player finishes a mission’s level, the players
earns points;
When the player reaches a certain amount of points, the
player gets a physical reward;
When all the class reaches a certain amount of points, the
all class gets a reward;
A leaderboard was set, ranking players by points;
When the activities end, the top 5 players in the
leaderboard got a physical reward.
The activities were then deployed (Step 6). Students executed
the activities as homework, mainly accessing the platform from
their homes.
4. Results
After the pre-test and the post-test, the subjects answered
the questionnaire and the scores were processed, according
to the DFS-2 manual (Jackson et al., 2010). The maximum
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Figure 1 – Boxplots of DFS-2 Total Scores: Pre-test and Post-test.
5. Discussion
The results’ analysis showed a slight increase in the class total
average score (+1.13). The statistical test aimed to find if the
differences between the total average scores in the post-test
and the pre-test were due to chance or if the results could be
considered statistically significant. The computed test value,
t, was higher than the critical value. With these results, it was
possible to accept the research hypothesis with a significance
level of 90.00%.
Some threats to the experiment’s internal validity were identified:
testing effects, instrumentation, and statistical regression.
Testing effects mean that the subjects can get used to the test,
which may lead to bias. Answering the same questionnaire in the
pre-test and in the post-test may lead to score gains. This threat
was addressed by taking the questionnaire a second time several
n.º 43 • July 2015
49
From the field
weeks after the pre-test to decrease the chances that subjects
make comparisons with previous answers. Instrumentation
or instrument change was considered because the subjects’
teacher helped them answering the questionnaire, by reading
aloud (as recommended by DFS-2 authors when subjects’
ages are below twelve years old) and explaining some of the
questions. This could affect the experiment since the teacher,
unconsciously, could have changed the explanation criteria or
use different judgments. This threat was addressed by asking
the teacher to use the same criteria in the pre-test and in the
post-test. The adequacy of the DFS-2 to the subjects’ ages was
of concern. The teacher’s active presence, when the subjects
were answering the questionnaires, was also a way to deal with
this other potential threat. The teacher read and explained each
question to the subjects to avoid misinterpretations. Statistical
regression, or regression towards the mean may occur when
subjects with extreme scores (very high or very low) are
selected. In subsequent tests these subjects are likely to get
closer to the mean. This threat was considered and two subjects
with extreme scores in the pre-test were rejected.
6. Conclusions
The experiment had some limitations, but it was possible to
conclude that the class had a statistically significant increase,
although small, in the students’ tendency to experience flow
while using the gamified version of the SLE. These results
allowed to accept the research hypothesis: a gamified version
of a SLE caused in its users an increase in their disposition to
experience flow than the non-gamified version. However, these
results generalization should be carefully considered. The
research hypothesis was accepted but with a relatively small
significance level.
The empirical study with young students, presented in this
paper, made a contribution to improve the knowledge of how
gamification, a new trend in education, can be effectively used
to improve students’ engagement in technology-enhanced
learning environments.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
50
From the field
References
International Conference on Gameful Design, Research, and Applications,
pages 107–110, New York. ACM.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. Jossey Bass,
Simões, J., Redondo, R., Vilas, A., Aguiar, A. (2013a). Using Gamification
San Francisco, CA.
to Improve Participation in a Social Learning Environment. In: The PLE
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., and Nacke, L. (2011). From game
Conference 2013 Proceedings.
design elements to gamefulness: Defining ”gamification”. In Proceedings of
the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future
Simões, J., Redondo, R., Vilas, A. (2013b). A Social Gamification Framework
Media Environments, MindTrek ’11, pages 9–15, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
for a K-6 Learning Platform. Computers in Human Behavior, n. 28, p. 1-1.
Dicheva, D., Dichev, C., Agre, G., and Angelova, G. (2015). Gamification in
Thiebes, S., Lins, S., and Basten, D. (2014). Gamifying information systems
education: A systematic mapping study (in press). Educational Technology
- a synthesis of gamification mechanics and dynamics. In Twenty Second
and Society, 18(3).
European Conference on Information Systems, Tel Aviv.
Gouveia, M., Ribeiro, J., Marques, M., and Carvalho, C. (2012). Validity
and reliability of the portuguese version of the Dispositional Flow Scale-2
in exercise. Revista de Psicolog ́ıa del Deporte, 21(1):81–88.
Hamari, J. and Koivisto, J. (2014). Measuring flow in gamification:
Dispositional Flow Scale-2. Computers in Human Behavior, 40(0):133 –
143.
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., and Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? – a
literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In proceedings of
the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pages 6–9,
Hawaii, USA.
Jackson, S., Eklund, B., and Martin, A. (2010). The FLOW manual: The
manual for the flow scales. Technical report, Mind Garden, Inc.
Jackson, S. and Eklund, R. (2002). Assessing flow in physical activity: The
Flow State Scale-2 and Dispositional Flow Scale-2. Journal of Sport and
Exercise Psychology, 24(2):133–150.
Seaborn, K., Pennefather, P., and Fels, D. (2013). Reimagining leaderboards:
Towards gamifying competency models through social game mechanics. In
Lennart E. Nacke, K. H. and Randall, N., editors, Proceedings of the First
ISSN: 1887-1542
Publisher: elearningeuropa.info
Phone: +34 933 670 400
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Copyrights
n.º 43 • July 2015
51
From the field
What really works in gamification?
Short answer: we don’t know, so let’s start thinking like
experimenters.
Authors
Andreas Lieberoth
[email protected]
Research Fellow, Ph.D.
Aarhus University, Denmark
This brief discussion addresses the practice of effect documentation in gamification
from the standpoint psychological and behavioral sciences. Based on experience from
the field and the lab, I suggest that the two most promising weapons for 2015 and
beyond will be an experimental mindset and creative partnerships connecting datadriven research with real-world design practices. Even though still a rarity, I mention two
recent experiments to support the view that gamification research can be subjected to
the same standards of evidence as similar interventions in e.g. social or health sciences.
1.Year zero
Tags
Games are everywhere, and they have mysterious sway over both players and those who look
to influence people – from teachers to marketers. In fact, looking closely at games seems to
be an awesome resource for understanding human psychology in general. With sentiments
like this, the field has been characterized by a “year zero” narrative (as per Feldwick, 2015)
similar to what has been seen in the recent excitement about behavioral economics and
neuroscience among professionals (Ferrier & Fleming, 2014; Morse, 2014). The big difference
is, that while neuroscience and behavioral economics are longstanding scientific traditions
now mounted in the interest of e.g. marketing and behavior design, gamification was originally
a purely practice oriented idea, which has later been subjected to import of scientific ideas,
in order to substantiate popular claims (e.g. Arczewski & Marczewski, 2012; Bogost, 2011;
Deterding, Dixon, Khaled, & Nacke, 2011). In a year zero narrative, we tell ourselves that the
world has changed with digital ludification, and that we, the gamification community, are
frontrunners in ushering in a new era of education, communication and behavior design.
Gamification
But we are facing an evidence problem and a crisis of method. We have yet to discover which
of the popular design tricks actually work, and under what circumstances (Hamari, Koivisto,
& Sarsa, 2014; Lieberoth, Kock, Marin, Planke, & Sherson, 2014; Lieberoth, Møller, & Marin,
2015). From an evidence standpoint, we simply don’t know. In 2014 Hamari and colleagues
found that only 24 empirical studies were available, and many of those did not use tools like
inferential statistics, control groups or pre/post-measures document how well each design
worked and compared to what.
The field will mature steadily no matter what researchers and practitioners do, but in
2015 we can still ride quite the momentum, and collect data from successful as well as
failed experiments. By thinking like scientists and establishing creative industry-research
partnerships, we can, nay must, weed out seductive but behaviorally unfruitful ideas, and
learn how to implement what really works.
Let me give a few examples from the field.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
52
From the field
2. The Aarhus framing study
In a randomized controlled trial (for a full report, see Lieberoth,
2015), we had people play a social exchange game, but in one
condition the game mechanics were stripped away leaving
only gamefully looking components like cards and playing
pieces. People in these two conditions were equally intrinsically
motivated, and significantly more so than a control group
doing the tasks with no gameful elements or mechanics. When
gamification is typically tested, it is as interwoven clusters of
game elements and other factors that might each influence
people in some way, or not at all. Using the experimental logic,
we were able to isolate framing, or game feel, as a measurable
psychological factor separate from other game elements.
3.The WeLearn/FynBus commuter
experiment
In a large-scale field (or pseudo) experiment hundreds of carcommuters signed up for a free trial bus pass. We then compared
two months worth of exposure nudging, rational information
about health benefits and point/badge-gamification on their
effectiveness in converting car-owners to bus commuters.
The electronic bus passes fed behavioral data directly back
to the scientists’ database, along with juicy information like
badges gained, login-patterns, and repeated-measures selfreport items derived from psychological motivation scales.
While a messy process, this was an exemplary partnership
between experts in three influence strategies, the behavior
design company WeLearn, and their client, a major Danish bus
operator who opted for a learning exercise rather than sinking
money into just one old fashioned campaign. The data is still
being analyzed as I write this, but while everyone is holding their
breath, the partnership model is worth mentioning to exemplify
how scientifically experimental approaches can be feasible for
researchers and practitioners together.
Figure 1: Materials from the WeLearn/Fynbus commuter experiment
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
53
From the field
The two stories exemplify that researchers can document and
dissociate psychological or behavioral effects in gamification,
but that this requires thinking like experimenters, even when
working closely with industry on real life problems.
As we know from the small trickle of data driven studies available,
I believe that the community sorely needs more in the same
vein, in order to be taken seriously by professionals from more
evidence based traditions (i.e. Lieberoth, Wellnitz, & Aagaard,
2015), including designs that dissociate the effects of “the usual
suspects” like points, badges and leaderboards. Everyone is sick
of hearing about those, so it is about time we use scientific rigor
to figure out if they work at all, and especially how they each
contribute, including in different behavioral settings.
4. Experimenter’s tools
In order to assess true design the effects, not just collect data
on finished projects, we need to think like experimenters. What
is the “treatment” we are giving our “patients”? What objective
“effects” do we predict, and how can we measure them? What
would be a suitable control-group or pre-test?
A great tool is the A/B test. Game designers often subject two
or more groups to different versions of a design, and compare
them on pre-specified variables like playtime or conversion rate.
A/B tests are often conducted online or in the app-store without
users ever knowing.
Figure 2: Sketch of a 2x2 factorial design
In this process, pie charts, percentages and testimonies are not
highly valued currencies, although they are useful for painting a
picture of the behavioral ecology as a whole. Instead, inferential
statistics like ANOVAs and multilevel models are needed to
compare groups or before/after data in terms of statistical
significance and effect. See for instance Game research
methods: An overview (e.g. Lieberoth, Wellnitz, & Aagaard,
2015) edited by Petri Lankoski and Staffan Björk. In the end,
we all need partners in crime, so researchers are usually happy
to help. This is all something we need to experiment with.
Critically. Creatively. Together.
Wanna play?
Factorial designs are even more powerful weapons. Here, you
group participants according to two or more kinds of influence.
For instance, you might have a health education app, and be
interested in both the effects of setting weekly goals for steps
walked and social competition between friends via Facebook.
If you just ran an A/B or before/after implementation, would
we know which was key to walking more: weekly goals or
competition? No.
To dissociate design factors, we would be better off with four
groups: Controls (no game elements whatsoever), full treatment
(weekly goals plus facebook competition), weekly achievements
only, and Facebook competition only. With enough users,
we can isolate the effects of each design factor compered to
controls, and whether the two combine into something greater
altogether. With demographic data in hand we might even
discover if certain groups of users are more motivated, or even
put off, by some design ideas.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
54
From the field
References
Scribner (Eds.), Engaging Consumers through Branded Entertainment and
Convergent Media (pp. 110–126). IGI global.
Arczewski, A., & Marczewski, A. (2012). Gamification – a simple
introduction. Tips, advice and thoughts on gamification. Amazon.com:
Lieberoth, A., Wellnitz, K. B., & Aagaard, J. (2015). Sex, Violence and
Self-published for Kindle.
Learning: Doing effect assessment for games. In P. Lankoski & S. Björk
(Eds.), Game research methods: An overview (pp. 175–192). Pittsburgh,
Bogost, I. (2011). Gamification is Bullshit. In For the win - Wharton
PA: ETC Press.
Gamification Symposium, August 8-9. 2011. Philadelphia, PA.
Morse, E. R. (2014). Psychonomics: How Modern Science Aims to Conquer
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From Game
the Mind and How the Mind Prevails. Austin, TX: Code Publishing.
Design Elements to Gamefulness : Defining “ Gamification .” In ACM (Ed.),
MindTrek’11, September 28-30, 2011. Tampere, Finland.
Feldwick, P. (2015). The Anatomy of Humbug: How to Think Differently
about Advertising. Leicester, UK: Troubadour Publishing.
Ferrier, A., & Fleming, J. (2014). The Advertising Effect: How to Change
Behaviour. Melbourne: Oxford University Press Australia & New Zealand.
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does Gamification Work? -A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification. In 2014 47th
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3025–3034).
Ieee. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2014.377
Lieberoth, A. (2015). Shallow gamification – psychological effects of
framing an activity as a game. Games and Culture, 10(3), 249–268.
doi:10.1177/1555412014559978
Lieberoth, A., Kock, M., Marin, A., Planke, T., & Sherson, J. F. (2014).
Getting Humans to Do Quantum Optimization - User Acquisition,
Engagement and Early Results from the Citizen Cyberscience project
Quantum Moves. Human Computation, 1(2).
Lieberoth, A., Møller, M., & Marin, A. (2015). Deep and shallow
gamification in marketing: the thin evidence for effects and forgotten
powers of really good games. In J. Martí-Parreño, C. Ruiz-Mafé, & L. L.
ISSN: 1887-1542
Phone: +34 933 670 400
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Copyrights
n.º 43 • July 2015
55
From the field
The JamToday Network
Authors
David Crombie
[email protected]
European Research, HKU
University of the Arts Utrecht
Utrecht, Netherlands
Tags
Applied games, game design,
smart learning
Funded under the EC ICT-PSP programme, JamToday, has established a central
networking hub for the sustainable implementation and uptake of the next generation
of educational games across Europe. Game Jams have been instrumental in stimulating
innovation in the creation, implementation and deployment of educational games.
JamToday supports this through a modular toolkit, providing support for events across
Europe, at local, regional and national levels. Given the emerging focus on smart
learning environments, JamToday also supports the move towards games as contextual
interventions and fosters awareness-raising and innovation between the games and
learning sectors with the intention of demonstrating real-life impact.
In order to achieve the goals of the network, the consortium has several different types of
partners. The network is coordinated by HKU University of the Arts Utrecht with the support
of the Dutch Game Garden as they represent a strong industry partner that reflects the
largely microSME basis of the European game sector. A further 8 European universities of
applied science provide expertise in practical innovation models, alongside 6 public sector
and regional growth agencies. In addition, the inclusion of the European Network of Living
Labs ensures a close connection to open innovation approaches.
Serious games (or applied games) have shown great potential for learning and personal
development as they allow people to practice, experiment and learn in a safe, motivating and,
ideally, playful environment. They can compete with other learning activities when it comes
to learning knowledge, skills and attitudes and they can empower players by giving them
a sense of self-efficacy and personal development. Although there has been considerable
on-going debate over the needs of the born-digital generation, our understanding of digital
literacy is only slowly emerging. The value of game-based learning is becoming clearer and
while many serious games are being developed, less attention is given to how to implement
them in learning environments and how to ensure there are significant learning outcomes.
Recent studies have also shown that quest-based learning approaches are especially useful
for educational contexts. With JamToday, we aim to use game design principles not just to
create useful and meaningful games, but also to explicate and design the context (such as
the classroom or curriculum) in which games can be most effectively implemented and used.
The collective strength of the JamToday network lies not just in its ability to help people
generate a critical mass of stakeholders at a regional level, but to do so around some of
the most important themes facing the deployment of game design thinking in learning
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
56
From the field
environments. Alongside this, support for every phase of setting
up a game jam is available from the modular toolkit so that no
previous experience is required to establish a game jam. The
toolkit provides detailed explanations and supporting materials
for initiating, preparing, running and evaluating a game jam,
with further support for ensuring the results are transferred to
learning environments. By way of example, a card game called
GameScope was developed to familiarize stakeholders with
some basic tenets of applied game design and this supported
stakeholder mapping activities in the different regions. Also
included in the toolkit is a systematic approach to evaluating the
outcomes of the game jams and further support for transferring
the results to learning environments with ‘train-the-trainer’
workshops. A further tool was developed to encourage the
different stakeholders to make a self-assessment of the impact
of their activities.
In 2014, game jams were held in 8 European cities with the
jammers working on a common assignment. In total more
than 200 people participated and 47 game-based learning
prototypes were successfully developed. Each region selected
a winning game, and external experts then evaluated these
games. The evaluation framework combined quantitative and
qualitative data and evaluated the game prototypes on several
criteria, such as:
•
•
•
Technical evaluation of the games
Focus of the games on the assignment
Learning sectors and transferability
The experience from the first game-jams highlighted a great
variety of approaches from the game jam organisers. Some
partners had no previous experience in running game-jams,
while others had been organising game-jams for many years in
other contexts such as the Global Game Jam. Similarly there was
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
a great difference in the experience partners had in working with
game companies. While some game jams gathered professional
and semi-professional participants (such as students in game
design), others gathered a mix of children and adults without
previous experience in coding or developing games. As a
consequence the games developed also have very diverse
characteristics: some are rather simple video games, others are
more advanced and others still have opted for analogue board
games. This open approach has enabled the network to reach a
large number of participants with very different profiles.
The analysis of the first JamToday game jams shows that there is
a consensus amongst game jam organisers on the relevance of
the game jam instrument as an efficient way to quickly develop
and explore new solutions to a problem, raise awareness
about the potential of applied-game design and bring together
stakeholders from different horizons with a potential to have
concrete socio-economic impact. From the games developed
during the game jams, some are now being taken further to
development, jammers decided to work together beyond the
jam, some are now pre-incubated in local incubators and so
forth.
Organisers of jams were positively impressed by the efficiency
of the JamToday model, because it allowed jammers with no
previous experience in programming to develop playable
video games prototypes. As anticipated, involving experts and
industry professionals was mentioned as one of the key factors
to success. Experts and industry professionals are particularly
useful for providing contextual information related to the theme
or help teams to adjust their expectations and support them in
keeping align with the assignment.
The flexible approach followed by JamToday has enabled
organisations with different profiles and agendas to successfully
run a game jam. The impact of the approach can be identified
not only for the learning environments for which the games are
developed but also for other variables such as:
•
•
•
•
Capability to broaden the network for game jam
organisers
Peer-learning for game jam participants
Capacity to attract people that would normally not work
with games and impact on the awareness about the
potential of applied-games for people outside the gaming
sector
Capacity to trigger interest in working on new themes for
game-developers or with other fields of application
n.º 43 • July 2015
57
From the field
•
•
•
•
•
•
Impact on game companies that can experiment with
new contexts and new themes
Capability of the game jam to bring participants in contact
with new economic actors at regional levels
Talent discovery
Improving collaborative creation of applied games
Opportunities for new collaboration for participants
Entrepreneurial discoveries
The output from the 2014 game jams are available at the
JamToday online Learning Hub. In 2015, the theme is ‘adopting
a healthier lifestyle’ and there will be 16 game jams in cities
across Europe, culminating in a JamToday Fair in Barcelona
where the winning teams will compete in a live game jam. In
this way we aim to make these creative processes even more
transparent to policymakers and learning professionals in order
to encourage interested parties to understand the value of this
open innovation methodology. With the significant increase in
game jams taking place in 2015, it is hoped that JamToday can
become an instrumental European hub for all those interested
in applied games and learning.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
58
From the field
References
Salen, K. et al (2010) Quest to Learn: Developing the School for Digital
Kids, The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on
All references must be adequately cited and listed following the standard
Digital Media and Learning, MIT Press
citation style choice of the author (APA, Chicago, MLA, ASA, Oxford,
Nash, P., Bagley, E.A.S, & Shaffer, D.W. (2012). Playing for public interest:
Harvard).
Epistemic games as civic engagement activities. Paper presented at the
Connolly, Boyle, MacArthur, Hainey & Boyle (2012) A systematic literature
review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games,
American Educational Research Association (AERA) annual meeting,
Vancouver, BC.
Computers & Education Vol. 59, Issue 2, pp 661-686
Nash, P., & Shaffer, D.W. (2012). Epistemic youth development: Educational
Przybylski, A. K., Weinstein, N., Murayama, K., Lynch, M. F., & Ryan, R. M.
games as youth development activities.
(2012). The ideal self at play: The appeal of videogames that let you be all
you can be. Psychological Science, 23, 69-76.
Ryan, Rigby, & Przybylski, (2006) Motivation pull of video games: A Selfdetermination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 347-365.
Bekebrede, G., Warmelink, H. J. G., & Mayer, I. S. (2011). Reviewing
the need for gaming in education to accommodate the net generation.
Computers & Education, 57(2), 1521-1529
Bennett, S., Maton, K. & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A
critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology,
39(5), 775-786.
Shaffer, D. W. (2009). Wag the Kennel: Games, Frames, and the Problem of
Assessment. In R. Fertig (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Effective Electronic
Gaming in Education. (Vol. II, pp. 577-592). Hershey, PA IGI Global.
Salen, K. et al (2010) Quest to Learn: Developing the School for Digital
Kids, The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on
Digital Media and Learning, MIT Press
Shaffer, D.W., (2006) How Computer Games Help Children Learn, Palgrave
Macmillan, New York
ISSN: 1887-1542
Phone: +34 933 670 400
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Copyrights
n.º 43 • July 2015
59
From the field
Well-being Focused Gaming™: Individualized Engagement
with Plush Toys, Avatars, and Personal Robots
Authors
Alexander Libin
[email protected]
Scientific Director
National Rehabilitation
Network, MedStar Health
& Georgetown University
Medical Center
Washington DC, USA
Games are humans’ inherited first choice when it comes to mastering the world,
whether they are aimed at everyday life learning, understanding other people’s actions
and motivation, or striving to succeed in everything that we do. Two main features
- virtuality and engagement - provide the player with the wide range of gaming
experiences. According to the Libin Game Model, each game can be presented as a
complex engaging system functioning through the configuration of exchanges between
a player and gaming environment mediated by a goal-setting mechanism. A special
class of Well-being Focused Games originates in playing activities of a therapeutic value
making it possible to provide relief to elderly nursing home residents via systematic
individualized interventions. The foundation for such naturally-occurred personalized
connection between humans and gaming agents is rooted in empathy as the most
basic human quality. A continuing question within the robotics community concerns
the degree of human-likeness robots ought to have when interacting with humans.
Finally, an ultimate embodiment of gaming experience - a personalized robot - is a
promise of a true companionship, enhancing the game with life-like qualities and
engaging Alzheimer’s patient in a unique game of touch, empathy and trust. Wellbeing Focused Gaming is an ever expanding area of both the conceptual merging of
simulated reality and everyday life and a multiplicity of practical applications based on
the concept of positive experiences that is necessary for effective learning in a variety
of existing realms.
1. Gaming as Mode of Life: Engagement Value
Tags
Individualized engagement,
psychosocial intervention,
robotherapy, LIBINbot, wellbeing focused gaming
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Games are humans’ inherited first choice when it comes to mastering the world, whether they
are aimed at everyday life learning, understanding other people’s actions and motivation, or
striving to succeed in everything that we do. Life itself is the mysterious game that everybody
plays with the Universe. Gaming is characterized by a set of operational values defined by
the purpose and the vehicle mechanism of a specific game and is based on two structuring
features - virtuality and engagement (Libin, 2001). Virtuality is associated with the ability of
our mind to model, simulate or imagine various scenarios that exist or might be constructed in
the real world. Engagement is a merged feature of both the player or a gamer and the gaming
or simulated environment, and is characterized by the level of involvement, interactivity, and
intensity as described by the Libin Game Model (LGM) (LGM; Libin, 1993; 2006). According
to LGM, each game can be presented as a complex engaging system functioning through
the configuration of exchanges between a player and gaming environment mediated by a
goal-setting mechanism. It is important to point out, that the concept of Engagement brings
together the non-linear nature of examining phenomena and its interactive nature, which
are two vitally significant components in the gaming approach. Perhaps because engaging
interactivity is a main characteristic of the brain (Sheldon,2004), mental functioning (Libin,
n.º 43 • July 2015
60
From the field
2008) and human development in general (Bornstein & Lamb,
2011), an engaging nature of gaming applications makes them
natural allowing humans to embrace games like any other part
of our physical, psychological and social environment.
2. Human Friendly Agents: Empathic Value
The long predicted merge of artificial and human worlds is
happening before our very eyes. We see different, but mostly
positive, consequences of human beings interacting with their
artificial partners (Libin, 2001). From the therapeutic point
of view, interactions between persons and artificial agents
-- gaming avatars or personalized robots - have the same
psychosocial nature as human-to-human communication.
Generally speaking, individual manners of establishing personal
contact with the communicating agent reflect styles of selfexpression, preferable communication, and coping strategies
(Libin,1995, 2002). In many populations, particularly those
classified as vulnerable, an artificial creature serves as the
mediator between a person’s behavior and a situation with a
high degree of uncertainty. The analysis of this interplay allows
researchers to draw conclusions on specific features of the
participating person and his/her individuality. The foundation
for such naturally-occurring personalized connection is rooted
in empathy as the most basic human quality and provides a
novel path of inquiry into the effects of empathetic robots in
psychosocial interactions. A continuing question within the
robotics community concerns the degree of human-likeness
robots ought to have when interacting with humans. This
question is often framed within the context of the Uncanny
Valley effect, which is a theory proposed by Mori that posits the
following: as robots become more humanlike they become more
familiar (and thus more likeable) until the mismatch between
their form, interactivity, and motion quality elicits a sense of
unease (Ho, MacDorman, Pramono, 2008). While studying the
phenomenon of believability in synthetic gaming characters,
Paiva et al (2004) focused on empathy as a main mechanism
responsible for maintaining the reciprocal emotional relations
established between users and characters. Researchers found
that children were more likely to respond positively to those
characters who exhibited socially appropriate behaviors. Using
simulation to study empathy (Pavia et al, 2005), investigators
also found differences between teachers’ and students’
empathic feelings towards animated agents using a simulated
classroom bullying event. Significantly more children (80%) felt
sorry for the characters compared to 70% of teachers. Further,
significantly more children (71%) expressed cognitive empathy
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
towards characters as compared to experts (47%) and teachers
(28%).
In order to study empathy’s role in human - robot interactions,
researchers (Putten et al., 2013) conducted an fMRI study to
investigate emotionality in human-robot interaction. Subjects
(N=14) were presented videos showing a human, a robot, and
an unanimated object, being treated in either an affectionate
or a violent way. Violent interaction towards both the robot
and the human resulted in similar neural activation patterns in
classic limbic structures indicating that both the robot and the
human elicit similar emotional reactions. However, differences
in neural activity suggest that participants show more negative
empathetic concern for the human in a negative situation.
These studies suggest the relevance of artificial agents in
psychological study as humans from a young age naturally form
empathic relationships with artificial agents that have been
show to neurologically notable in adulthood.
The class of Human-Friendly Agents can be defined by two
characteristics that make it potentially valuable for psychological
research and practice (Libin 2006; Tapus & Matarić, 2008; Paiva
et al., 2011). First, a general feature of the class of interactive
simulation or empathic robots is that those creatures are
designed for the purpose of communication or interaction
with a human being. The concept of empathic artificial partner
places the relationships between humans and robots into
a psychological, rather than technological, context. A few
parameters depict an artificial empathic partner as a good
human companion:
•
•
•
It imitates a real life (human- or animal-like) behavior;
It models emotional, cognitive, motor behaviors normally
experienced by humans;
It communicates with the person on various levels such
as tactile-kinesthetic, sensory, emotional, cognitive, and
social – behavioral.
A second major distinction that differentiates the class of
interactive and simulative empathic artificial creatures from
other groups is that it reflects a structure of a living world
including:
•
•
•
Anthropomorphic robots or humanoids;
Robots imitating animals;
Artificial creatures imitating living beings other than
humans or animals, or fictitious creatures.
As of 2015, numerous creatures equipped with tactile, audio,
and visual sensors and differing levels of robo-IQ already exist
n.º 43 • July 2015
61
From the field
on the market and in the laboratory. The anthropomorphic
robot platforms Cog and Kismet, the humanoids AMI and Asimo,
the robotic dog AIBO and robot-seal Paro, and the automated
dolls Amazing Amy and My Real Baby are only a few of many
known examples. While practitioners and researchers gradually
realize that an individual’s special needs might require specially
designed tools, theoretical and applied justification has to be
developed to embrace and analyze the epistemology and
phenomenology of an already diverse robo-population.
3. Playing With Toys: Therapeutic Value
Ultimately all games are designed to benefit our personal
well-being. Of course, there is a commercial value to the most
popular games, but the psychological cost-effectiveness analysis
is beyond the scope of this text. Instead, a special class of
Well-being Focused Games that originated in playing activities
of a therapeutic, stress-relief or health promotion nature will
be identified and discussed. Gaming approaches for treating
problems that a person experiences over the course of their life
are aimed at psychological mechanisms that underlie behaviors
disturbing to themselves or others. Psychological effects
produced by gaming or non-pharmacological interventions
(Libin, 2006) also influence biochemical, neurological, and
psycho-physiological patterns that form individual behaviors,
states and traits. As some authors have indicated psychological
therapy achieves the same effects as pharmacological methods
- from biochemistry to psychophysiology of emotions and
complex social problematic behaviors. Among psychologicallyoriented techniques are traditional person-to-person or group
psychotherapy, sensory and mental stimulation based on color,
semantics of geometrical shapes and human drawings, music,
videotapes, meditation, and physical therapy (Libin et al.,
2008). In this study, we examined the efficacy of a systematic
algorithm for providing individualized, non-pharmacological
interventions for reducing agitated behaviors in nursing home
residents with dementia. We aimed to develop simple playing
engagement activities for persons with Alzheimer’s. (Libin &
Cohen-Mansfield, 2004; Cohen-Mansfield, Libin & Marx, 2007).
The study was conducted in 12 nursing home buildings in USA,
where 6 were used as treatment facilities, and 6 as control
facilities. The interdisplinary team consented 167 elderly
persons with dementia. Our engaging activities were tailored to
the individual profiles of agitated participants using a systematic
algorithm that considered type of agitation and unmet needs.
Interventions were then designed to match individual cognitive,
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
physical, and sensory abilities, as well as lifelong habits and roles.
Personal profile was matched to one of the playing engagement
activities — individualized music or other sensory stimulation,
game puzzles, provision of real or simulated social contact such
as family videotapes, toys, and robotic animal-assisted therapy.
Interventions were provided for 10 days during the 4 hours of
greatest agitation. The implementation of personalized, nonpharmacological interventions resulted in statistically significant
decreases in overall agitation in the intervention group relative
to the control group from baseline to treatment (F1,164 =
10.22, p =.002). In addition, implementation of individualized
interventions for agitation resulted in statistically significant
increases in pleasure and interest (F1,164 = 24.22, p <.001;
F1,164 = 20.66, p<.001). Our findings, which were part of a
larger theoretical framework (Cohen-Mansfield, 2000) support
the use of engaging gaming activities to treat agitation in
persons with dementia.
4. Personalized Robot, LIBINbot, as
the Ultimate Gaming Embodiment:
Companionship Value
While gaming is an engaging activity for many of the lucky
players who do not have the experience of a debilitating
medical condition or a life trauma, it is a remarkable challenge
to find appropriate stimuli and activities that engage persons
with special needs in therapeutic well-being focused activities
(Cohen-Mansfield, 2000; Libin & Cohen-Mansfield, 2001;
Libin, 2001). For instance, pet therapy has been used to treat
and entertain persons with dementia (Filan & Llewellyn-Jones,
2006). However, the presence of a real pet in the nursing home
environment is often associated with difficulties and limitations,
such as 1) insufficient nursing staff resources (i.e., a special
person who can take care of a pet is not always available); and
2) possible concerns about inappropriate response of pets to
actions of persons with dementia, or 3) safety concerns, such as
tripping over the pets. Therefore, we hypothesized that the use
of robotic pets as artificial partners and companions for elderly
people with cognitive impairment might have advantages
in certain situations. To investigate the specifics of a person
with dementia’s interactions with the robot, a pilot study was
conducted at the Research Institute on Aging, which is affiliated
with the Hebrew Home of Greater Washington – the largest
nursing home in a state of Maryland (USA).
n.º 43 • July 2015
62
From the field
Our main intervention involved an engaging robotic cat
compared to a non-interactive plush toy. A notion of a
personalized engaging robotic companion is based on the LifeBased Interactive (LIBIN) Robot, or a LIBINbot (Libin, 2006).
Traditional robots are designed to substitute for many kinds
of human-performed tasks (Note. The origination of the word
“robot” comes from the word “rabota”, or “labor”, translated
from Czech language that was a native tongue for the famous
writer Karel Čapek and his brother Joseph who coined the
word “robot” in 1920. A different approach, named Robotic
Psychology and Robotherapy (Libin, Libin, 2014), suggested
a design of personalized intelligent creatures who’s main task
would be a simulation of a companionship for the humans, thus
introducing a LIBINbot as a special class of artificial partners
(Libin, 2006)
In 2002, the Japanese OMRON corporation was the first to
embrace the concept of a simulated human companion by
manufacturing a novel life-like robotic cat capable of not only
mimicking the features and behaviors of a cat companion,
but also able to engage with the interacting person in a very
real-life like mode of communication (Washington Post, 2005).
The first robotic companion had a name of NeCoRo – which
means ‘a companion’ in Japanese – and was the first iteration
of the OMRON corporation’s simulated human companion (see
Pictures 1 and 2). Besides being a sophisticated robot with an
artificial intelligence system, it has multiple built-in sensors that
provide a self-organizing behavior. This artificial cat creates a
playful, natural communication with humans by mimicking a
real cat’s reactions, which can be either verbal (meow, purr, or
hiss) or nonverbal (stretching paws, wagging tail, opening and
closing eyes, turning head and spreading ears, and sitting or
lying down). Robotic cat NeCoRo is covered with soft syn¬thetic
fur of different shades and colors with sensors that make it
responsive to the human touch. In 2002 we (Note. Alexander
Libin, PhD and Elena Libin, PhD) brought a few LIBINbots from
Japan to the United States to participate in our new study on
robotic psychology and robotherapy.
Picture 1. The first LIBINbot: robotic cat NeCoRo
NeCoRo can stretch its body and paws, move its tail, open
and close its eyes, and meow, hiss, or purr when it is
touched. It is worth mentioning that robots with behavioral
patterns aimed toward mimicking animal or human behavior
have not only therapeutic, but also social learning value.
Picture 2. LIfe-like human companion - cat NeCoRo
Ten caregivers of elderly persons diagnosed with dementia and
residing at the nursing home special care units were approached
with the purpose of obtaining an informed consent. Nine of them
agreed for their relative to participate in a study. All participants
were females with the average age of 90 years (with the range
from 83 to 98 years). The mean score for Global Deterioration
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
63
From the field
Scale (Reisberg, 1983), which is a single item assessing severity
of age-related cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease via
a Lickert-type scale from 1 (no cognitive decline) to 7 (late
dementia or very severe cognitive decline), was 5.4 (with the
range from 4 – moderate cognitive decline to 7 - late clinical
phase with severe cognitive impairment).
The project was based on a controlled – conditions experimental
design involving a comparison of engagement responses to two
different stimuli – the LIBINbot, named Max, and a plush cattoy, named Toby that served as a therapeutic comparator.. The
cat-toy was selected after preliminary analysis of more than 60
samples presented on the Internet, so its appearance would
match as closely as possible that of the robotic cat Max. All nine
residents received two interactive sessions – one with Max, and
another one with Toby – with a duration of ten minutes each.
To eliminate an order effect, cats were presented in a random
fashion: for more than half of the participants (67%) Max was
administered on their first session, while another 33% were
presented with Toby first. A standard set of instructions was
developed on how to present a cat to a person with dementia.
To reduce the influence on engagement of past experiences
that might be associated with the cat’s name, both cats were
presented without naming them at the beginning of the session.
All sessions were conducted by trained research assistants with
at least one year of experience in working with cognitively
impaired nursing home residents.
Individual engagement with the stimuli was assessed along
the following dimensions: attention, attitude, intensity of
manipulation, and duration of engagement. The first three
constructs were measured on a 5-point scale, where the highest
score (5) characterized a positive outcome (i.e., very attentive,
very positive, very strong). Duration of the actual engagement
between a person with dementia and the robotic or plushtoy cat was measured in minutes. Additionally, the quality of
engagement was recorded and included such items as the
content and target of resident’s talk while engaged with the
stimulus. All sessions were video recorded for the purposes of
further analysis. In addition, information regarding the person’s
past experiences with pets was obtained from the family
members. This included a three–item questionnaire, with each
item answered by a negative or affirmative response (liking or
disliking cats, liking or disliking dogs, and ownership of a pet).
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Data regarding agitated behaviors at baseline and during the
session, the specifics of the resident’s engagement with the
robotic cat Max and plush-toy Toby, and the level of cognitive
deterioration were entered into a computer and analyzed via SPSS
11.0 software (Statistical Package for Social Sciences). Verbal,
physical, and overall problem behaviors (Cohen Mansfield,
Werner, & Marx,1989), were studied via a paired sample t-test.
The results showed that the level of agitation decreased during
treatment phase, compared to the non-treatment. When the
residents were involved with Toby, the level of physical and
overall agitation decreased significantly (t(8) = 2.5 p=0.036 and
t(8) = 2.4 p=0.046 respectively). Engagement with Max also
lowered the level of agitation in the expected direction, but
was not statistically significant (p=0.078 for overall agitation).
Analysis of the data on affect revealed that during the sessions
with the robotic cat there was a significant increase in pleasure
(t(8) = 3.6 p=0.007) and in interest (t(8) = 2.7 p=0.028); with
the plush-toy, the increase of positive moods was in the same
direction but not statistically significant (p=0.111 for pleasure
and p=0.052 for interest.) Control comparison of agitation and
emotions at the baseline for Max vs. Toby sessions exposed no
significant differences.
A correlation analysis was performed for the engagement
parameters, indicators for the level of cognitive impairment,
and the person’s in liking or disliking real cats in the past
(before entering nursing home). For Max, the level of cognitive
functioning was associated with the duration of engagement, so
that persons with higher cognitive levels tended to spend more
time with Max (r = -0.67 p=0.05), whereas for Toby, cognitive
functioning was associated with the intensity of manipulation,
so that persons with higher cognitive levels manipulated the
plush-toy cat more (r = -0.73 p=0.03). Although correlations
between a person’s past liking of real cats and parameters of
engagement did not reach significant levels, they were in the
expected direction.
Results show that even persons with severe dementia can be
engaged in interactions with a LIBINbot. Both the robotic cat
and the plush-toy cat produced similar effects on agitated
behavior and expressed affect - the amount of manifested
verbal and physical disruptive behaviors decreased and the
amount of positive emotions increased during treatment
phase as compared to baseline. However, few specifics were
found with regard to the stimuli used. The interactions with
the LIBINbot Max triggered positive emotions (pleasure and
interest) in persons with dementia. At the same time, persons
n.º 43 • July 2015
64
From the field
with higher levels of cognitive impairment (higher scores on
the Global Deterioration Scale) were engaged with the robot
cat for a shorter duration than those with lower levels of
cognitive functioning. It is also interesting that even with Toby,
who is lacking any interactive behaviors, the level of intensity
of manipulation was strongly associated with the level of
deterioration – the more impaired the resident was, the more
difficult it was to manipulate the plush toy. Those results allow
us to formulate a hypothesis for a further in-depth study on the
use of interactive robots for dementia care. We propose that
persons with higher levels of cognitive functioning will manifest
greater engagement (in terms of duration, pleasure and interest)
with the robots over repeated exposures; whereas for the more
impaired a person the less interactive stimuli (i.e., plush toys)
might be as useful as robotic ones for their engagement.
5. Conclusions: The Psychosocial Pillars of
Well-being Focused Gaming
People enjoy being entertained. As society progresses, human
needs that can be satisfied through leisure activities become
more and more refined. Therefore, means for fulfilling those
needs both grow in number and become more diverse. However,
the primary task and ultimate goal of any form of entertainment
has remained the same throughout the ages: to provide a
substantial level of interactivity that stimulates the human
imagination. With the development of technology, the kinds
of entertainment tools that come to life have transformed our
understanding of the ways to satisfy Homo ludens. Innovations
that have appeared over the last decade include internet-based
recreation, virtual reality simulation, video games, and, finally,
interactive robots. Robotic creatures with artificial intelligence
and sensory feedback theoretically and practically comply with
the basic meaning of entertainment, which is to stimulate
leisure through positive engagement by providing a wide variety
of choices. Moreover, the use of advanced technological means
has broadened the context produced via entertainment systems
by combining pure leisure activities and pleasure experiences
with the effects of learning, training, and therapy.
intensity of simulations and responses, and (3) the situated
context created by the entertaining environment which is
defined by such factors as intensity of involvement, mode of
emotional experiences, and individual psychological profiles.
6. Acknowledgements.
The author would like to acknowledge the experiences and the
expertise of his colleagues, with whom he was privileged to
work on the Well-being Literacy via Multimedia Education and
Psychosocial Research (WeLL) program, in particular Elena Libin,
PhD and Ellen Danford, BA. We would like to thank the founder
of the International Society on Virtual Systems and Multimedia
Professor Takeo Ojika, PhD (Institute of Dream Systems
Development, Japan) for sponsoring cat-robot NeCoRo for the
robotherapy study. The robotherapy pilot project has drawn
on the experience and creativity of members of the Research
Institute on Aging team, notably Jiska Cohen-Mansfield, PhD;
Marx, M, PhD; Khin Thein, MD; Andrew Michaelson, BA: Jennifer
Scott, MA; and James Biddison, BA; their dedication to the WeLL
project is greatly appreciated.
Methodological support for this project was provided through
the MedStar Health Research Institute, a component of the
Georgetown-Howard Universities Center for Clinical and
Translational Science (GHUCCTS) and supported by Grant
U54 RR026076-01 from the NCRR, a component of the
National Institutes of Health (NIH). Its contents are solely the
responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent
the official views of NCRR or NIH.
Incorporating the elements of training, education, and therapy
into the entertainment process leads to the development of an
enhanced constructive model of entertainment. A therapeutic
and training effect of the entertainment agents is influenced
by (1) one’s current needs and individual preferences, (2) an
entertainment agent’s physical (embodied) or digital (virtual)
features and behavioral configurations defined through the
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
65
From the field
References
Libin, A. & Cohen-Mansfield, J. (2004). Therapeutic robocat for nursing
home residents with dementia: Preliminary inquiry. American Journal of
Bornstein, Marc H., Michael E. Lamb (eds) (2011). Developmental Science.
Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Dementias, Mar-Apr; 19 (2): 111-117.
An Advanced Textbook, Sixth Edition, Psychology Press.
Libin A. & Libin, E. Robotic Psychology. (2004). In: Spielberger, Charles
Cohen-Mansfield, J. (2000). Theoretical frameworks for behavioral
problems in dementia. Alzheimer’s Care
(Ed.). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, pp. 295-298. Oxford: Elsevier.
Quarterly, 1(4); 8-21
Libin, A., Libin, E., Libin, V. (2008). The Geometrical Form Preferences Test
Cohen-Mansfield J. Libin A. Marx MS. (2007). Nonpharmacological
treatment of agitation: a controlled trial of systematic individualized
through Human-Figure-Constructive-Drawings (A manual for clinicians).
Moscow: Eksmo Education, 380 p.
intervention. Journals of Gerontology. Series A: Biological Sciences and
Libin, A; Schladen MM; Ljungberg I; Tsai B; Jacobs S; Reinauer K; Minnick
Medical Sciences. 62A(8): 908-16.
S; Spungen M; Groah S (2011). YouTube as an on-line disability selfCohen Mansfield, J., Werner, P., & Marx, M. S. (1989). An observational
study of agitation in agitated nursing home residents. International
management tool in persons with spinal cord injury. Topics in Spinal Cord
Injury Rehabilitation, Winter; 16 (3): 84-92.
Psychogeriatrics 1:153 165.
Libin, A, Lauderdale M, Millo Y, Shamloo C, Spencer R, Green B, Donnellan
Filan, S.L. & Llewellyn-Jones, R.H. (2006). Animal-assisted therapy for
dementia: a review of the literature. International Psychogeriatrics; 18(4):
597-611.
J, Wellesley C, Groah S. (2010). Role-Playing Simulation as an Educational
Tool for Health Care Personnel: Developing an Embedded Assessment
Framework. Cyberpsychol Behav. and Social Networking, 217-24.
Insight. Retrieved at https://www.youtube.com/analytics
Libin, A. (1993). Human Individuality: On Temperament and Style as
Structural Components of the Personality System. Doctoral Thesis (Ph.D.)
in Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Moscow.
Libin, E. & Libin, A. (2004). Robotherapy. In: Spielberger, Charles (Ed.).
Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, pp. 289-293. Oxford: Elsevier.
Paiva, A.,Dias, J, Sobral, D, Aylett, P. Sobreperez, S. Woods, C. Zoll, and L.
E. Hall. (2004). Caring for agents and agents that care: Building empathic
relations with synthetic agents. In AAMAS, IEEE Computer Society, 194–
Libin, E. (1995). Coping with life crises and difficult situations. Moscow:
Selena. 610 p. (in Russian)
Paiva, A., Dias, J., Sobral, D., Aylett, R., Woods, S., Hall, L.,Zoll, C. (2005).
Libin, A. (2001). Virtual reality as a complex interactive system: A
multidimensional model of a person – artificial partner co-relations. In:
H. Thwaites, & L. Addison (Eds.), Enhanced realities: Augmented and
unplugged, pp. 652-657. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.
Libin, E. (2002). Psychology of Coping with Difficult Life Situations. Moscow:
Psychological Institute of Russian Academy of Education. (in Russian)
Libin, A. (2006). Persons and their artificial partners: Robotherapy as an
alternative nonpharmacological treatment. In: Marinelli, D. (Ed). Essays
on the future of interactive entertainment. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon
University Press, 143-154.
Learning by feeling: Evoking empathy with synthetic characters. Applied
Artificial Intelligence, 19, 235-266.
Paiva, Ana, Iolanda Leite, Tiago Ribeiro. Emotion Modeling for Social
Robots. (2011) In Calvo, R. A., D’Mello, S. K., Gratch, J., Kappas, A. (Eds.),
Handbook of Affective Computing. Oxford University Press.
Putten Rosenthal-von der, A.M., Schulte, F.P. ; Eimler, S.C. ; Hoffmann,
L. ; Sobieraj, S. ; Maderwald, S. ; Kramer, N.C. ; Brand, M. (2013). Neural
correlates of empathy towards robots. 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International
Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), 215-216.
Reisberg, B. (1983). The brief cognitive rating scale and global deterioration
Libin, A. (2008). Mental Hierarchy Principles: Bridging Universal and
Unique in Mind-Body Research. Psychological Journal of the Russian
Academy of Sciences, 2008; Vol. 29, 5: 10-35.
201.
scale. In: Crook, T., Ferris, S., Bartus, R. (Eds). Assessment in geriatric
psychopharmacology. Mark Powley Assocaites, Inc., 19 – 35.
Tapus Adriana and Maja J. Matarić. (2008). Socially Assistive Robots:
The Link between Personality, Empathy, Physiological Signals, and Task
Performance. In AAAI Sping Sympoisum on Emotion, Personality, and
Social Behavior, Mar 2008.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
66
From the field
Sheldon, Kennon M. (2004). Optimal Human Being: An Integrated MultiLevel Perspective, Random House.
Washington Post (2005). Purr. Whirr. Your Next Pet May Not Be Fur in the
Future - Or Could Be a Copy Cat. Psychologists Elena and Alexander Libin
on the use of robotic cats in therapy. By Weeks, Linton. Sunday, April 24.
ISSN: 1887-1542
Phone: +34 933 670 400
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Copyrights
n.º 43 • July 2015
67
Design Paper
Design Principles for Social Impact Games
Authors
Fares Kayali
[email protected]
Postdoctoral researcher Vienna
University of Technology
Vienna, Austria
Vera Schwarz
[email protected]
Project assistant University of
Vienna
Vienna, Austria
Gerit Götzenbrucker
[email protected]
This paper examines the game design of YourTurn!, a playful intervention with the
objective of fostering intercultural relationships and awareness among youths in Vienna,
Austria. Special attention is paid to how the intervention is designed to increase its social
impact. YourTurn! was developed within a multi-disciplinary context and evaluated in
a longitudinal study comprised of semi-structured interviews with 51 youths, one set
conducted before and the second set after a three-month play intervention. We describe
how the game mechanics were designed based on the desired impact and then reflect
on their effects based on the evaluation of the second set of interviews. The results
show a positive impact but also issues with the intervention’s lightweight approach
to an important social issue. Based on qualitative feedback, gameplay metrics and a
reflection from a design perspective we abstract a series of guidelines for the design of
social impact games, which can be broadly structured into the areas creative play and
social interaction, media literacy, and relating a game to its audience’s everyday habits.
Associate professor University
of Vienna
Vienna, Austria
Peter Purgathofer
[email protected]
Associate professor Vienna
University of Technology
Vienna, Austria
Tags
social impact games, game
design, youths, design
principles, serious games.
1. Introduction
This paper evaluates the design of YourTurn! The Video Game, a playful intervention with
the objective of fostering intercultural relationships and awareness among youths in Vienna,
Austria. The game’s core mechanic is the collaborative editing of YouTube contents.
Overall, there is a lack of research that thoroughly evaluates serious games, particularly in
the area of social impact. Even less is known about the interplay between design decisions
and their influence on a game’s impact. This paper closes the gap between measuring impact
and game design in social impact games. Qualitative player feedback, gameplay metrics and
a reflection on the academic design process result in a series of design principles for social
impact games.
Firstly, we outline our research context and multidisciplinary methodological approach.
Secondly, we present our research results and feedback regarding the intervention. This
leads to a discussion of what went right and wrong with the intervention, which is used to
distill a series of design principles for social impact games.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
68
Design Paper
2. Linking Theory and Practice
When discussing YourTurn! The Video Game, we will talk
about “social impact games”, or serious games that aim to
raise awareness of social issues, change social behavior, and
generally effect a positive social impact. At its core, YourTurn! is
a game, but some parts are also gamified in the sense of “using
game-design elements in non-gaming contexts“ (Deterding et
al. 2011b). A comprehensive list of serious games for social
change has been used as the basis for the serious game design
assessment framework by Mitgutsch and Alvardo (2012). It
shows the various purposes and desired impacts that exist for
social impact games. iCivics1 , for example, focuses on social
learning to empower youths to become knowledgeable and
engaged citizens. Writings published in Steinkuehler et al.
(2012) demonstrate the broad range of applications of learning
through games, while Linderoth (2012) outlines constraints.
Yussof et al. (2009) describe a feedback loop between learning
and game mechanics in serious games (figure 1).
Figure 1: A conceptual framework for serious games as described in
Yusoff et al. (2009, p. 22)
For social impact games, this interaction can be taken one step
further, meaning that mechanics should directly interact with
the instructional contents or desired learning activities. This
approach is closely related to what Ian Bogost (2007) terms
“procedural rhetoric”, viewing games as systems that players
can interact with. Thus, players can learn about these systems’
implications and how they work. Similarly, gameful design
(Deterding et al. 2011a) means that in order to implement game
mechanics that are intended to trigger specific desired behaviors,
a direct relationship with the actual cause—as opposed to a
more superficial gamification layer—is indispensable. Given
the fact that YourTurn! is strongly rooted within participatory
digital media through its use of YouTube, the following quote
is of particular relevance: “Today’s digital cultures are deeply
participatory, using digital authoring tools and distribution
networks to dramatically alter how we interact.” (Squire 2007,
p. 53)
1
http://www.icivics.org [last accessed June 25th, 2015]
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Lange (2011) also speaks of interaction domains rather than
the separation between real and virtual worlds. Malaby
(2006) describes these domains as areas that transcend the
spheres of the real and the virtual and instead focus on specific
tasks. In a study of MUD (Multi-User Domain) players, she
demonstrated the potential of in-game interaction to promote
cultural exchange and enhance technical and programming
skills. Charsky (2010) calls for serious games to achieve the
same fidelity that commercial games have, not only in terms
of graphics but also the way in which they implement game
mechanics. He describes serious game design as the merging
of game characteristics, such as competition, goals, rules,
challenges, choices, and fantasy, with pedagogical elements.
What all of the above-mentioned authors have in common is
that they see a strong relationship between core gameplay and
direct interaction with the actual cause. This premise became
the basis of YourTurn!’s design. YourTurn! can be regarded as a
serious game (Abt 1970) in the sense that it combines gameplay
with the intention of real-world change. Within that genre,
it matches the category of political and educational games
(Michael & Chen 2006) because of its emphasis on raising
social awareness. The game is designed to foster an awareness
of cultural diversity. Its overriding aim is to teach players that
living together also means interacting, communicating, and
learning about one another’s cultures and habits, thus fostering
communality and acceptance. Referring to Ratan and Ritterfeld
(2009), it can be said that YourTurn! focuses on the primary
learning principles of social problem solving. However, the
game’s goal is to take this principle a step further and actually
trigger social behavior change. This means that it can also be
categorized as a persuasive game (Bogost 2007). The potential
positive impact of serious and persuasive games has been
suggested theoretically (e.g., see Klimmt 2009 and Clark 2007),
and studies also exist that highlight the effects of serious games
on health issues (see Kato et al. 2008 in particular, Rahmani
& Boren 2012 for an overview). It has also been shown that
serious games have the potential to trigger positive motivation
(Cole et al. 2012).
Research on social impact games is rather sparse. A study
published by Peng et al. (2010) provides insight into games and
social context. One example of an evaluated game is StarPower
2
, a board game about social inequality. Its evaluation (Bell &
Griffin 2007) concludes that simulations such as StarPower
2
2015]
http://www.whatsrace.org/pages/starpower.htm [last accessed June 25th,
n.º 43 • July 2015
69
Design Paper
enhance concrete experiences and learning by allowing
participants to engage directly with the subject matter. Toft
and Naseem (2012) also indicate that games can be used to
encourage communication and togetherness within families.
Studies in Germany found a lack of social networks in Turkishorigin communities, leading to a lack of integration into society
(Janßen 2010). Online platforms and games support the
establishment and maintenance of social relations and networks
in immigrants’ (and everybody else’s) lives (Valdez 2008).
player started by choosing to “take part” or start a new video
by picking a channel (topic). There are no wrong choices in
YourTurn!. It is about being creative and seeing what fits the
topic and the videos of other players. The structure of YourTurn!
is that of an online social community (figure 2). The focus is on
creative play within a game environment. YourTurn! contains
game elements like avatars, points and achievements. It cannot
be strictly regarded as a game, because there is an intentional
lack of clear goals and standard procedures in order to facilitate
experimentation and freedom of expression.
Recent studies indicate the heavy use of the Internet, especially
online communities (Lins 2009, Hugger 2009) and games
(Moser 2009), by ethnic minorities, including second-generation
immigrant youths. In general, new media can be seen as an
integrative factor in the lives of adolescents (Kuhn 2009). This
was also shown to be true for second-generation immigrants
(Hepp 2009, Kissau 2008) and Muslim youths (Brouwer 2004).
Online environments, such as social networks and online games,
not only support ludic identities but also hybrid identities, which
connect physical and digital life, and can therefore be used to
trigger social learning (Schumann et al. 2009).
YourTurn! The Video Game
Figure 2: YourTurn!’s start page shows the most popular mixes and
YourTurn! The Video Game3 is a playful intervention based upon
the creation of YouTube video mash-ups with other players. It
was created to foster social interaction, communication, and
reflection on intercultural practices among juvenile minority
groups. YourTurn! is accessible via Facebook, where players
engage in head-to-head battles. Taking turns, they select short
snippets of YouTube (music) videos, which they append to a
mutual video mix. Playing against each other leads to a shared
and creative one-minute video mix that can then be watched
and rated by other players. YourTurn! relates to everyday media
use and social interaction. It is browser-based and requires
the Flash media player. A Facebook account is required for
authentication.
Due to the asynchronous creation of video mash-ups, the
time investment required for YourTurn! is low, and it is best
experienced in shorter play sessions spread out over several
days. Players start by creating an avatar. Then they can watch
a few video mixes created by other players to understand what
gameplay is about and what makes a good video. Afterwards,
they can choose to navigate to the studio section to create
their own videos. They may either participate in a mix another
3
opportunities to contribute.
Several conscious design decisions were made beforehand:
•
•
•
•
Multi-player gameplay was designed to be asynchronous
to make the pace of the game less stressful and to make
the game work even with a small user base.
The game is offered in German and English to ease access.
Language is as simple as possible to avoid confusion for
non-native speakers.
Game elements like a score, avatar upgrades and
achievements were introduced to provide a more
structured experience around the creative core of the
game.
Configurable avatars are used to provide a means of selfexpression and to foster long-term engagement through
unlockable upgrades.
3. Methodological Considerations
The research group’s multi-disciplinary perspective is shaped by
the authors’ diverse scientific backgrounds, which range from
communication research, political science and social network
analysis to usability research, computer science, and game
studies (Kayali et al. 2011).
http://yourturn.fm [last accessed June 25th, 2015]
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
70
Design Paper
The discussed intervention addresses a marginalized group—
working-class teenagers with and without immigrant parents,
i.e., with low levels of socioeconomic resources. We thus applied
sensitive qualitative settings, such as in-depth interviews and
ego network analysis. Additionally we used gameplay metrics to
track user behavior. Thus, our core research process is based on
methodological triangulation within an action research setting
that involved a three-month play intervention. We were looking
for ways to use the intervention to intervene in Viennese
teenagers’ everyday lives that would be directly related to their
social media behavior.
Based on Berry’s (2001; Sam & Berry 2010) psychological
acculturation concept, we use an approach that is specific to
migration and diversity research. This concept considers two
dimensions: maintenance of the culture of origin and related
identities by immigrants as well as socializing with people of
other cultural origins and participating in the host society on
an everyday basis. The four emerging acculturation strategies
are assimilation, separation, integration and marginalization.
Hence, one important aspect of the acculturation process is the
establishment of interethnic communication and relationships.
We thus gathered information about social relationships,
perceptions of friendship, and social networks in order to
analyze the relevant intra- and interethnic relationships.
We conducted 91 semi-structured personal media interviews
in two sets. The first set consisted of 51 interviews, and the
second consisted of another 40 with the same teenagers. In
the first set, the interviewees told us what music they liked and
which online games they played. Based on their feedback, we
decided to integrate YouTube, the world’s most popular video
dissemination platform (Marek 2013), into YourTurn!. Our
interviewees were aged 14 to 17 (2011) and 15 to 18 (2012).
Half of them were female, half were male. Their ethnic origins
were Turkish, Southeast European and North African, and native
Austrian. Tables 1 and 2 give a detailed overview.
Interviewees: male
Set 1
female
total
Turkish
8
8
16
Austrian
8
8
16
8
19
24
51
SE European, 11
N. African
27
Interviewees: male
Set 2
female
total
Turkish
7
7
14
Austrian
5
5
10
SE European, 9
N. African
7
16
19
40
21
Table 2: Overview of interviewees in the second set of interviews
Two interviews were conducted––before and after the
intervention was published. During the three-month play
intervention, more than half of our interviewees played and were
asked about the gaming experience afterwards. Additionally, we
used direct and participatory observation in youth clubs and on
Facebook to complete our insights.
4. Results
We will discuss the intervention’s impact on the observed
youths’ ego networks and on their notions of intercultural
exchange and friendship. Also, we present player feedback
regarding the intervention itself and how this relates to the data
accumulated through gameplay metrics (Swain 2008).
Ego networks and intercultural friendships
The total sample size for the evaluation of the play intervention
is 40. Of these, 26 were invited to play regularly. The others (14)
represent our control group. Fifteen of the 26 players, the “top
gamers”, spent a significant amount of time, meaning that they
reached level 15 or higher. Some of the players who invested
less time had not really played any games at all during the threemonth time span.
The gaming itself and the teenagers’ predisposition toward
gaming could not change their concept of friendship as a
physical relationship, but we found significant effects on their
ego network constellations and perceptions of diversity. To
explore whether or not the ego networks of our interviewees
had changed, we combined two ego network generator tools
(Fischer 1982, and Hollstein et al. 2013) and asked questions
addressing various relationship levels, such as “Friendship”,
“Trust”, and “Socializing”. Moreover, we compared the networks
from before and after the teenagers played YourTurn! to
measure network changes resulting from our play intervention.
Table 1: Overview of interviewees in the first set of interviews
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
71
Design Paper
In the second set of interviews, we did indeed find differences
in network size depending on whether a person had engaged
with the playful intervention or not; gamers’ networks were
larger. This effect has two causes. First, gamers’ networks were
already larger before the study. Second, the gamers’ network
size increased by 0.5 contacts from interview 1 to interview
2. Whereas people who did not participate in the game did
not change their network sizes. Of course, we cannot be
sure that the increased network sizes were solely caused by
our intervention. Our interviewees may not have massively
expanded their networks but instead made their pre-existing
friends play as well. One possible explanation for this behavior
is given by Linderoth et al. (2014), who found that real-world
ties and relationships lessen the pressure of having to perform
well in a game.
In our second set of interviews, following the play intervention,
we found that the interviewees’ attitudes towards diversity had
become slightly more positive as compared to those expressed
in the first interview set. Those who had played YourTurn! were
more interested in intercultural friendships than those who had
not. Also, those interviewees identifying as both immigrant and
Austrian were most likely to play YourTurn! However, we do
not know if these were effects of YourTurn! or if playing was
more appealing to teenagers who were more open-minded and
interested in other cultures.
The native Austrian section of our sample talked more about
the negative aspects of diversity, but those individuals were
also most likely to claim being interested in intercultural
friendships, with their actual friends being Austrian natives like
themselves for the most part. Also, native Austrians were least
likely to play YourTurn! after having been asked to do so by us,
which is another clue to the relationship between YourTurn!
and intercultural awareness (again, this is not indicative of the
direction of the relationship). An analysis of the 15 top gamers’
interviews (across both interview sets) shows that eight gamers
maintained their mainly positive views of diversity in Vienna,
while six gamers expressed a more positive view of diversity
after the play intervention than before (only one changed
negatively).
Game-specific feedback
an important feature, eleven said it was surprising, and six found
it to be a unique experience. For example, P32 (female) said,
“It is totally different, almost abnormal, but not in a negative
sense—there’s no other game like it.” When asked what she
liked about the intervention, P35 (female) answered, “You
don’t know what the other player will answer. It’s so creative,
and it’s interesting how the other player will react to what you
post next.” These comments are not surprising, because the
premise of the project was to encourage creativity and create
a unique experience that would stand out from the masses of
other Facebook games, despite its low production values. The
interviews confirm that this not only worked but that YourTurn!
was also perceived positively. However, access metrics show
that many players either spent very little time in the intervention
and/or quit prematurely (figure 3).
Figure 3: Engagement metrics (Google Analytics).
The above engagement metrics show that more than half of
the players spent less than 3 minutes in the intervention. For
returning players, the reason for this could be that they were
simply checking to see if new game content had been added,
but for the remainder the metrics indicate that they quit after a
very short time.
However, the metrics show a relatively long engagement time,
with around 30% of players staying 10 minutes or longer and
12% staying more than 30 minutes. This is quite a long time for
a turn-based game in which players often just check in to make
only a few turns. It should be noted that appending a video is
not as quick a task as one might imagine. It involves the close
watching and re-watching of what the other players have done,
looking through YouTube video content and experimenting to
determine which particular clip will actually fit well at the end.
P35 (female) summarizes it well: “You have to have time for
it—a lot of time.”
Overall, YourTurn! was well-received. Thirty-five of 40
interviewees made at least one positive comment about the
intervention, such as “interesting” (17 statements), “good” (16),
or “fun” (12). Seventeen interviewees mentioned creativity as
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
72
Design Paper
YourTurn! was used both as a tool for self-expression, as well as
a means of learning about things that others are interested in.
When asked whether he became aware of new YouTube videos
through the intervention, P30 (male) said: “Yes, lots of them.
There were a couple of videos [finished mixes] for each topic,
and they were very surprising—some of them funny, some sad,
some very interesting.”
Figure 4: User drop-off metrics (Google Analytics).
The metrics in figure 4 show that about one third of users were
lost before they started to make or contribute to a video mix.
The bounce rate of visitors that did not go beyond the first page
was 19.2%. These numbers may be due to the unique concept
or at least the failure to communicate this concept in an easyto-understand way. For example, P4 (female) said: “In the
beginning, I had no clue. Then, I started to look at videos and
got what it [the game] was about.”
It can be concluded that the concept is not easy to comprehend
at first glance, but if a little more time is invested in grasping
that concept, the intervention can become engaging. During the
three-month action research period, some players also lacked
the requisite media literacy, and questions like “How do I know
which video to pick?” and “How do I judge whether my video
clip fits the topic?” were asked. In summary, it can be said that
creative play is a chance to make a game stand out and also
helps foster togetherness in collaborative play, but it heightens
the entrance barriers for some players.
Concept and game features
When asked about which game features stood out, most players
(16) mentioned “video editing”. In no way does this contradict
the above interpretation of the metrics, because the players
mentioning “video editing” as a feature were mostly those who
spent more time with the intervention. For these players, our
design expectations were met because they grasped the core
concept of collaborative video editing. The concept seems to
be especially appealing considering the lack of easily accessible
low-level video editing tools.
Referring directly to the video content, players said that they
liked “showing which videos they like” (ten statements),
and enjoyed the diversity of video content present in the
intervention (8). This also means that for some players,
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Figure 5: The video player and rating interface.
YourTurn! uses a contextual rating system that is meant to
encourage viewing what others have created and giving feedback
based on ratings such as “funny”, “meaningful”, “creative”, etc.
(figure 5). Compared to the number of mixes, the number of
ratings awarded is very low. From a design perspective, the
flaws in the rating system soon became obvious. Firstly, rating
videos did not feel like a real game activity, and it was detached
from the core mechanic of editing videos cooperatively. There
are no additional incentives or consequences for rating videos.
Secondly, the rating system was not consistently integrated into
the user interface. The interviews confirmed these weaknesses
regarding the rating system. There were few mentions of it (4),
and nobody cited watching the content added by other players
as one of the intervention’s core features. Players did say
that they were interested in what others were doing, but this
referred mostly to those they had personally made videos with.
It seems that watching was not considered as interesting as
expressing oneself and being active. In conclusion, it can be said
that watching finished mixes was not seen as a primary feature
of the intervention, although it was planned to be.
One feature that was very well-received by players (15
statements) was the customizable avatars (figure 6). The
fact that the avatar editor was received well coincides
with the objective of making the intervention not only a
tool for communication and cultural exchange but also a
means of self-expression. Expressing oneself thus serves as
n.º 43 • July 2015
73
Design Paper
a basis for approaching and getting to know one another.
to be willing to watch and relate to the diverse content they are
confronted with.
5. Discussion and Design Principles
In this section we present three design principles. They derive
from regarding the results of the players’ qualitative evaluation
and gameplay metrics (see above) from a reflective design
perspective. Reflecting, as a designer and player, is a common
practice in design research (Aarseth 2003, Burdick 2003, Ehn
& Löwgren 2004, Stapleton 2005). Furthermore we present a
series of smaller, more specific design insights.
•
Playful creativity and collaboration can be means for
the expression of and reflection on culture. In YourTurn!
videos are created based on a topic and, taking turns,
players negotiate cultural meaning by submitting adequate
video responses. The associative style of play enables the
sharing of intercultural practices and furthers integration
(Berry 2001). The music-related content contributes to this
process (Solomon 2009). In a more general sense it can be
said that collaborative video editing helps players explore
and share their cultural backgrounds. Most video contents
focused on music, but there were also videos related
to local politics, movie tastes, sports preferences, and
humorous compilations. The avatar editor was also wellreceived because it allowed players to experiment with
expressing themselves. The evaluation with players showed
the potential of YourTurn! to trigger curiosity about various
topics and invite players to find out about other players and
their interests.
•
The chance for success of a social impact game can be
increased by closely relating to the target audience’s
everyday habits and experiences. The combination of
Facebook and YouTube worked well. YouTube was identified
as the primary means of music consumption for youths in
Vienna, while we learned that Facebook is subsequently
used to post and discuss pieces of music. Music is an
apt medium for transporting cultural meaning and selfexpression. While YourTurn! is not a music game, the choice
of YouTube was a conscious one, hoping that players would
use musical content to communicate with one another (see
Marek 2013). Perhaps because of a variety of in-game topics
that invite the use of music videos, a considerable portion
of the game content did indeed reflect musical tastes. We
can assume that building on media channels and social
Figure 6: The avatar editor.
Social interaction
With 16 statements, collaboration was one of the most oftenmentioned positive features of the intervention. The interviews
also confirmed the potential to forge new social interactions.
Players made comments like “OK, he/she understands me,
and then, you send a Facebook friend request because you are
already there and can connect with one another more quickly,”
(P1, female) “Maybe, the other player likes that you add good
video clips, and maybe, you get to know each other then,” (P7,
male) and “You find common interests. This facilitates making
contact” (P30, male).
While 25 of the 40 interviewees recognized the intervention’s
potential to encourage getting to know other people and 16
of 26 players said they were interested in the people they had
played with, five of our 15 top gamers (players who reached
level 15) actually got to know someone they had not known
before, and two more (seven total) attempted to add someone
as a Facebook friend. However, in their ego networks, these new
friendships were regarded as less important than friendships the
players had already established before playing the intervention.
Overall, this shows a clear discrepancy between the numbers
of players who see the game’s potential as a means of forging
new friendships and the actual cases in which this happened.
These facts may point to a more long-term potential for the
intervention to foster new social connections, which could only
be observable over a longer timeframe and with a large and
diverse game community.
Sixteen players mentioned that they liked seeing previously
unknown videos in the intervention. This indicates the potential
for reflecting on intercultural practices because players appear
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
74
Design Paper
services relevant to youths helps anchor the intervention
in their everyday lives. The focus on creativity makes it a
playful communication channel that fosters togetherness
and helps expand social boundaries while at the same time
concealing the “serious” pupose. At first players also think
that they engage in a more familiar form of competitive play.
In the end they create something together and competitive
play is subtly transformed into collaboration. During the
three-month-long play intervention, real-life activities
supporting YourTurn! were made available. These included
workshops on DJing, beat boxing, and rapping; a mobile
sound studio that offered the opportunity for players to play
together; and a gamer party at a youth center to promote
the intervention. We observed that these occasions helped
recruit new players. Our interviewees also stated that they
felt more encouraged to play together with others that way.
•
Creative gameplay offers a chance to make a serious
game unique, and it demands but can also further media
literacy. The decision to focus on a new idea rather than
follow a classic genre helped make the intervention
memorable and engaging while maintaining low costs.
YourTurn! offers creative play instead of providing a lot of
content and assets. To be able to compete with mainstream
games serious games can build on unique gameplay rather
than high production values. In YourTurn! finding a suitable
clip means learning to reflect on communication, aesthetics
and context. However, we also noticed that the need to
be creative constituted an entry barrier for some players.
YourTurn! is not a standard videogame. It uses a maybe
overly unique concept that makes it difficult to grasp at first
glance what it is about. While it uses game elements, such
as scores, progression, achievements and avatars, it has no
longer-term goals, which leads to a lack of visible, long-term
motivation for players. While unique fetaures can make a
game stand out, social impact games need to partly rely on
established game concepts to ease access. Our evaluation
shows this ambivalence, with interviewees both praising
the uniqueness of YourTurn! and emphasizing difficulties in
understanding the intervention’s core concept.
The following list is composed of smaller design insights, which
are more specific to YourTurn! but have been abstracted in order
to be valuable for consideration in future projects or research.
•
Player interaction was not meaningful enough. Although
several new friendships were created by some players, the
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
three-month timespan was too short and the immediacy
of interaction with other players too low. To further online
friendships meaningful ways of interaction must be offered
in a game.
•
The decision to make YourTurn! Facebook-only was made
to keep costs down and to provide a social environment
for players to continue communicating after contact was
established in YourTurn!. While Facebook use is indeed
widespread, this decision still left out just under 10% of
our interview sample. A social impact game should not
force a particular social network on its particpants but offer
different choices.
•
The problems of having a unique concept and a high entry
barrier were further exacerbated by the unguided entry.
YourTurn! lacks an interactive tutorial or guided first steps.
While an introduction video and instructions are available,
these were rarely watched or read by players. Just like good
mainstream games, serious games need to have gameplay
instructions embedded into the first steps of playing the
game.
•
The rating system through which players could award tags
to videos they liked or found interesting was not used
very frequently. The feature was not introduced through
gameplay and was not featured prominently enough. This
led players to mostly creating instead of watching videos.
This is almost game-breaking because ratings and “likes”
constitute the only ways in which a player can obtain
valorization for their creations. Serious games also need
to offer support mechanics, additional to the mechanics
designed around the desired impact.
•
Problems with the intervention included destructive
strategies, such as repeating the same segment a preceding
player had added and quickly finishing off a video with
arbitrary selections. When creatively empowering players,
measures against destructive play have to be taken.
•
The contents in YourTurn! decay over time. The choice of
YouTube meant that YourTurn! was not able to save or cache
contents (to avoid facing legal consequences over content
use). YouTube videos vanish regularly, for example, when
they are taken down due to copyright issues. Everything
that vanishes from YouTube is lost in YourTurn! as well. It
also has no mechanisms to keep one player from taking
over all the contents as soon as video mixes are open for
n.º 43 • July 2015
75
Design Paper
collaboration. A multiplayer serious game has to make sure
that there is no content deprivation.
6. Conclusions and Outlook
Understanding YourTurn! and what went right and wrong in
terms of designing for social impact can help with the game
design processes of other serious or social impact games. We
presented a series of design principles based on a qualitative
evaluation of and a design reflection on YourTurn!.
In general, YourTurn! shows that games can impact both players’
ego networks and attitudes. While we could see impacts in
these areas, more significant results can only be achieved by
observing a larger number of players over a far longer timespan.
YourTurn! did not directly address the matters of acculturation
and intercultural friendships. The advantage of this design
decision was that youths primarily regarded YourTurn! as
a game and not as something that was designed to teach or
educate them. Thus, when playing, they did so for fun, while
the social impact aspect of the intervention was conveyed on a
more subliminal level. Although this may not be transferable to
all social issues, whenever possible, it can indeed help dispense
with the finger-wagging nature of attempts to educate people
about social issues, especially when dealing with a potentially
difficult teenage audience. However, as was experienced to a
certain degree in YourTurn!, concealing impact mechanics can
potentially distract from the matter at hand, thus leading to less
meaningful results.
What worked well was to let people interact with the subject
matter on a game-mechanics level. This is not a new approach
and has already been successfully implemented in serious games
such as World without Oil (Eklund et al. 2007). YourTurn! is built
on the assumption that social impact games must function first
and foremost as games before they can successfully address a
significant social issue. This evaluation is a further confirmation
of the theoretical arguments regarding serious games for social
impact made by Klimmt (2009) and Clark (2007).
The problems with YourTurn! on the whole were a result of
providing too few long-term incentives for playing, a tooshort observation period and a budget that was insufficient
for fully fleshing out the intervention. The main restrictions
of our research were the strong local ties—to Viennese youth
centers, schools and vocational training institutions—which led
to weak generalization potential. Our 91 qualitative interviews
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
outline insights potentially transferable to other Western
European countries, but the results cannot be fully generalized
for other areas. Overall, qualitative research cannot easily be
generalized. However, it provides scientists with deeper insights
that quantitative research fails to offer, and it is thus suited
for generating hypotheses and/or theories. Hence, qualitative
results may serve as a basis for further research.
We learned that if an intervention is designed to play a role in
how players express themselves, it will also be used to reflect
on other topics of social and cultural relevance. For an audience
aged 14 to 18, reputation and self-expression are central issues
(Wegener 2004), and thus it makes sense to build a game
around this core. However, teenagers also prefer playing with
their real-life friends to extend their in-game success and are
unlikely to play with unknown people. YourTurn! succeeded
in connecting well with youth culture (MacDonald & Shildrick
2007). Another major takeaway from the project was that a
low access threshold is needed to reach a larger portion of this
target audience.
YourTurn! had broader implications beyond its original purpose
as well. We built YourTurn! with the assumption that creative
empowerment would foster an intrinsic motivation to play and
thus lead to increased interactions with other players, which
was YourTurn!’s primary goal. While this goal was achieved
only partially, the creative nature of the intervention produced
an interesting side effect. The empowerment of players led to
an increase in media literacy and an expansion of media use
because players went beyond merely watching and began to
edit, research and orchestrate video contents. The intervention
addressed several new media literacies described by Jenkins
et al. (2006), including play, performance, appropriation and
distributed cognition.
YouTube has established itself as a central resource for
entertainment and communication among youths and children,
but it is generally restricted to receptive usage. Only a fraction
of youths and children master the technological barriers that
prevent the creative use of YouTube material. YourTurn! changes
this dramatically, putting players in a position in which they can
work creatively with material that is otherwise intended mainly
for consumption. The playful interaction with video creation
and mash-ups changes the perception of a technology that is
otherwise perceived as read-only. This can initiate a desire for
the creative use of other artifacts, digital or real. In this context,
YourTurn! can be described as a system that fosters creative
n.º 43 • July 2015
76
Design Paper
empowerment and advances media literacy beyond the confines
of reception and interpretation and well into participatory
culture. Systems such as YourTurn! undermine the power of
enormous media corporations that aim to diminish the Internet
by making it into a distribution medium for content. Instead,
this intervention creates a playful environment in which players
can use their intricate knowledge of popular YouTube culture to
create, compete and share re-interpretations and mash-ups of
contents they had initially only consumed.
of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning
Future Media Environments, (pp. 9-15). ACM.
Deterding, S., Sicart, M., Nacke, L., O’Hara, K., & Dixon, D. (2011b).
Gamification. using game-design elements in non-gaming contexts. In
CHI ‘11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp.
2425-2428). ACM.
Ehn, P., & Löwgren, J. (2004). Design [x] Research: Essays on Interaction
Design as Knowledge Construction. Malmö University, School of Arts and
Communication.
References
Fischer, C.S. (1982). To Dwell Among Friends. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago
Aarseth, E. (2003). “Playing Research: Methodological approaches to
Press.
game analysis.” In Proceedings of the Digital Arts and Culture Conference.
Haug, S. (2011). Soziale Netzwerke und soziales Kapital. Faktoren für die
Abt, C. C. (1970). Serious Games. New York: Viking Press.
Bell, L. A., & Griffin, P. (2007). “Designing social justice education courses.
Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice”, 67-87 in Adams, M., Griffin, P., &
Bell, L. A. (Eds.) Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice (Vol. 1). Routledge.
Berry, J. W. (2001). “A Psychology of Immigration.” In: Journal of Social
strukturelle Integration von Migranten in Deutschland. In: Gamper, M./
Reschke, L. (eds.): Knoten und Kanten. Soziale Netzwerkanalyse in der
Wirtschafts- und Migrationsforschung. Bielefeld: Transcript, 247-273.
Hepp, A. (2009). “Digitale Medien, Migration und Diaspora. Deterritoriale
Vergemeinschaftung jenseits nationaler Integration.” In: Uwe Hunger and
Kathrin Kissau (Eds.): Internet und Migration. Theoretische Zugänge und
Issues (57): 615–631.
empirische Befunde, 33-52. Wiesbaden: VS.
Burdick, A. (2003). “Design (as) Research.” In B. Laurel (Ed.) Design
Hollstein, B., Pfeffer, J., & Behrmann, L. (2013). Collecting Egocentric
Research: Methods and Perspectives. MIT Press.
Networks Using Touchscreen Computers. In: Schönhuth, M., Gamper, M.,
Bogost, I. (2007). Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames.
Kronenwett, M., & Stark, M. (Eds.): Visuelle Netzwerkforschung. Bielefeld:
Mit Press.
Transcript.
Breton, R. (1964). “Institutional Completeness of Ethnic Communities and
Hugger, K. (2009). Junge Migranten online. Suche nach sozialer
the Personal Relations of Immigrants.” In: American Journal of Sociology
Anerkennung und Vergewisserung von Zugehörigkeit. Wiesbaden: VS.
no. 2, 193-205.
Janßen, A. (2010). “„Man braucht ja eigentlich, wenn man eine so große
Brouwer, L. (2004). “Dutch Muslims on the Internet. A New Discussion
Familie hat, keine Freunde“ Zur Leistungsfähigkeit Sozialer Netzwerke
Platform.” Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 24(1): 47–55.
bei Türkischen Migranten und Migrantinnen der zweiten Generation.”
Charsky, D. (2010). “From edutainment to serious games: A change in the
use of game characteristics.” Games and Culture, 5(2), 177-198.
Clark, R. E. (2007). “Learning from serious games? Arguments, evidence
and research suggestions.” Educational Technology, 56–59.
Cole, S. W., Yoo, D. J., & Knutson, B. (2012). “Interactivity and Rewardrelated Neural Activation During a Serious Videogame.” PloS one, 7(3),
e33909.
In: Gamper, M./ Reschke, L. (eds.): Knoten und Kanten. Soziale
Netzwerkanalyse in der Wirtschafts- und Migrationsforschung. Bielefeld:
Transcript, 333-361.
Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A. J., & Weigel, M.
(2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media
Education for the 21st Century. Chicago: MacArthur Foundation.
Kayali, F., Schwarz, V., Götzenbrucker, G., Purgathofer, P., Franz, B., &
Pfeffer, J. (2011). “Serious Beats: Transdisciplinary Research Methodologies
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011a). “From Game
for Designing and Evaluating a Socially Integrative Serious Music-based
Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining Gamification.” In Proceedings
Online Game.” Paper presented at the DiGRA 2011 Conference “Think
Design Play”.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
n.º 43 • July 2015
77
Design Paper
Kato, P. M., Cole, S. W., Bradlyn, A. S., & Pollock, B. H. (2008). “A Video
Michael, D., & Chen, S. (2006). Serious Games: Games That Educate, Train
Game Improves Behavioral Outcomes in Adolescents and Young Adults
and Inform. Boston: Thomson.
With Cancer: A Randomized Trial.” Pediatrics, 122(2), 305-317.
Moser, H. (2009). “Das Internet in der Nutzung von Jugendlichen mit
Kissau, K. (2008). Das Integrationspotenzial des Internet für Migranten.
Migrationshintergrund.” In: Internet und Migration. Theoretische Zugänge
Wiesbaden: VS Research.
und empirische Befunde, eds. Uwe Hunger and Kathrin Kissau, 199-212.
Klages, H. (1993). Traditionsbruch als Herausforderung. Perspektiven der
Wertewandelgesellschaft. Frankfurt/New York.
Wiesbaden: VS.
Peng, W., Lee, M., & Heeter, C. (2010). “The Effects of a Serious Game
Klimmt, C. (2009). “Serious Games for Social Change: Why They (Should)
Work.” In U. Ritterfeld, P. Vorderer & M. Cody (Eds.), Serious Games: Effects
and Mechanisms (pp. 247-270). New York: Routledge.
Kolip, P. (1994). “Freundschaften im Jugendalter.” Zeitschrift für
Erziehungswissenschaft 1, 20-37.
Kuhn, A. (2009). Vernetzte Medien. Nutzung und Rezeption am Beispiel
von „World of Warcraft“. Konstanz: UVK.
on Role-Taking and Willingness to Help.” Journal of Communication, 60(4),
723-742.
Preciado, P., Snijders, T.A.B., Burk, W.J., Stattin, H., Kerr, M. (2012). „Does
proximity matter? Distance dependence of adolescent friendships“. In:
Social Networks no. 34, 18-31.
Rahmani, E., & Boren, S. A. (2012). “Videogames and Health Improvement:
A Literature Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.” GAMES FOR HEALTH:
Research, Development, and Clinical Applications, 1(5), 331-341
Lange, P. G. (2011). “Learning Real-Life Lessons From Online Games.”
Games and Culture, 6(1), 17-37.
Ratan, R., & Ritterfeld, U. (2009). “Classifying Serious Games.” In U.
Ritterfeld, M. Cody & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Serious Games: Mechanisms and
Linderoth, J. (2012). Why gamers don’t learn more: An ecological approach
to games as learning environments. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds,
4(1), 45-62.
Effects. New York/London: Routledge.
Sam, D.L. & Berry, J.W. (2010). Acculturation: When Individuals and Groups
of Different Cultural Backgrounds Meet, Perspectives on Psychological
Linderoth, J., Björk, S., & Olsson, C. (2014). Should I stay or should I go? A
Study of Pickup Groups in Left 4 Dead 2. Transactions of the Digital Games
Research Association, 1(2).
Science 5(4). 472.
Schumann, C., Jöckel, S. & Wolling, J. (2009). “Wertorientierungen in
Gilden, Clans und Allies. Eine interkulturelle Analyse über den Einfluss
Lins, C. (2009). “Internetnutzung von Migrantinnen und Migranten in
jugendlicherWertvorstellungen auf Spielergemeinschaften in Ungarn und
Deutschland. Ergebnisse der Sonderauswertung des (N)ONLINER Atlas
Deutschland.” Medien Journal 2: 4–18.
2008.” In: Internet und Migration. Theoretische Zugänge und empirische
Befunde, eds. Uwe Hunger and Kathrin Kissau, 151–172. Wiesbaden: VS
Verlag.
Stapleton, A. J. (2005). “Research as Design—Design as Research.” Paper
presented at the Digital Games Research Association 2005 Conference—
“changing views: worlds in play”.
Malaby, T. (2006). “Parlaying Value Capital in and Beyond Virtual Worlds.”
Games and Culture, 1(2), 141-162.
Squire, K. D. (2007). “Games, Learning, and Society: Building a Field.”
Educational Technology, Saddle Brook, NJ, 47(5), 51.
Marek, Roman (2013). “Understanding YouTube. Über die Faszination
eines Mediums.” Bielefeld. Transcript.
Solomon, T. (2009). “Berlin Frankfurt Istanbul: Turkish Hip-hop in Motion.”
European Journal of Cultural Studies, 12.
MacDonald, R., & Shildrick, T. (2007). Street corner society: leisure
careers, youth (sub) culture and social exclusion. Leisure studies, 26(3),
339-355.
Steinkuehler, C., Suire, K. & Barab, S. (2012). Games, Learning, and
Society: Learning and Meaning in the Digital Age. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Mitgutsch, K., & Alvarado, N. (2012). Purposeful by design?: a serious
game design assessment framework. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (pp. 121-128). ACM.
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Swain, C. (2008). “Master Metrics: The Science Behind the Art of Game
Design.” Presented at the NLGD Conference, Utrecht, Holland.
n.º 43 • July 2015
78
Design Paper
Toft, I. M., & Naseem, A. (2012). “Designing a Game for Playful
Communication within Families.” Eludamos. Journal for Computer Game
Culture, 6(1), 39-52.
Valdez, Z. (2008). “The Effect of Social Capital on White, Korean, Mexican
and Black Business Owners’ Earnings in US.” Journal of Ethnic and
Migration Studies 34: 995–973.
Wegener, C. (2004). Identitätskonstruktion durch Vorbilder. Über Prozesse
der Selektion, Aneignung und Interpretation medialer Bezugspersonen.
merz—Zeitschrift für Medienpädagogik, 48(6), 20-31.
Yusoff, A., Crowder, R., Gilbert, L., & Wills, G. (2009). “A Conceptual
Framework for Serious Games.” In Advanced Learning Technologies, 2009.
ICALT 2009. Ninth IEEE International Conference on (pp. 21-23). IEEE
Games cited:
Eklund, K., McGonigal, J., Cook, D., Lamb, M., Senderhauf, M., & Wells, K.
(2007). World Without Oil: Independent Television Service.
ISSN: 1887-1542
Phone: +34 933 670 400
ning
r
a
e
eL ers
Pap
43
Copyrights
n.º 43 • July 2015
79

Papers43 - Open Education Europa

Transcripción

Documentos relacionados

46 Indexed and Abstracted ISSN 2045