Search

The authors explore how framing theory and the method of frame-reflective discourse analysis provide foundations for the emerging discipline of serious games (SGs) research. Starting with Wittgenstein's language game and Berger and Luckmann's social constructivist view on science, the authors demonstrate why a definitional or taxonomic approach to SGs is problematic and unfruitful. Using Goffman's frame analysis as an alternative, they construct four frames, with sample illustrations, demonstrating the different ways in which the utility of games for society, business and politics is considered. These are SGs as: (1) tool (therapy, drug), (2) innovation (economic utility), (3) persuasion (idea, belief) and (4) self-organization (complexity). The frames are based upon different values and perceive different impacts of games in society, business and politics. The authors discuss the implications of their approach.

The authors define the requirements and a conceptual model for comparative evaluation research of simulation games and serious games (SGs) in a learning context. A first operationalisation of the model was used to comparatively evaluate a suite of 14 SGs on varying topics played between 2004 and 2009 in 13 institutes of higher education in the Netherlands. The questions in this research were: what is the perceived learning effectiveness of the games and what factors explain it? How can we comparatively evaluate games for learning? Data were gathered through pre- and post-game questionnaires among 1000 students, leading to 500 useful datasets and 230 complete datasets for analysis (factor analysis, scaling, "t"-test and correlation analysis) to give an explorative, structural model. The findings are discussed and a number of propositions for further research are formulated. The conclusion of the analysis is that the students' motivation and attitudes towards game-based learning before the game, their actual enjoyment, their efforts during the game and the quality of the facilitator/teacher are most strongly correlated with their learning satisfaction. The degree to which the experiences during the game were translated back into the underlying theories significantly determines the students' learning satisfaction. The quality of the virtual game environment did not matter so much. The authors reflect upon the general methodology used and offer suggestions for further research and development. (Contains 14 tables, 3 figures, and 4 notes.)

1. Introduction Over the past decade we have observed the emergence of a modest amount of psychotherapeutic games. With the term psychotherapeutic games, we refer to computer games aimed at [...], Most of the scientific literature on computer games aimed at offering or aiding in psychotherapy provides little information on the relationship between the game's design and the player's cognitive processes. This article investigates the use of Bloom's taxonomy in describing a psychotherapeutic game in terms of knowledge level and cognitive processing. It introduces the Revised Bloom Taxonomy and applies this to five psychotherapeutic games (Personal Investigator, Treasure Hunt, Ricky and the Spider, Moodbot, and SuperBetter) in a two-round procedure. In the first round consensus was reached on the Player Actions with Learning Objectives (PALOs) in each game. The second round sought to determine what level of knowledge and cognitive processing can be attributed to the PALOs by placing them in the taxonomy. Our low intercoder reliability in the second round indicates that Bloom's Revised Taxonomy is not suitable to compare and contrast content between games.

Computer games and organizations are becoming increasingly interwoven in the 21st century. Sophisticated computer games connected by networks are turning into spaces for organizing. Therefore, it may not be surprising that conventional organizations are now scrounging these games for novel ways to enhance efficiency. The result is the formation of game/organization hybrids; uneasy recontextualizations of partly incompatible ideas, values and practices. We begin this essay by elucidating what it is socially that makes something a game by exploring the notion’s anthropological foundations. We then introduce two examples of actual game/organization hybrids; raiding in computer games and gamification in formal organizations. We conclude by discussing the implications of such hybridization and suggest venues for how organization and management scholars can benefit from studying computer games and theories of play. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]