Serious Games Evaluation: Processes, Models, and Concepts

Emmerich, Katharina; Bockholt, Mareike

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46152-6_11

Cited by 24 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As noted by Emmerich and Bockholt (2016), two types of evaluation models exist: some models evaluate the quality of the game during or after the development phase; and contributes to further development and modifications (e.g., ADDIE models (Molenda, 2003), Serious Game Design Assessment (SGDA) framework (Mitgutsch and Alvarado, 2012)). Other models use empirical study (e.g., interviews, surveys, testing) to investigate the game's actual effects regarding fulfilment of its purpose.…”

Section: Level Of Evaluation: Reaction Learning Behaviour and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extended Taxonomy of Design and Innovation Games to Identify Perspectives of Development and Evaluation

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning innovation and design process is a necessity of the coming decade and games are a potential tool to do so. This paper proposes an extended taxonomy for categorising innovation and design games. The intent is to understand the essential, the similar and the different categories not only for development, but also for evaluation of innovation and design games, and in turn, help educators identify appropriate games for their learning objectives and curricula.

show abstract

Section: Level Of Evaluation: Reaction Learning Behaviour and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extended Taxonomy of Design and Innovation Games to Identify Perspectives of Development and Evaluation

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In practice, this concept takes the form of a collaborative work in which stakeholders, researchers, designers, and end-users explore a problem and produce solutions together, considering their different approaches, needs, and perspectives. In this way, different types of stakeholders in HCI-SGs design settings are involved; an extremely important aspect ( Emmerich and Bockholt, 2016 ). Within a “co-creation” environment, different opinions, experiences and ideas are productively blended, allowing for interaction and collaboration amongst, for example, game researchers and users, resulting in further understanding of the role of game design elements in the maximization of the player’s experience and game impact in their life.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Within a “co-creation” environment, different opinions, experiences and ideas are productively blended, allowing for interaction and collaboration amongst, for example, game researchers and users, resulting in further understanding of the role of game design elements in the maximization of the player’s experience and game impact in their life. In the same vein, interaction of the users with developers and researchers can help them to identify successful and failed game concepts, assisting them improving the effectiveness in their design of HCI-SGs ( Emmerich and Bockholt, 2016 ). From these perspectives, a triangulation strategy based on different kind of sources (i.e., literature review, users’ perspective, medical opinion) were considered to readjust and consequently improve the 14 constructed game scenarios of the PGS.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The number of responders (104) lies within the acceptable limits, as, usually, in the digital gaming research area where older adults are involved, there are not so many studies with sample size greater than 100 participants ( Marston et al, 2016 ). Adequate variety in the responders’ categories was also noticed, fostering the importance of inclusion of different type of stakeholders in SGs design settings ( Emmerich and Bockholt, 2016 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assistive HCI-Serious Games Co-design Insights: The Case Study of i-PROGNOSIS Personalized Game Suite for Parkinson’s Disease

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) and games set a new domain in understanding people’s motivations in gaming, behavioral implications of game play, game adaptation to player preferences and needs for increased engaging experiences in the context of HCI serious games (HCI-SGs). When the latter relate with people’s health status, they can become a part of their daily life as assistive health status monitoring/enhancement systems. Co-designing HCI-SGs can be seen as a combination of art and science that involves a meticulous collaborative process. The design elements in assistive HCI-SGs for Parkinson’s Disease (PD) patients, in particular, are explored in the present work. Within this context, the Game-Based Learning (GBL) design framework is adopted here and its main game-design parameters are explored for the Exergames, Dietarygames, Emotional games, Handwriting games, and Voice games design, drawn from the PD-related i-PROGNOSIS Personalized Game Suite (PGS) (www.i-prognosis.eu) holistic approach. Two main data sources were involved in the study. In particular, the first one includes qualitative data from semi-structured interviews, involving 10 PD patients and four clinicians in the co-creation process of the game design, whereas the second one relates with data from an online questionnaire addressed by 104 participants spanning the whole related spectrum, i.e., PD patients, physicians, software/game developers. Linear regression analysis was employed to identify an adapted GBL framework with the most significant game-design parameters, which efficiently predict the transferability of the PGS beneficial effect to real-life, addressing functional PD symptoms. The findings of this work can assist HCI-SG designers for designing PD-related HCI-SGs, as the most significant game-design factors were identified, in terms of adding value to the role of HCI-SGs in increasing PD patients’ quality of life, optimizing the interaction with personalized HCI-SGs and, hence, fostering a collaborative human-computer symbiosis.

show abstract

“…Evaluation is a fundamental step in game development (Emmerich and Bockholt, 2016). Serious game evaluations can take place at different levels, both short-term (player satisfaction and learning) or long-term (changing players' behavior and the outcomes achieved as a result of the game by the organization that applied it) (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2006).…”

Section: Rq1 What Are Bpm Games Learning Objectives and Design Characteristics?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Serious games in business process management: a systematic literature review

LEITÃO

Navarro

Cameira

et al. 2021

BPMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study conducts a systematic literature review (SLR) on serious games in the BPM domain, in order to answer: RQ1 – what are BPM games' learning objectives and design characteristics? RQ2 – How rigorously each BPM game was evaluated in terms of their effectiveness and entertainment?.Design/methodology/approachWe followed the PRISMA statement method and systematic literature review standards. Selected studies were analyzed using qualitative evidence synthesis.FindingsWe found 37 references that describe 15 serious games within the BPM domain. Games are diverse, ranging from analog games that need a few hours to complete to complex digital games that require many sessions. Game evaluation should be generally improved as 27 publications can be considered as quasi-experimental or nonexperimental and potentially biased.Research limitations/implicationsFuture research should focus on developing new games about process implementation and using other notations besides BPMN. More studies testing the reliability and validity of existing games in different settings and using more rigorous experimental designs are also necessary. Practitioners can identify thoroughly evaluated games relevant to their learning objectives.Originality/valueThis is the first SLR about BPM games. It consolidates the literature, analyzes, describes and categorizes 15 games with respect to their internal characteristics and evaluation reliability.

show abstract

Serious Games Evaluation: Processes, Models, and Concepts

Cited by 24 publications

References 24 publications

Extended Taxonomy of Design and Innovation Games to Identify Perspectives of Development and Evaluation

Extended Taxonomy of Design and Innovation Games to Identify Perspectives of Development and Evaluation

Assistive HCI-Serious Games Co-design Insights: The Case Study of i-PROGNOSIS Personalized Game Suite for Parkinson’s Disease

Serious games in business process management: a systematic literature review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About