Framing serious gaming

  • 2,259 views
Uploaded on

How does framing theory and the method of frame-reflective discourse analysis provide foundations for the emerging discipline of serious games research? A definitional or taxonomic approach to serious …

How does framing theory and the method of frame-reflective discourse analysis provide foundations for the emerging discipline of serious games research? A definitional or taxonomic approach to serious games (SG) is problematic and unfruitful. Using Goffman’s frame analysis as an alternative, I 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 serious games 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 slides summarize the publications: 1) Mayer, I. S., Warmelink, H. J. G., & Zhou, Q. (2014). The Utility of Games for Society, Business and Politics: A Frame Reflective Analysis. In Nick Rushby & D. Surry (Eds.), Wiley Handbook of Learning Technology (in press). Wiley. 2) Mayer, I. S., Warmelink, H. J. G., & Zhou, Q. (2015). A Frame-Reflective Discourse Analysis of Serious Games. British Journal of Educational Technology.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
2,259
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4

Actions

Shares
Downloads
31
Comments
0
Likes
2

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Framing Serious Gaming © P RO F. D R . I G O R M AY E R I . S . M AY E R @ H OT M A I L . C O M S I G NAT U R E G A M E S W W W. S I G N AT U R E G A M E S . E U AC A D E M Y F O R D I G I TA L E N T E RTA I N M E N T, N H T V, A P P L I E D U N I V E R S I T Y
  • 2. www.signaturegames.eu Find me / us: 1. Linkedin 2. Slideshare 3. Youtube
  • 3. Towards a science of SG Frames and discourse analysis Principles of play Methodology for SG research Study designs and data- gathering Research instruments and tools Professional ethics
  • 4. Read the presentation Go to… Research Gate www.researchgate.net/ profile/Igor_Mayer?ev =hdr_xprf Academia.edu Mendeley Mayer, I. S., Warmelink, H. J. G., & Zhou, Q. (2014). The Utility of Games for Society, Business and Politics: A Frame Reflective Analysis. In Nick Rushby & D. Surry (Eds.), Wiley Handbook of Learning Technology (in press). Wiley. Mayer, I. S., Warmelink, H. J. G., & Zhou, Q. (2015). A Frame- Reflective Discourse Analysis of Serious Games. British Journal of Educational Technology. (in press) Zhou, Q. (2014). The Princess in the Castle: Challenging Serious Game Play for Integrated Policy Analysis and Planning. PhD thesis. TU Delft. Mayer, I. S., Bekebrede, G., Harteveld, C., Warmelink, H. J. G., Zhou, Q., van Ruijven, T., … Wenzler, I. (2014). The Research and Evaluation of Serious Games: Toward a Comprehensive Methodology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(3), 502–527. doi:10.1111/bjet.12067 Mayer, I. S., Bekebrede, G., Warmelink, H. J. G., & Zhou, Q. (2014). A Brief Methodology for Researching and Evaluating Serious Games and Game-Based Learning. In T. M. Connolly, L. Boyle, T. Hainey, G. Baxter, & P. Moreno-Ger (Eds.), Psychology, Pedagogy and Assessment in Serious Games (pp. 357–393). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4773-2.ch017
  • 5. Innovation model: Where are SGs? Ref: Gartner Hype Cycle / Through of disillusionment
  • 6. Essentialist definitions  “How should we explain to someone what a game is? I imagine that we should describe games to him, and we might add: ‘This and similar things are called ‘games’. And do we know any more about it ourselves? Is it only other people whom we cannot tell exactly what a game is? But this is not ignorance. We do not know the boundaries because none have been drawn. To repeat, we can draw a boundary for a special purpose. Does it take that to make the concept usable? Not at all! (Except for that special purpose)” (Wittgenstein, 1953).  “Voluntary attempt to overcome unnecessary obstacles” J.B. Suits The Grasshopper: Games, Life and Utopia 1978
  • 7. Functionalist definitions  Games for non-entertainment purposes…(Sawyer, 2002)  Serious game is a mental contest, played with a computer in accordance with specific rules, that uses entertainment to further government or corporate training, education, health, public policy and strategic communication objectives. (Zyda 2005)  Games for health, training, military, learning…
  • 8. The politics behind functional definitions  Despite the possibility of rescuing serious games under the definition I have just offered, I do not want to preserve that name. Instead, I would like to advance persuasive games as an alternative whose promise lies in the possibility of using procedural rhetoric to support or challenge our understanding of the way things in the world do or should work. (Bogost, 2007: 59)  ‘Gamification is bullshit’ (Bogost, 2011)
  • 9. Taxonomies? They… …never seem to work …are political …reify …block innovation © Ben Sawyer
  • 10. Frame analysis (Erving Goffman 1974 Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience )
  • 11. Serious games can only be viewed through multiple frames at the same time
  • 12. Realist, Utilitarian Evolutionist, Transformationist Interventionist, Decisionist Idealist, Phenomenological
  • 13. Gaming = Intervention, Therapy ADHD – Healseeker - © Flanders Care http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnkhfgowEPI
  • 14. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CexMBkKwWUY Gaming = Cost-effective learning Training dike inspection, Levee Patroller / Deltares, The Netherlands
  • 15. Gaming = Safe training virtual training first responders (XVR © Esemble, the Netherlands) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl8cN4qvnKQ
  • 16. Realist, Utilitarian Evolutionist, Transformationist Interventionist, Decisionist Idealist, Phenomenological
  • 17. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zmeR-u-DioE Gaming = Product and process innovation (€) Augmented Reality in industry (© Ford Valencia, Spain)
  • 18. Gaming = Innovation in surgery (€) !? Headmounted video display for surgery (© Sony)
  • 19. Gaming = Innovation in spatial planning Next Generation Urban Planning © Tygron, the Netherlands http://vimeo.com/54296051
  • 20. Realist, Utilitarian Evolutionist, Transformationist Interventionist, Decisionist Idealist, Phenomenological
  • 21. Gaming = Societal criticism politics of nutrition, Fatworld (© persuasive games) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u64QCQe2sx0
  • 22. Gaming = Ridiculizing serious matters Wikileaks / Snowden leaks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMD-qStUGgc
  • 23. Gaming = Public awareness FloodSim (© Playgen, UK) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTEgI6N-cWI
  • 24. Gaming = Public involvement Aqua Republica (© DHI et al.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqC9f7F3als
  • 25. Gaming = Customer loyalty, branding Aviation Empire (© Little Chicken, KLM, the Netherlands) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdLfMqoMOqw
  • 26. Changing (political) ideas: sub frames Economia (EU) ‘Let’s educate them’ frame Occupy Wall street ‘Radical, anti-politics’ frame Wikileaks – ‘Critical’ frame SOS slaves – ‘Grass Roots‘ frame Anti SOPA / PIPA ‘Advocacy Perspective’
  • 27. Realist, Utilitarian Evolutionist, Transformationist Interventionist, Decisionist Idealist, Phenomenological
  • 28. Gaming = citizen science, wisdom of the crowd Biomedical research, Foldit, (© Foldit, US) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdBcpdH_ptA
  • 29. Gaming = citizen science, wisdom of the crowd Biomedical research, Eyewire http://blog.eyewire.org/about/
  • 30. Gaming = managing complex systems Ocean management, MSP Challenge 2050 (I&M, Signature Games, the Netherlands) http://www.mspchallenge.org/maritime-spatial-planning-challenge-2050/
  • 31. Discourse analysis Truth claim Criteria Rebuttal Type of research Policy
  • 32. Realist, Utilitarian Evolutionist, Transformationist Interventionist, Decisionist Idealist, Phenomenological Discourse analysis Effectiveness Gaming is a cost-effective, means for learning, training and intervention. Innovation (€) Global Economic Rat race. Gaming = Innovation and ec. sector. Persuasion Games are rhetorical; They can convince, change ideas, beliefs of players, consumers, citizens Playfulness Ludification, gamification of society, organization, politics, leadership, management. Lack of Proof Show me the evidence? Do we teach the right things?. Poss. Neg. effects, such as agression, addiction? Disturbance Over-optimism and side effects.Risks of industrial policy (subsidies, protection). Inequality Social-ec. exclusion; what are the consequences for society, power (gap between generations, rich/poor, nations). Manipulation Risk of manipulation, abuse of power, hidden agendas and ideologies. Ideology battle.
  • 33. Realist, Utilitarian Evolutionist, Transformationist Interventionist, Decisionist Idealist, Phenomenological Discourse analysis: consequences for research Efficacy: The ability to reach a limited set of pre-determined goals or effects effectively and cost efficiently Innovation value delivery The ability to deliver certain values important to innovation, such as efficiency, creativity, new socio-technical combinations. Belief change: The ability to change the way people perceive, discuss behave around certain issues; Self-organization: the ability to constitute new forms of human-system interaction. Psychological, medical, consultancy, experimental Economic, organizational, engineering System sciences (organizational learning) and complexity sciences Media, cultural, sociological, political.
  • 34. Realist, Utilitarian Evolutionist, Transformationist Interventionist, Decisionist Idealist, Phenomenological Consequences for policy…(e.g., Horizon 2020,)
  • 35. Discussion  Reflection on frame and discourse analysis  Many serious games can be viewed through multiple frames.  One frame may be more convincing than others.  We can examine the fidelity or persuasiveness of frames  Frames can break, change. New frames can emerge.  What are your examples?  What are your frames?