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.