Pub Date : 2022-11-03DOI: 10.1177/10468781221135199
Brandon Behlendorf, G. Ackerman
Background Red Teaming is widely used to discover vulnerabilities, test defensive measures, and anticipate emerging but novel threats. It has rarely been conducted both systematically and at scale, substantially limiting confidence in its results and the generalizability of its findings. Aim We introduce distributed, empirical, systematic, and scalable red teaming (DESSRT), a framework for translating tactical-level Red Teaming into a replicable research methodology. We apply DESSRT to address whether the information about and availability of computed tomography (CT) scanners influences adversary decision-making in aviation security. Method Using a convenience sample of 143 university students, participants role-played as adversaries in an eight-hour attack planning exercise. Via a custom instrument, participants were randomly assigned across three adversary profiles built on historical cases and then designed a simulated attack. Afterwards, one of three injects about CT scanners were randomly assigned, and participants were asked about potential changes in attack plans (including target changes). Differences among assigned profiles and CT scanner injects were evaluated using standard statistical tests of association. Results Although differences in explosive and weapon package selections were not statistically significant across profiles, security evasion methods were. Following injects, participants were equally as likely to change tactics across profiles, with the majority (53%) changing at least one tactical area. When asked, the majority (18) of those who changed targets (27/143) reported that the additional information on CT scanners did have some effect on their target change decision. Conclusion Overall, the DESSRT framework provides a novel mechanism for translating traditional Red Teaming exercises into a replicable and empirical research method. Although not a replacement for historical data, where available, DESSRT allows analysts and researchers to test theories about human decision-making, generate novel what-if insights to support planning efforts, and validate parameters within complex models.
{"title":"DESSRT: A Novel Framework for Empirical Red Teaming at Scale","authors":"Brandon Behlendorf, G. Ackerman","doi":"10.1177/10468781221135199","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221135199","url":null,"abstract":"Background Red Teaming is widely used to discover vulnerabilities, test defensive measures, and anticipate emerging but novel threats. It has rarely been conducted both systematically and at scale, substantially limiting confidence in its results and the generalizability of its findings. Aim We introduce distributed, empirical, systematic, and scalable red teaming (DESSRT), a framework for translating tactical-level Red Teaming into a replicable research methodology. We apply DESSRT to address whether the information about and availability of computed tomography (CT) scanners influences adversary decision-making in aviation security. Method Using a convenience sample of 143 university students, participants role-played as adversaries in an eight-hour attack planning exercise. Via a custom instrument, participants were randomly assigned across three adversary profiles built on historical cases and then designed a simulated attack. Afterwards, one of three injects about CT scanners were randomly assigned, and participants were asked about potential changes in attack plans (including target changes). Differences among assigned profiles and CT scanner injects were evaluated using standard statistical tests of association. Results Although differences in explosive and weapon package selections were not statistically significant across profiles, security evasion methods were. Following injects, participants were equally as likely to change tactics across profiles, with the majority (53%) changing at least one tactical area. When asked, the majority (18) of those who changed targets (27/143) reported that the additional information on CT scanners did have some effect on their target change decision. Conclusion Overall, the DESSRT framework provides a novel mechanism for translating traditional Red Teaming exercises into a replicable and empirical research method. Although not a replacement for historical data, where available, DESSRT allows analysts and researchers to test theories about human decision-making, generate novel what-if insights to support planning efforts, and validate parameters within complex models.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48357270","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-07DOI: 10.1177/10468781221131352
Brian Cleveley, Karin Diane Hatheway-Dial, Lori Wahl, J. Peutz
Introduction There has been an increase in the delivery of educational and training content using computer-based simulations across a range of platforms. Minimal studies have compared the effectiveness of multiple digital delivery platforms with one another using the same simulation. Objective This research investigated differences in knowledge change due to the platform used for delivery of a stand-alone learning simulation. Methods A pretest–posttest design was used to evaluate 127 participants. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: desktop, tablet, mobile VR (Google Cardboard), and virtual reality headset. A pretest was given prior to participants’ completion of a learning simulation. Upon completion of the learning simulation, participants completed a posttest. Results This study indicated that all participants improved knowledge scores across the four platforms used to deliver the learning simulation. All participants positively increased their overall scores from the pretest to the posttest. There were no statistically significant differences in knowledge change between the four groups. Conclusion All participants positively increased their overall scores from the pretest to the posttest regardless of platform technology used to deliver the virtual reality learning simulation. This indicates that it is possible to effectively deliver the same learning simulation across different platforms that include a mix of 2D and immersive technologies.
{"title":"Comparison of Knowledge Change in a Virtual Reality Simulation Across Four Platform Technologies","authors":"Brian Cleveley, Karin Diane Hatheway-Dial, Lori Wahl, J. Peutz","doi":"10.1177/10468781221131352","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221131352","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction There has been an increase in the delivery of educational and training content using computer-based simulations across a range of platforms. Minimal studies have compared the effectiveness of multiple digital delivery platforms with one another using the same simulation. Objective This research investigated differences in knowledge change due to the platform used for delivery of a stand-alone learning simulation. Methods A pretest–posttest design was used to evaluate 127 participants. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: desktop, tablet, mobile VR (Google Cardboard), and virtual reality headset. A pretest was given prior to participants’ completion of a learning simulation. Upon completion of the learning simulation, participants completed a posttest. Results This study indicated that all participants improved knowledge scores across the four platforms used to deliver the learning simulation. All participants positively increased their overall scores from the pretest to the posttest. There were no statistically significant differences in knowledge change between the four groups. Conclusion All participants positively increased their overall scores from the pretest to the posttest regardless of platform technology used to deliver the virtual reality learning simulation. This indicates that it is possible to effectively deliver the same learning simulation across different platforms that include a mix of 2D and immersive technologies.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48862263","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-07DOI: 10.1177/10468781221132850
Timothy C. Clapper
Background When the concepts of mastery learning and deliberate practice are applied in accordance with their intended meaning, they can be used to create robust learning opportunities that can ensure that more learners achieve and maintain higher standards of competency. With the rapid expansion of healthcare simulation over the past 10–15 years, these concepts are not always described accurately in the literature, leaving those considering the use of these practices vulnerable to inaccurate interpretation and application. Aim The purpose of this article is to provide a much-needed clarification of mastery learning and deliberate practice for those conducting simulation-based education. This clarification includes defining background information on these two important concepts and suggestions for application. Conclusion An accurate understanding of mastery learning and deliberate practice can ensure that going forward, we properly design interventions, systems, and research protocols that can inform us about what works best for our learners.
{"title":"Mastery learning and deliberate practice: Do simulationists need clarification?","authors":"Timothy C. Clapper","doi":"10.1177/10468781221132850","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221132850","url":null,"abstract":"Background When the concepts of mastery learning and deliberate practice are applied in accordance with their intended meaning, they can be used to create robust learning opportunities that can ensure that more learners achieve and maintain higher standards of competency. With the rapid expansion of healthcare simulation over the past 10–15 years, these concepts are not always described accurately in the literature, leaving those considering the use of these practices vulnerable to inaccurate interpretation and application. Aim The purpose of this article is to provide a much-needed clarification of mastery learning and deliberate practice for those conducting simulation-based education. This clarification includes defining background information on these two important concepts and suggestions for application. Conclusion An accurate understanding of mastery learning and deliberate practice can ensure that going forward, we properly design interventions, systems, and research protocols that can inform us about what works best for our learners.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49355042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-04DOI: 10.1177/10468781221127480
M. Schijven, T. Kikkawa
We may say that reality these days is broken. According to Jane McGonigal, that is no news, as that was the title of her groundbreaking and a must-read book back in 2011 (McGonigal, 2011). Jane extensively elaborated on escapism from reality, why games may make us better and succeed in life, and how games can change the world. A book a decade old, but is relevant to date as ever. As gaming may inspire us to cooperate and collaborate to repair what reality has broken, and gameplay may become a way of thinking and solving problems, rather than tinkering with a gadget. Now how to get people into a flow-zone, freely thinking how to solve everyday problems? Many theories about that, and in our thinking, we may find different games to play. Moving from playing a game, towards gamification and then shifting into nudging may be a very interesting concept. But little is to be found about the delicate, but important differences between gamification and nudging. Indeed, it is relevant to understand what sets them apart to maximize benefits. Gamification is a concept that has largely arisen from marketing. Behavior is believed to be the outcome from direct or indirect interaction with one’s surroundings, resulting from feedback in the form of rewards and/or punishments. Behavior is thus largely conditioned, having the player choose between options that are set out by the architect of the game. Setting out a game using game mechanics such as competition, rewards, accomplishments and often also punishments may activate people, engage theme and when well done, help people make better informed decisions for better outcomes in reality. Nudging, on the other hand, is all about free choice architecture. The master of the game, the game architect, provides players (aren’t we all?) in real life with framed options, providing choice. And s/he can make one option more appealing than the other
{"title":"To Nudge or to Gamify – How to Repair Reality?","authors":"M. Schijven, T. Kikkawa","doi":"10.1177/10468781221127480","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221127480","url":null,"abstract":"We may say that reality these days is broken. According to Jane McGonigal, that is no news, as that was the title of her groundbreaking and a must-read book back in 2011 (McGonigal, 2011). Jane extensively elaborated on escapism from reality, why games may make us better and succeed in life, and how games can change the world. A book a decade old, but is relevant to date as ever. As gaming may inspire us to cooperate and collaborate to repair what reality has broken, and gameplay may become a way of thinking and solving problems, rather than tinkering with a gadget. Now how to get people into a flow-zone, freely thinking how to solve everyday problems? Many theories about that, and in our thinking, we may find different games to play. Moving from playing a game, towards gamification and then shifting into nudging may be a very interesting concept. But little is to be found about the delicate, but important differences between gamification and nudging. Indeed, it is relevant to understand what sets them apart to maximize benefits. Gamification is a concept that has largely arisen from marketing. Behavior is believed to be the outcome from direct or indirect interaction with one’s surroundings, resulting from feedback in the form of rewards and/or punishments. Behavior is thus largely conditioned, having the player choose between options that are set out by the architect of the game. Setting out a game using game mechanics such as competition, rewards, accomplishments and often also punishments may activate people, engage theme and when well done, help people make better informed decisions for better outcomes in reality. Nudging, on the other hand, is all about free choice architecture. The master of the game, the game architect, provides players (aren’t we all?) in real life with framed options, providing choice. And s/he can make one option more appealing than the other","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47061155","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-28DOI: 10.1177/10468781221126786
Nina V. Nygren, Ville Kankainen, Lucas Brunet
Background Biodiversity crisis requires researchers to reflect on tools and strategies to engage with different stakeholders. We propose that serious games can be designed to introduce stakeholders to a novel environmental policy tool and to communicate research on environmental issues. Our case is biodiversity offsetting (BDO), a novel policy tool aiming to reconcile nature conservation with other land uses. As any media, games offer certain framings of the issues they communicate about—some aspects are made more salient than others. However, frame analysis has not been widely used to analyze the design choices or the messages communicated by games. We analyze how these framings are designed into a game communicating about environmental issues. Aim To intervene in the emerging public discussion on BDO in Finland, we designed a land use board game and during the design process, played it with public and private stakeholders who would soon encounter and implement biodiversity offsetting policies in Finland. The aim of this article is to describe how our framings of BDO affected the design process and how those framings interacted with the design decisions we made. With our analysis, we want to contribute to the understanding of how framings and design choices interact in game design and how paying attention to framings is especially important for the design of SGs. Method We analyze how our framings of biodiversity offsetting and our design choices interact in game design. Our understanding of biodiversity offsetting guided our game design, but the design choices also contribute to the framing of the issue itself. Results Game design choices strongly frame the topic of the game and thus influence the function of a serious game. Thus, the framings of the topic should be considered carefully during the game design process, especially in the context of serious games.
{"title":"Offsetting Game—Framing Environmental Issues in the Design of a Serious Game","authors":"Nina V. Nygren, Ville Kankainen, Lucas Brunet","doi":"10.1177/10468781221126786","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221126786","url":null,"abstract":"Background Biodiversity crisis requires researchers to reflect on tools and strategies to engage with different stakeholders. We propose that serious games can be designed to introduce stakeholders to a novel environmental policy tool and to communicate research on environmental issues. Our case is biodiversity offsetting (BDO), a novel policy tool aiming to reconcile nature conservation with other land uses. As any media, games offer certain framings of the issues they communicate about—some aspects are made more salient than others. However, frame analysis has not been widely used to analyze the design choices or the messages communicated by games. We analyze how these framings are designed into a game communicating about environmental issues. Aim To intervene in the emerging public discussion on BDO in Finland, we designed a land use board game and during the design process, played it with public and private stakeholders who would soon encounter and implement biodiversity offsetting policies in Finland. The aim of this article is to describe how our framings of BDO affected the design process and how those framings interacted with the design decisions we made. With our analysis, we want to contribute to the understanding of how framings and design choices interact in game design and how paying attention to framings is especially important for the design of SGs. Method We analyze how our framings of biodiversity offsetting and our design choices interact in game design. Our understanding of biodiversity offsetting guided our game design, but the design choices also contribute to the framing of the issue itself. Results Game design choices strongly frame the topic of the game and thus influence the function of a serious game. Thus, the framings of the topic should be considered carefully during the game design process, especially in the context of serious games.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42271285","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-23DOI: 10.1177/10468781221123919
I. Zairi, M. Ben Dhiab, K. Mzoughi, I. Ben Mrad
Background and aim Serious games are interactive games with a purpose for education, developed generally under software technology, serious games also include tabletop games (board games and card games), and many of them are used in medical settings like hospital training. Previous work indicates that serious games can enhance students' motivation, interaction, and engagement. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a serious game on medical students' learning outcomes and determine its effect on students' flow and motivation and examine the relationship between the flow and motivation. Methods This was a prospective study performed for two years (2018-2019 and 2019-2020 academic years). A total of 108 third-year medical students participated in this study. Students were asked to play a serious game on a computer for twenty minutes. A set of questionnaires containing evaluation grids to measure the flow and the motivation were given to students. The effectiveness of the game was assessed using pre-and post-tests. Results Complete datasets were available for 97 students. Flow and motivation dimensions experienced by the students were generally high (mean = 54,5). Significant and positive relationships between the sub-scale of flow experience and intrinsic motivation to know, intrinsic motivation to experience simulation, and the three types of extrinsic motivation were found. There was a negative correlation between the flow dimension and intrinsic motivation toward accomplishments and amotivation. There was a significant difference between the mean scores of pre-tests and post-tests (p < .01). Conclusion The serious game is regarded as a particularly active and problem-solving form of learning that promote medical students' motivation, flow and learning achievements.
{"title":"The Effect of Serious Games on Medical Students’ Motivation, Flow and Learning","authors":"I. Zairi, M. Ben Dhiab, K. Mzoughi, I. Ben Mrad","doi":"10.1177/10468781221123919","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221123919","url":null,"abstract":"Background and aim Serious games are interactive games with a purpose for education, developed generally under software technology, serious games also include tabletop games (board games and card games), and many of them are used in medical settings like hospital training. Previous work indicates that serious games can enhance students' motivation, interaction, and engagement. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a serious game on medical students' learning outcomes and determine its effect on students' flow and motivation and examine the relationship between the flow and motivation. Methods This was a prospective study performed for two years (2018-2019 and 2019-2020 academic years). A total of 108 third-year medical students participated in this study. Students were asked to play a serious game on a computer for twenty minutes. A set of questionnaires containing evaluation grids to measure the flow and the motivation were given to students. The effectiveness of the game was assessed using pre-and post-tests. Results Complete datasets were available for 97 students. Flow and motivation dimensions experienced by the students were generally high (mean = 54,5). Significant and positive relationships between the sub-scale of flow experience and intrinsic motivation to know, intrinsic motivation to experience simulation, and the three types of extrinsic motivation were found. There was a negative correlation between the flow dimension and intrinsic motivation toward accomplishments and amotivation. There was a significant difference between the mean scores of pre-tests and post-tests (p < .01). Conclusion The serious game is regarded as a particularly active and problem-solving form of learning that promote medical students' motivation, flow and learning achievements.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48429734","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-23DOI: 10.1177/10468781221123595
Andrew C Griggs, E. Lazzara, Shawn M. Doherty, J. Keebler, B. Gewertz, Tara N. Cohen
Background Teams are the foundation of modern organizations. Many organizations are interested in interventions to bolster the effectiveness of their workforce. One viable intervention is an escape room. Escape rooms are engaging, team-based activities that require individuals to work together to complete multiple tasks in a limited amount of time. Purpose The purpose of this article is to provide ten considerations that are relevant to leveraging escape rooms as a means for data collection. Specifically, we offer guidance regarding pilot testing, equipment set-up, participant recruitment, briefing participants, progress monitoring, hints, room maintenance, data maintenance and analysis, and revising the room and study. Conclusion The considerations provided in this article can assist researchers when attempting to employ an escape room as a mechanism to collect data.
{"title":"Unlocking the Methodology of Escape Rooms: Considerations for Conducting Applied Escape Rooms in Research","authors":"Andrew C Griggs, E. Lazzara, Shawn M. Doherty, J. Keebler, B. Gewertz, Tara N. Cohen","doi":"10.1177/10468781221123595","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221123595","url":null,"abstract":"Background Teams are the foundation of modern organizations. Many organizations are interested in interventions to bolster the effectiveness of their workforce. One viable intervention is an escape room. Escape rooms are engaging, team-based activities that require individuals to work together to complete multiple tasks in a limited amount of time. Purpose The purpose of this article is to provide ten considerations that are relevant to leveraging escape rooms as a means for data collection. Specifically, we offer guidance regarding pilot testing, equipment set-up, participant recruitment, briefing participants, progress monitoring, hints, room maintenance, data maintenance and analysis, and revising the room and study. Conclusion The considerations provided in this article can assist researchers when attempting to employ an escape room as a mechanism to collect data.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47717874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-21DOI: 10.1177/10468781221120599
Alexandra Lapierre, C. Arbour, Marc-André Maheu-Cadotte, Billy Vinette, G. Fontaine, Patrick Lavoie
Background Clinical simulations are complex educational interventions characterized by several design features, which have the potential to influence cognitive load, that is, the mental effort required to assimilate new information and learn. This systematic review and meta-analysis explored the associations between simulation design features and cognitive load in novice healthcare professionals. Methods Based on the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, a search was performed in five databases for quantitative studies in which the cognitive load of novice healthcare professionals was measured during or after a simulation activity. Each clinical simulation was coded to describe its design features. Univariate and multivariate mixed model analyses were performed to explore the associations between simulation design features and cognitive load. Results From 962 unique records, 45 studies were included and 27 provided enough data on subjective cognitive load (i.e., Paas Scale and NASA-Task Load Index scores) to be meta-analyzed. In the multivariate analysis for the NASA-Task Load Index scores, each repetition of a simulation using the same scenario resulted in a linear decrease in cognitive load. In contrast, technology-based instruction before or during a simulation activity was associated with higher cognitive load. In the univariate analyses, other features such as feedback and instructor presence were also statistically associated with cognitive load. Regarding the univariate analyses of the Paas Scale scores, simulator type, briefing, debriefing, and repetitive practice were statistically associated with cognitive load. Conclusion This is the first meta-analysis exploring the relationship between clinical simulation design features and novice healthcare professionals’ cognitive load. Although the findings show that several design features can potentially increase or decrease cognitive load, several gaps and inconsistencies in the current literature make it difficult to appreciate how such reciprocity influences novice healthcare professionals’ learning. These limitations are discussed and avenues for educators and further research are suggested.
{"title":"Association between Clinical Simulation Design Features and Novice Healthcare Professionals’ Cognitive Load: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"Alexandra Lapierre, C. Arbour, Marc-André Maheu-Cadotte, Billy Vinette, G. Fontaine, Patrick Lavoie","doi":"10.1177/10468781221120599","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221120599","url":null,"abstract":"Background Clinical simulations are complex educational interventions characterized by several design features, which have the potential to influence cognitive load, that is, the mental effort required to assimilate new information and learn. This systematic review and meta-analysis explored the associations between simulation design features and cognitive load in novice healthcare professionals. Methods Based on the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, a search was performed in five databases for quantitative studies in which the cognitive load of novice healthcare professionals was measured during or after a simulation activity. Each clinical simulation was coded to describe its design features. Univariate and multivariate mixed model analyses were performed to explore the associations between simulation design features and cognitive load. Results From 962 unique records, 45 studies were included and 27 provided enough data on subjective cognitive load (i.e., Paas Scale and NASA-Task Load Index scores) to be meta-analyzed. In the multivariate analysis for the NASA-Task Load Index scores, each repetition of a simulation using the same scenario resulted in a linear decrease in cognitive load. In contrast, technology-based instruction before or during a simulation activity was associated with higher cognitive load. In the univariate analyses, other features such as feedback and instructor presence were also statistically associated with cognitive load. Regarding the univariate analyses of the Paas Scale scores, simulator type, briefing, debriefing, and repetitive practice were statistically associated with cognitive load. Conclusion This is the first meta-analysis exploring the relationship between clinical simulation design features and novice healthcare professionals’ cognitive load. Although the findings show that several design features can potentially increase or decrease cognitive load, several gaps and inconsistencies in the current literature make it difficult to appreciate how such reciprocity influences novice healthcare professionals’ learning. These limitations are discussed and avenues for educators and further research are suggested.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49549303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-18DOI: 10.1177/10468781221120686
Chen Ling, Shriram Seetharaman, L. Mirza
Background Diabetes affects many people across the world. Diabetes education plays a critical role in helping people with diabetes to perform diabetes self-management at home. Intervention We explored whether serious games can be used as a supplementary tool for diabetes education. Two online video games- the “Diabetic Dog” game and “Carb Counting with Lenny the Lion” game, were used for the study. Methods Fourteen patients with Type II diabetes were recruited from the Norman Diabetes Center by personal invitations. After initial training, the patients played the games a minimum of four times per week during the two-week study duration. Pre- and post-assessments of patients' diabetes knowledge and self-efficacy in diabetes self-management behaviors were performed using questionnaires, and an interview was conducted at the end to gauge the effectiveness of the game intervention. Results The results from the questionnaires show a general trend of improvement in patient diabetes knowledge and self-efficacy in diabetes self-management. A general trend of improvements in patients’ self-efficacy in controlling blood sugar level, handling abnormal blood sugar levels, taking insulin, and complying with a diabetes diet was observed. The interview results showed that the patients reinforced their diabetes knowledge and became more aware of their own lifestyles by playing diabetes educational games. They perceived the games as fun and easy to play. They also provided suggestions for the game design for diabetes education. Conclusion The study showed that serious game intervention had good potential to be a useful supplement to clinic-based diabetes education in improving patient diabetes knowledge and increasing patient self-efficacy in diabetes self-management behavior.
{"title":"Roles of Serious Game in Diabetes Patient Education","authors":"Chen Ling, Shriram Seetharaman, L. Mirza","doi":"10.1177/10468781221120686","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221120686","url":null,"abstract":"Background Diabetes affects many people across the world. Diabetes education plays a critical role in helping people with diabetes to perform diabetes self-management at home. Intervention We explored whether serious games can be used as a supplementary tool for diabetes education. Two online video games- the “Diabetic Dog” game and “Carb Counting with Lenny the Lion” game, were used for the study. Methods Fourteen patients with Type II diabetes were recruited from the Norman Diabetes Center by personal invitations. After initial training, the patients played the games a minimum of four times per week during the two-week study duration. Pre- and post-assessments of patients' diabetes knowledge and self-efficacy in diabetes self-management behaviors were performed using questionnaires, and an interview was conducted at the end to gauge the effectiveness of the game intervention. Results The results from the questionnaires show a general trend of improvement in patient diabetes knowledge and self-efficacy in diabetes self-management. A general trend of improvements in patients’ self-efficacy in controlling blood sugar level, handling abnormal blood sugar levels, taking insulin, and complying with a diabetes diet was observed. The interview results showed that the patients reinforced their diabetes knowledge and became more aware of their own lifestyles by playing diabetes educational games. They perceived the games as fun and easy to play. They also provided suggestions for the game design for diabetes education. Conclusion The study showed that serious game intervention had good potential to be a useful supplement to clinic-based diabetes education in improving patient diabetes knowledge and increasing patient self-efficacy in diabetes self-management behavior.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47381385","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-17DOI: 10.1177/10468781221120690
Denise M. Bressler, M. S. Tutwiler, Amanda Siebert-Evenstone, Leonard A. Annetta, Jason A. Chen
Background According to the Committee on STEM Education, K-12 science students need access to learning experiences that promote collaboration and engagement. To fill that void, we need to develop activities that stimulate engaged learning and scaffold effective collaboration. K-12 teacher candidates see value in utilizing games for this purpose. Specifically, tabletop science games can help teachers engage students in science learning and scaffold collaboration. Aim For this study, we designed a collaborative, STEM-themed card game called MOUNTAIN RESCUE and explored its capacity to promote engaged learning and collaboration. Method Four groups of STEM campers (n = 14) in a suburban Mid-Atlantic region played MOUNTAIN RESCUE. All groups had a mix of boys and girls. Play-testers ranged from 10–13 years old. The tabletop game took approximately 30-minutes. During gameplay, players embodied unique STEM roles: physicist, chemist, structural engineer, and electrical engineer. They collaborated to solve challenges related to electricity, physics, chemistry, and engineering design. Discourse was audio-recorded throughout gameplay. Immediately after gameplay, self-report survey data were collected to assess flow and perceptions of collaborative learning. Results Findings demonstrated that the game promoted engagement and collaboration. Specifically, students had a flow-like experience and felt positively about the game's value for collaborative learning. Utterances demonstrating active engagement and constructive thinking became more group-focused over time. Conclusion This study contributes to science education by demonstrating potential benefits of a well-designed, low-tech, science learning environment or—in other words—a tabletop game.
{"title":"“What if We Explore…” Promoting Engaged Learning and Collaboration with MOUNTAIN RESCUE","authors":"Denise M. Bressler, M. S. Tutwiler, Amanda Siebert-Evenstone, Leonard A. Annetta, Jason A. Chen","doi":"10.1177/10468781221120690","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221120690","url":null,"abstract":"Background According to the Committee on STEM Education, K-12 science students need access to learning experiences that promote collaboration and engagement. To fill that void, we need to develop activities that stimulate engaged learning and scaffold effective collaboration. K-12 teacher candidates see value in utilizing games for this purpose. Specifically, tabletop science games can help teachers engage students in science learning and scaffold collaboration. Aim For this study, we designed a collaborative, STEM-themed card game called MOUNTAIN RESCUE and explored its capacity to promote engaged learning and collaboration. Method Four groups of STEM campers (n = 14) in a suburban Mid-Atlantic region played MOUNTAIN RESCUE. All groups had a mix of boys and girls. Play-testers ranged from 10–13 years old. The tabletop game took approximately 30-minutes. During gameplay, players embodied unique STEM roles: physicist, chemist, structural engineer, and electrical engineer. They collaborated to solve challenges related to electricity, physics, chemistry, and engineering design. Discourse was audio-recorded throughout gameplay. Immediately after gameplay, self-report survey data were collected to assess flow and perceptions of collaborative learning. Results Findings demonstrated that the game promoted engagement and collaboration. Specifically, students had a flow-like experience and felt positively about the game's value for collaborative learning. Utterances demonstrating active engagement and constructive thinking became more group-focused over time. Conclusion This study contributes to science education by demonstrating potential benefits of a well-designed, low-tech, science learning environment or—in other words—a tabletop game.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46402127","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：