IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v39y2022i4p723-733.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

System dynamics gamification: A proposal for shared principles

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni Cunico
  • Eirini Aivazidou
  • Edoardo Mollona

Abstract

As gamification has been gaining ground in research practice, system dynamics is no exemption. Despite the long tradition of system dynamics gamification, capitalizing on lessons learned from previous experiences is still challenging for practitioners. Specifically, the extant literature introduces a repertoire of system dynamics‐based simulators and games under quite divergent perspectives and nomenclatures, while a comprehensive set of practical ‘how‐to‐gamify’ guidelines and a resource repository are lacking. Thus, this research aims to propose a set of shared principles by (i) providing an embryonic definition of system dynamics gamification and (ii) framing the most relevant challenges and drivers, to fill in the literature gaps and allow for effective knowledge accumulation. Overall, this work anticipates rendering gamification as a recognized branch of the systems dynamics domain by establishing a common language and recommending directions to improve practice and research efforts.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Cunico & Eirini Aivazidou & Edoardo Mollona, 2022. "System dynamics gamification: A proposal for shared principles," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 723-733, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:39:y:2022:i:4:p:723-733
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2805
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2805
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2805?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juliette N. Rooney-Varga & Florian Kapmeier & John D. Sterman & Andrew P. Jones & Michele Putko & Kenneth Rath, 2020. "The Climate Action Simulation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 51(2), pages 114-140, April.
    2. David C. Lane & Birgit Kopainsky & David C. Lane, 2017. "‘Behavioural System Dynamics’: A Very Tentative and Slightly Sceptical Map of the Territory," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 414-423, July.
    3. John Sterman, 2014. "Interactive web-based simulations for strategy and sustainability: The MIT Sloan LearningEdge management flight simulators, Part II," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(3), pages 206-231, July.
    4. Timo Lainema & Olli-Pekka Hilmola, 2005. "Learn more, better and faster: computer-based simulation gaming of production and operations," International Journal of Business Performance Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(1), pages 34-59.
    5. Erling Moxnes, 1998. "Not Only the Tragedy of the Commons: Misperceptions of Bioeconomics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1234-1248, September.
    6. Martin Shubik, 1972. "On Gaming and Game Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(5-Part-2), pages 37-53, January.
    7. Robson, Karen & Plangger, Kirk & Kietzmann, Jan H. & McCarthy, Ian & Pitt, Leyland, 2016. "Game on: Engaging customers and employees through gamification," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 29-36.
    8. David C. Lane & Birgit Kopainsky & Ali Kerem Saysel, 2017. "Role of Information Feedback in Soil Nitrogen Management: Results from a Dynamic Simulation Game," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 424-439, July.
    9. Lasse Gerrits & David Vaandrager, 2018. "Group Model Building in a Pressure Cooker: A Field Experiment with Public Policy," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 139-151, January.
    10. John Sterman, 2014. "Interactive web-based simulations for strategy and sustainability: The MIT Sloan LearningEdge management flight simulators, Part I," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(1-2), pages 89-121, January.
    11. Norman Wayne Porter, 2018. "The Value of System Dynamics Modeling in Policy Analytics and Planning," Public Administration and Information Technology, in: J Ramon Gil-Garcia & Theresa A. Pardo & Luis F. Luna-Reyes (ed.), Policy Analytics, Modelling, and Informatics, pages 123-150, Springer.
    12. Sterman, J.D., 2006. "Learning from evidence in a complex world," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(3), pages 505-514.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Miles M. Yang & Hong Jiang & Michael Shayne Gary, 2016. "Challenging learning goals improve performance in dynamically complex microworld simulations," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(3-4), pages 204-232, July.
    2. Florian Kapmeier, 2020. "Reflections on developing a simulation model on sustainable and healthy diets for decision makers: Comment on the paper by Kopainsky," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 928-935, November.
    3. Philip Hallinger & Ray Wang, 2020. "The Evolution of Simulation-Based Learning Across the Disciplines, 1965–2018: A Science Map of the Literature," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 51(1), pages 9-32, February.
    4. Céline Bérard & L.M., Cloutier & Luc Cassivi, 2017. "The effects of using system dynamics-based decision support models: testing policy-makers’ boundaries in a complex situation," Post-Print hal-02128255, HAL.
    5. Shepherd, Simon & Balijepalli, Chandra, 2015. "A game of two cities: A toll setting game with experimental results," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 95-109.
    6. Federico Cosenz & Guido Noto, 2016. "Applying System Dynamics Modelling to Strategic Management: A Literature Review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 703-741, November.
    7. Rocio de la Torre & Bhakti S. Onggo & Canan G. Corlu & Maria Nogal & Angel A. Juan, 2021. "The Role of Simulation and Serious Games in Teaching Concepts on Circular Economy and Sustainable Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-21, February.
    8. Nikon Vidjajev & Riina Palu & Jan Terentjev & Olli-Pekka Hilmola & Victor Alari, 2022. "Assessment of the Development Limitations for Wave Energy Utilization in the Baltic Sea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, February.
    9. Jürgen Strohhecker, 2016. "Factors influencing strategy implementation decisions: an evaluation of a balanced scorecard cockpit, intelligence, and knowledge," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 89-119, February.
    10. Edward G. Anderson & David R. Keith & Jose Lopez, 2023. "Opportunities for system dynamics research in operations management for public policy," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1895-1920, June.
    11. Céline Bérard & Martin Cloutier L. & Luc Cassivi, 2017. "The effects of using system dynamics-based decision support models: testing policy-makers’ boundaries in a complex situation," Post-Print halshs-01666605, HAL.
    12. John Sterman, 2014. "Interactive web-based simulations for strategy and sustainability: The MIT Sloan LearningEdge management flight simulators, Part II," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(3), pages 206-231, July.
    13. D C Lane & E Husemann, 2008. "System dynamics mapping of acute patient flows," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(2), pages 213-224, February.
    14. González-Méndez, Mauricio & Olaya, Camilo & Fasolino, Isidoro & Grimaldi, Michele & Obregón, Nelson, 2021. "Agent-Based Modeling for Urban Development Planning based on Human Needs. Conceptual Basis and Model Formulation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    15. Emiliya Suprun & Andrijana Horvat & David F. Andersen, 2021. "Making each other smarter: assessing peer mentoring groups as a way to support learning system dynamics," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 37(2-3), pages 212-226, April.
    16. Torres, Juan Pablo & Kunc, Martin & O'Brien, Frances, 2017. "Supporting strategy using system dynamics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(3), pages 1081-1094.
    17. Andrea M. Prado & Ronald Arce & Luis E. Lopez & Jaime García & Andy A. Pearson, 2020. "Simulations Versus Case Studies: Effectively Teaching the Premises of Sustainable Development in the Classroom," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 303-327, January.
    18. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Jones, Bobby & Caudill, Barry & Nakaima, April, 2016. "Steps towards incorporating heterogeneities into program theory: A case study of a data-driven approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 88-97.
    19. Wenjing Luo & Zhi Qiu & Yurika Yokoyama & Shengyuan Zheng, 2022. "Decision-Making Mechanism of Joint Activities for the Elderly and Children in Integrated Welfare Facilities: A Discussion Based on “Motivation–Constraint” Interaction Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-23, August.
    20. Kimberly M. Thompson & Radboud J. Duintjer Tebbens, 2006. "Retrospective Cost‐Effectiveness Analyses for Polio Vaccination in the United States," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1423-1440, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:39:y:2022:i:4:p:723-733. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.