IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v49y2018i3p246-262.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rigor in Gaming for Design: Conditions for Transfer Between Game and Reality

Author

Listed:
  • Jayanth Raghothama
  • Sebastiaan Meijer

Abstract

Background . The increasing cognizance of complexity in systems has brought into focus important questions about the methods and tools we use to address them. Games for design , where games and computer simulations are used together to create concrete and tangible designs in a pluralistic way, with multiple stakeholders within the game is a new area for simulation gaming. Aim . In this article about gaming for design, embedded in the design science approach towards game science, we raise important philosophical questions about this new area, as well as attempt to address practical questions at the application level. We attempt to bridge the analytical science and design science approaches to games, and analyze them through meta-constructs of games such as fidelity , abstraction and resolution . Results . Results from two applications, through analysis of game play and debriefing of game sessions from two applications, COMPLEX and ProtoWorld are gathered and analyzed to understand the respresentational requirements for simulations and games. Conclusion . Results point to the need for rigor in gaming, particularly when modeling reference systems and rigor in assessing effects, both during game play and while debriefing. Results also point to expanded definitions of meta-constructs of games, as well as to their linked nature.

Suggested Citation

  • Jayanth Raghothama & Sebastiaan Meijer, 2018. "Rigor in Gaming for Design: Conditions for Transfer Between Game and Reality," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 246-262, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:49:y:2018:i:3:p:246-262
    DOI: 10.1177/1046878118770220
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1046878118770220
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1046878118770220?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. Marcin Wardaszko, 2018. "Interdisciplinary Approach to Complexity in Simulation Game Design and Implementation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 263-278, June.
    2. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, April.
    3. Paul T. Grogan & Sebastiaan A. Meijer, 2017. "Gaming Methods in Engineering Systems Research," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(6), pages 542-552, November.
    4. Richard N. Landers & Elena M. Auer & Andrew B. Collmus & Michael B. Armstrong, 2018. "Gamification Science, Its History and Future: Definitions and a Research Agenda," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 315-337, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Willy C. Kriz & J. Tuomas Harviainen & Timothy C. Clapper, 2018. "Game Science: Foundations and Perspectives," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 199-206, June.
    2. Jan HG Klabbers, 2018. "On the Architecture of Game Science: A Rebuttal," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 356-372, June.

    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. Jan HG Klabbers, 2018. "On the Architecture of Game Science: A Rebuttal," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 356-372, June.
    2. Willy C. Kriz & J. Tuomas Harviainen & Timothy C. Clapper, 2018. "Game Science: Foundations and Perspectives," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 199-206, June.
    3. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.
    4. Sunder Shyam, 2011. "Imagined Worlds of Accounting," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-14, January.
    5. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    6. Basile, Luigi Jesus & Carbonara, Nunzia & Pellegrino, Roberta & Panniello, Umberto, 2023. "Business intelligence in the healthcare industry: The utilization of a data-driven approach to support clinical decision making," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    7. Loris Gaio, 2005. "A diversity-based approach to requirements tracing in new product development," ROCK Working Papers 031, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 13 Jun 2008.
    8. B. A. Huberman & N. S. Glance, "undated". "Diversity and Collective Action," Working Papers _001, Xerox Research Park.
    9. Zhewei Zhang & Youngjin Yoo & Kalle Lyytinen & Aron Lindberg, 2021. "The Unknowability of Autonomous Tools and the Liminal Experience of Their Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 1192-1213, December.
    10. David Stadelmann & Benno Torgler, 2012. "Bounded Rationality and Voting Decisions Exploring a 160-Year Period," Working Papers 2012.70, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    11. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    12. Maria Elena Latino & Marta Menegoli & Fulvio Signore & Maria Chiara De Lorenzi, 2023. "The Potential of Gamification for Social Sustainability: Meaning and Purposes in Agri-Food Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-18, June.
    13. H. Christopher Frey & Sumeet R. Patil, 2002. "Identification and Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 553-578, June.
    14. Marie-Laure Salles-Djelic & Michel Gutsatz, 2000. "Managerial Competencies for Organizational Flexibility: The Luxury Goods Industry between Tradition and Postmodernism," Post-Print hal-01892018, HAL.
    15. Rennard, Jean-Philippe, 2006. "Artificiality in Social Sciences," MPRA Paper 1458, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.
    17. Dalila Cisco Collatto & Aline Dresch & Daniel Pacheco Lacerda & Ione Ghislene Bentz, 2018. "Is Action Design Research Indeed Necessary? Analysis and Synergies Between Action Research and Design Science Research," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 239-267, June.
    18. Nadia Fiorino & Emma Galli & Ilde Rizzo & Marco Valente, 2023. "Public procurement and reputation. An agent‐based model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(4), pages 806-832, November.
    19. Olivier L. de Weck & Marshall B. Jones, 2006. "Isoperformance: Analysis and design of complex systems with desired outcomes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 45-61, March.
    20. Hippel, Eric von., 1992. "Adapting market research to the rapid evolution of needs for new products and services," Working papers 3374-92., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.

    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:sae:simgam:v:49:y:2018:i:3:p:246-262. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.