Simulation-Games as a Learning Experience: An Analysis of Learning Style and Attitude

  • Janet Lynn SutherlandEmail author
  • Knut Ekker


The authors explore the degree to which individual learning styles affect pre-simulation attitudes toward teamwork and post-simulation perceptions of the value of the simulation as a learning experience among third-semester university-level participants in a large-scale telematic simulation-game in Bremen (Germany). The learning style trait pairs ‘academic type’ and ‘interpersonal type’ are introduced as explanatory variables, first as categorical variables, then as continuous variables in multiple regression analyse. The results show that the pre-simulation attitude toward teamwork and interpersonal type explain variation in perceptions of the simulation experience. Qualitative data from debriefing teleconferences generally reflect the quantitative analysis.


Telematic simulation-game learning style academic type interpersonal type 



The authors wish to thank John Schindler for permission to use the Paragon Learning Style Inventory he and Harrison Yang developed. We also owe a debt of gratitude the European Union’s Socrates Program for funding IDEELS as a curriculum development project from 1997 through 2001.


  1. Chin, J., Dukes, R., & Gamson, W. (2009). Assessment in simulation and gaming: A review of the last 40 years. Simulation & Gaming, 40, 553–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. de Bono, E. (2009). Edward de Bono personal web site. Retrieved April 14, 2010, from
  3. Ekker, K. (2004). User satisfaction and attitudes towards an I-based simulation. Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference: Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2004). (pp. 224–232). Lisbon, Portugal: IADIS.Google Scholar
  4. Ekker, K., & Sutherland, J. (2005). Telematic simulations and changes in attitudes towards simulation topics. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2005: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2005 (pp. 2034–2041). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  5. Golden, P. A., & Smith, J. R. (1989). Simulation performance revisited: The fit between instructor style and learning style. Developments in Business Simulation & Experiential Exercises, 16, 89–91.Google Scholar
  6. Gosen, J., & Washbush, J. (2004). A review of scholarship on assessing experiential learning effectiveness. Simulation & Gaming, 35, 270–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Morgan, K. (2001) What does a group need to be successful? Retrieved April 14, 2010, from
  8. Schindler, J., & Yang, H. (2009). Paragon Learning Style Inventory. Retrieved April 14, 2010, from /index.html and
  9. Project IDEELS (2001a). Shared learning objectives. Retrieved April 14, 2010, from
  10. Project IDEELS (2001b). Specific learning objectives. Retrieved April 14, 2010, from
  11. Sutherland, J. L., Ekker, K., & Eidsmo, A. (2006). Telematic simulation in the post-September 11 world. In Reeves, T. C., & Yamashita, S. F. (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2006. World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 2650–2657). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
  12. Wheatley, W. J., Armstrong, T. R., & Madox, E. N. (1989). The impact of leader and team member characteristics upon simulation performance: A start-up study. Developments in Business Simulation & Experiential Exercises, 16, 13–16.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.English-Speaking Cultures, Languages and Literatures FacultyUniversity of BremenBremenGermany
  2. 2.Information Technology, Nord-Trondelag University CollegeSteindjerNorway

Personalised recommendations