Multiplayer Serious Games and User Experience: A Comparison Between Paper-Based and Digital Gaming Experience

  • Luca ArgentonEmail author
  • Marisa Muzio
  • Esther J. Shek
  • Fabrizia Mantovani
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9221)


Networking and team working are becoming the foundations of human performance in educational, organizational and recreational settings. Here, new communities of practice are being established to promote an engagement economy that will be able to foster innovation and success by sustaining collective well-being and group flourishing. Considered as “positive technologies”, Serious Games (SGs) can support these processes. By fostering continuous learning experiences blended with entertaining affordances, SGs have in fact been able to shape new opportunities for human psychological training and assessment. However, despite the impressive growth of SGs applications, only a few of them have been tested and scientifically considered from an empirical point of view. Our study tries to address this gap, evaluating the potential of digital game technology compared to paper-based applications not only among individuals, but also among groups. The study, conducted with Mind the Game, a multiplayer SG, involved 75 students. Preliminary results showed only minor but fundamental differences between the two experimental conditions. On the one hand, groups who experienced the paper-based condition felt more competent than groups exposed to the digital experience, reporting higher levels of negative feelings too. On the other hand, groups exposed to the digital condition described themselves as more challenged and efficient in a collective way.


Digital Version Digital Condition Engagement Economy Digital Experience Recreational Setting 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Barabasi, A.L.: Linked: The New Science of Networks. Perseus Publishing, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    McGonigal, J.: Reality is Broken. The Penguin Press, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baker, D.P., Day, R., Salas, P.: Teamwork as an essential component of high-reliability organizations. Health Serv. Res. 41, 1576–1598 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Botella, C., Riva, G., Gaggioli, A., Wiederhold, B.K., Alcaniz, M., Banos, R.M.: The present and future of positive technologies. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 15, 78–84 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Riva, G., Banos, R.M., Botella, C., Wiederhold, B.K., Gaggioli, A.: Positive technology: using interactive technologies to promote positive functioning. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 15, 69–77 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Argenton, L., Triberti, S., Serino, S., Muzio, M., Riva, G.: Serious games as positive technologies for individual and group flourishing. In: Brooks, A., Braham, S., Jain, M. (eds.) Technologies of Inclusive Well-Being. Springer, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Seligman, M.E.P.: Positive Psychology: Fundamental Assumptions. The Psychologist. 16, 26–27 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Seligman, M.E.P., Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Positive psychology: an introduction. Am. Psychol. 55, 5–14 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fisher, G., Giaccardi, E., Eden, H., Sugimoto, M., Ye, Y.: Beyond binary choices: integrating individual and social creativity. Int. J. Hum Comput Stud. 12, 428–512 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cantamesse, M., Galimberti, C., Giacoma, G.: Interweaving interactions in virtual worlds: a case study. Stud. Health. Technol. Inform. 167, 189–193 (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wendel, V., Babarinow, M., Hörl, T., Kolmogorov, S., Göbel, S., Steinmetz, R.: Woodment: web-based collaborative multiplayer serious game. In: Pan, Z., Cheok, A.D., Müller, W., Zhang, X., Wong, K. (eds.) Transactions on Edutainment IV. LNCS, vol. 6250, pp. 68–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mayer, I.S., van Dierendonck, D., van Ruijven, T., Wenzler, I.: Stealth assessment of teams in a digital environment. In: Gala 2013 Conference, pp. 1–13. Springer, Paris (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bateman, C.M.: Game Writing: Narrative Skills For Video Games. Charles River Media, Independence, Boston (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    McQuiggan, S.W., Robison, J.L., Lester, J.C.: Affective transitions in narrative-centered learning environments. In: Woolf, B.P., Aïımeur, E., Nkambou, R., Lajoie, S. (eds.) ITS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5091, pp. 490–499. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Searle, J.: Intentionality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Edery, D., Mollick, E.: Changing the Game: How Video Games are Transforming the Future of Business. FT Press, Upper Saddle River (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Piggott, D.: Gliding: A Handbook on Soaring Flight. A&C Black, London (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gaggioli, A., Riva, G., Milani, L., Mazzoni, E.: Networked Flow: Towards an understanding of creative networks. Springer, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brigliadori, L., Brigliadori, R.: Competing in Gliders Winning with your mind. Pivetta Partners, Vedano al Lambro (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bowman, S.L.: The functions of role-playing games. How partecipants create community, solve problems and explore identity. McFarland & Copany Inc., London (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Myers, I.B.: Introduction to Type: A Description of the Theory and Applications of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto (1987)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Steiner, I.D.: Group process and productivity. Academic Press, New York (1972)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Arrow, H., Mccrath, I.E., Berdhal, J.L.: Small groups as complex systems: fomation, co-ordination, devlopment and adaptation. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    IJsselsteijn, W.A., de Kort, Y.A.W, Poels, L., Bellotti, F.: Characterizing and measuring user experiences in digital games. International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology 2: 27(2007)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Guzzo, R.A., Yost, P.R., Campbell, R.J., Shea, P.J.: Potency in groups: articulating a construct. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 32, 87–106 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chin, W.W., Salisbury, W.D., Pearson, A.W., Stollak, M.J.: Perceived cohesion in small groups: adapting and testing the perceived cohesion scale in small-group setting. Small Group Res. 30, 751–766 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vahed, A.: The tooth morphology board game: an innovative strategy in tutoring dental technology learners in combating rote learning. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Games-Based Learning (ECGBL), pp. 16–17, October 2008, Barcelona, Spain (2008)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mayer, I.S., Carton, L., de Jong, M., Leijten, M., Dammers, E.: Gaming the future of an urban network. Futures 36, 143 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luca Argenton
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marisa Muzio
    • 2
  • Esther J. Shek
    • 1
    • 2
  • Fabrizia Mantovani
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Studies in Communication Sciences – CESCOMUniversity of Milan-BicoccaMilanItaly
  2. 2.Department of Sport Sciences, Nutrition and HealthUniversity of MilanMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations