Advertisement

Exploring the Relation Between Game Experience and Game Mechanics for Bodily-Kinesthetic Players

  • Pejman SajjadiEmail author
  • Andreas Lo-A-Njoe
  • Joachim Vlieghe
  • Olga De Troyer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10056)

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a research on investigating whether tailoring the game mechanics and interaction modality of a game has an impact on the game experience of the player in the case of players with a high bodily-kinesthetic intelligence (with respect to the theory of Multiple Intelligences). For this purpose, we designed and developed a game called LeapBalancer, and evaluated it with a group of kinesthetic and a group of non-kinesthetic players. The results of the evaluation show that considering the intelligences of the players during game design matters and affects their game experience. In addition, we analyzed the players’ in-game behavior to explain the results. The finding are also important for learning games, since research suggest that good game experience is positively correlated with improved learning.

Keywords

Recommendation System Interaction Modality Game Experience Leap Motion Multiple Intelligence 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Millis, K., Forsyth, C., Butler, H., Wallace, P., Graesser, A., Halpern, D.: Operation ARIES!: a serious game for teaching scientific inquiry. In: Ma, M., Oikonomou, A., Jain, L.C. (eds.) Serious Games and Edutainment Applications, pp. 169–195. Springer, London (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Poels, K., De Kort, Y., IJsselsteijn, W.: It is always a lot of fun!’: exploring dimensions of digital game experience using focus group methodology. In: Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on Future Play, pp. 83–89. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. HarperPerennial, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Webster, J., Trevino, L.K., Ryan, L.: The dimensionality and correlates of flow in human-computer interactions. Comput. Hum. Behav. 9(4), 411–426 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Craig, S., Graesser, A., Sullins, J., Gholson, B.: Affect and learning: an exploratory look into the role of affect in learning with AutoTutor. J. Educ. Media 29(3), 241–250 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vandewaetere, M., Cornillie, F., Clarebout, G., Desmet, P.: Adaptivity in educational games: including player and gameplay characteristics. Int. J. High. Educ. 2(2), 106–114 (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sajjadi, P., Broeckhoven, F., Troyer, O.: Dynamically adaptive educational games: a new perspective. In: Göbel, S., Wiemeyer, J. (eds.) GameDays 2014. LNCS, vol. 8395, pp. 71–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-05972-3_8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gardner, H.: Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sajjadi, P., Vlieghe, J., De Troyer, O.: Relation between multiple intelligences and game preferences: an evidence-based approach. In: 10th European Conference on Games Based Learning: ECGBL2016, pp. 565–574 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sajjadi, P., Vlieghe, J., De Troyer, O.: Evidence-based mapping between the theory of multiple intelligences and game mechanics for the purpose of player-centered serious game design. In: VS-Games 2016, 8th International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications (2016, forthcoming)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sicart, M.: Defining game mechanics. In: Game Studies, pp. 1–14 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    The Components of MI. http://multipleintelligencesoasis.org/about/the-components-of-mi/. Accessed 16 Mar 2016
  13. 13.
    Brody, N.: Geocentric theory: a valid alternative to Gardner’s theory of intelligence. In: Howard Gardner Under Fire Rebel Psychol. Faces his critics, pp. 73–94 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Waterhouse, L.: Inadequate evidence for multiple intelligences Mozart effect, and emotional intelligence theories. Educ. Psychol. 41(4), 247–255 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Waterhouse, L.: Multiple intelligences, the mozart effect, and emotional intelligence. Crit. Rev. 41(4), 207–225 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chen, J.: Theory of multiple intelligences: is it a scientific theory? Teachers Coll. Rec. 106(1), 17–23 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McCue, P.: The crucial role of animated children’s educational games. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Educators Program, p. 6 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Katryna, S.: Cognitive behavioral game design: a unified model for designing serious games. Front. Psychol. 5 (2014). doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00028
  19. 19.
    Chuang, T.-Y., Sheng-Hsiung, S.: Using mobile console games for multiple intelligences and education. Int. J. Mob. Learn. Organ. 6(3–4), 204–217 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lotfi, E., Mohammed, B.: Teaching Arabic sign language through an interactive web based serious game. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 116(3), 12–18 (2015)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khademi, M., Mousavi Hondori, H., McKenzie, A., Dodakian, L., Lopes, C.V., Cramer, S.C.: Free-hand interaction with leap motion controller for stroke rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1663–1668. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vattel, L., Riconscente, M.: Learning geoscience concepts through play & kinesthetic tracking. In: Games Learning Society Conference, p. 12 (2016)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tirri, K., Nokelainen, P.: Multiple intelligences profiling questionnaire. In: Tirri, K., Nokelainen, P. (eds.) Measuring Multiple Intelligences and Moral Sensitivities in Education, pp. 1–13. SensePublishers, Dordrecht (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    IJsselsteijn, W., De Kort, Y., Poels, K., Jurgelionis, A., Bellotti, F.: Characterising and measuring user experiences in digital games. In: International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology, vol. 620, pp. 1–4 (2007)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    IJsselsteijn, W., Van Den Hoogen, W., Klimmt, C., De Kort, Y., Lindley, C., Mathiak, K., Poels, K., Ravaja, N., Turpeinen, M., Vorderer, P.: Measuring the experience of digital game enjoyment. In: Proceedings of Measuring Behavior, pp. 88–89 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pejman Sajjadi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andreas Lo-A-Njoe
    • 1
  • Joachim Vlieghe
    • 1
  • Olga De Troyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science, WISEVrije Universiteit BrusselBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations