Abstract
Split screen is a cinematographic device in which the screen is divided into sub-sections representing different views. It is used only occasionally in films and narrative games, as it may be confusing and disrupts immersion. In this article, we propose to use split screen for learning purposes, and describe a fully implemented serious game based on the concept of simultaneous debriefing. The screen is divided into one part representing a character telling his story, and another part representing this told story, interaction occurring at both levels.
A qualitative evaluation showed that the game was not confusing for most users and that the split screen did change the in-game behavior and the vision of the story. However a minority of players reported that split screen improved their learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Construct 3. https://www.construct.net/
Twine. https://twinery.org/
Crocq, M.A., Guelfi, J.D.: DSM-5: manuel diagnostique et statistique des troubles mentaux. Elsevier Masson, 5e éd edn (2015)
Petit dit Dariel, O.J., Raby, T., Ravaut, F., Rothan-Tondeur, M.: Developing the serious games potential in nursing education. Nurse Educ. Today https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2012.12.014
Eco, U.: Lector in fabula: Le rôle du lecteur ou la Coopération interprétative dans les textes narratifs. Grasset (1989)
Fanning, R.M., Gaba, D.M.: The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simul. Healthcare J. Soc. Simul. Healthcare 2(2), 115–25 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180315539
de Freitas, S., Liarokapis, F.: Serious games: a new paradigm for education? In: Ma, M., Oikonomou, A., Jain, L.C. (eds.) Serious Games and Edutainment Applications, pp. 9–23. Springer, London (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2161-9_2
Hales, C.: Weird and wonderful: how experimental film narratives can inform interactive digital narratives. In: Bosser, A.-G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C. (eds.) ICIDS 2020. LNCS, vol. 12497, pp. 149–163. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62516-0_14
Kim, Y., Baylor, A.L.: Research-based design of pedagogical agent roles: a review, progress, and recommendations. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 26(1), 160–169 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0055-y
Kumar, M., Gandhi, V., Ronfard, R., Gleicher, M.: Zooming on all actors: automatic focus+context split screen video generation. Comput. Graph. Forum 36(2), 455–465 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.13140
Linssen, J., de Groot, T., Theune, M., Heylen, D.: LOITER-TB: thought bubbles that give feedback on virtual agents’ experiences. In: Brinkman, W.-P., Broekens, J., Heylen, D. (eds.) IVA 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9238, pp. 283–286. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21996-7_30
Lourdeaux, D., et al.: VICTEAMS: a virtual environment to train medical team leaders to interact with virtual subordinates. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents, IVA 2019, pp. 241–243. Association for Computing Machinery (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3308532.3329418
Paas, F.G.W.C.: Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: a cognitive-load approach. J. Educ. Psychol. 84, 429–434 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429
Pavel, T.G.: “possible worlds” in literary semantics (1975). J. Aesthetics Art Criticism 34(2), 165–176 (1975). https://doi.org/10.2307/430073
Ryan, M.L.: Possible Worlds, Artificial Intelligence, and Narrative Theory. Indiana University Press (1991)
Spelke, E., Hirst, W., Neisser, U.: Skills of divided attention. Cognition 4(3), 215–230 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(76)90018-4
Sutter Widmer, D., Szilas, N.: Un temps pour jouer, un temps pour écouter? In actes de la conférence. In: Environnements informatiques pour l’apprentissage humain - EIAH (2011)
Szilas, N.: Vers les simulations sociales pédagogiques, et au-delà: du réel au virtuel, du social au narratif. Raisons éducatives (21), 113–128 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3917/raised.021.0113
Talen, J.: “24”: Split screen’s big comeback (2002). https://www.salon.com/2002/05/14/24_split/
Van Heukelom, J.N., Begaz, T., Treat, R.: Comparison of postsimulation debriefing versus in-simulation debriefing in medical simulation. Simul. Healthcare J. Soc. Simul. Healthcare 5(2), 91–97 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e3181be0d17
Villenave, B.: De la cicatrice Retour sur le split screen depalmien. Cahier Louis-Lumière 5(1), 49–57 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3406/cllum.2008.913
Wang, F., Hannafin, M.J.: Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 53(4), 5–23 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504682
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing
About this paper
Cite this paper
Szilas, N., Humbert, J., Le, K. (2023). Split Screen - Split Mind: An Innovative Format for Narrative Reflexive, and Pedagogical Games. In: Ciancarini, P., Di Iorio, A., Hlavacs, H., Poggi, F. (eds) Entertainment Computing – ICEC 2023. ICEC 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14455. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8248-6_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8248-6_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-99-8247-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-99-8248-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)