Edward Melcer
Katherine Isbister
ABSTRACT
Recent work has highlighted a notable divide in communication and collaboration between technical and social science/humanities disciplines within games research. In order to provide deeper insight around this apparent separation and underlying difference in epistemic cultures, we interviewed experts from various communities within games research. Our findings highlight some fundamental differences in research methodologies, publication practices, and epistemic cultures that need consideration in the larger discussion around future directions of games research. We in turn utilize these differing viewpoints to consider an assortment of approaches that could potentially better address the needs of technical, social science, and humanities sub-communities within games research.
- Bo-Christer Björk, Mikael Laakso, Patrik Welling, and Patrik Paetau. 2014. Anatomy of green open access. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 65, 2 (2014), 237--250. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Bernard C K Choi and Anita W P Pak. 2006. Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical and investigative medicine 29, 6 (2006), 351--364.Google Scholar
- S. Deterding. 2016. The Pyrrhic Victory of Game Studies: Assessing the Past, Present, and Future of Interdisciplinary Game Research. Games and Culture Published online before print September 1, 2016 (2016), 1--23. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lance Fortnow. 2009. Viewpoint: Time for computer science to grow up. Commun. ACM 52, 8 (2009), 33--35. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Robert Frodeman. 2010. Introduction. In The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press, xxixâĂŞxxxix.Google Scholar
- Kristrun Gunnarsdottir. 2005. Scientific journal publications: On the role of electronic preprint exchange in the distribution of scientific literature. Social Studies of Science 35, 4 (2005), 549--579. Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. B. Holbrook. 2010. Peer review. In The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. 321--332.Google Scholar
- Katherine Isbister and Florian âĂIJFloydâĂİ Mueller. 2015. Guidelines for the design of movement-based games and their relevance to HCI. Human-Computer Interaction 30, 3--4 (2015), 366--399.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Susan Leigh Star. 2010. This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology, & Human Values 35, 5 (2010), 601--617. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Edward Melcer, Truong-Huy Dinh Nguyen, Zhengxing Chen, Alessandro Canossa, Magy Seif El-Nasr, and Katherine Isbister. 2015. Games Research Today: Analyzing the Academic Landscape 2000--2014. In Foundations of Digital Games (FDG). Pacific Grove, CA.Google Scholar
- Johnny Saldaña. 2015. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.Google Scholar
- Noor Shaker, Julian Togelius, and M Nelson. 2014. Procedural Content Generation In Games. Springer.Google Scholar
- Moshe Y. Vardi. 2009. Conferences vs. journals in computing research. Commun. ACM 52, 5 (2009), 5. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Annika Waern and Jose Zagal. 2013. Introduction. Transactions of the Digital Games Research Association 1, 1 (2013), 1--2. Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Toward understanding disciplinary divides within games research
Recommendations
Lightweight Games User Research for Indies and Non-Profit Organizations
CHI EA '16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing SystemsThe Games User Research (GUR) community has thrived at CHI with four workshops and a course since CHI 2012; all of these were well attended. In line with the #chi4good spirit this year, the GUR field must advance towards demographics that will benefit ...
Understanding the Role of Objects in Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration
In this paper we make a case for the use of multiple theoretical perspectives—theory on boundary objects, epistemic objects, cultural historical activity theory, and objects as infrastructure—to understand the role of objects in cross-disciplinary ...
Comments