skip to main content
10.1145/3505270.3558337acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pageschi-playConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Development of a Gamified Cooperative Teamwork Environment Using an Event-Based Approach

Published:07 November 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

This work aims to develop a cooperative gamified testbed for teamwork assessment using an event-based approach. It proposes a systematic approach to develop event-based gamified teaming testbeds where cooperative game features trigger observable teaming behaviors Cooperative game features have been used in previous work to understand social play and develop serious games where cooperation, interdependence, and asymmetry are applied. Players in cooperative games engage in teamwork processes such as communication, coordination, planning, and performance monitoring. The event-based approach to training is a methodology used to develop teamwork simulations using scripted trigger events that explicitly connect with the targeted teamwork competencies. A process was developed to identify cooperative features that serve as behavioral triggers and to establish a connection between teamwork competencies, gamified features, and targeted behavioral responses. Furthermore, the paper presents a game prototype design developed using the event-based approach and the identified cooperative game features. This approach provides a systematic way to develop and assess team research testbeds. With these testbeds, objective teamwork assessment will be possible through tracking the exercised behaviors. This paper aims to present this process as a framework for serious cooperative games development and to establish cooperative games as testbeds for objective teamwork assessment.

References

  1. Michael D. Coovert, Jennifer Winner, Winston Bennett, and David J. Howard. 2017. Serious Games are a Serious Tool for Team Research. International Journal of Serious Games 4, 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Ansgar E. Depping and Regan L. Mandryk. 2017. Cooperation and interdependence: How multiplayer games increase social closeness. CHI PLAY 2017 - Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc, 449–461.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Jason B Ellis, Kurt Luther, Katherine Bessiere, and Wendy A Kellogg. 2008. Games for Virtual Team Building.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Yvonne A Farah, Michael C Dorneich, and Stephen B Gilbert. 2022. Evaluating Team Metrics in Cooperative Video Games, HFES 2022 (accepted).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Jennifer Fowlkes, Daniel J. Dwyer, Randall L. Oser, and Eduardo Salas. 1998. Event-based approach to training (EBAT). International Journal of Aviation Psychology 8, 3: 209–221.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Jennifer E. Fowlkes, Norman E. Lane, Eduardo Salas, Thomas Franz, and Randall Oser. 1994. Improving the Measurement of Team Performance: The TARGETs Methodology. Military Psychology 6, 1: 47–61.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. John Harris, Mark Hancock, and Stacey D. Scott. 2016. Leveraging asymmetries in multiplayer games: Investigating design elements of interdependent play. CHI PLAY 2016 - Proceedings of the 2016 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc, 350–361.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., & Zubek, R. (2004, July). MDA: A formal approach to game design and game research. In Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Challenges in Game AI (Vol. 4, No. 1, p. 1722)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Timothy C. Lisk, Ugur T. Kaplancali, and Ronald E. Riggio. 2012. Leadership in Multiplayer Online Gaming Environments. Simulation and Gaming 43, 1: 133–149.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Igor Mayer. 2018. Assessment of Teams in a Digital Game Environment. Simulation and Gaming 49, 6: 602–619.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Benedikt Morschheuser, Marc Riar, Juho Hamari, and Alexander Maedche. 2017. How games induce cooperation? A study on the relationship between game features and we-intentions in an augmented reality game.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. R L Oser, J W Gualtieri, J A Cannon-Bowers, and E Salas. Training team problem solving skills: an event-based approach $.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Alec Ostrander, Stephen Gilbert, and Michael Dorneich. 2019. Team Data Analysis Using FATE: Framework for Automated Team Evaluation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Michael A. Rosen, Wendy L. Bedwell, Jessica L. Wildman, Barbara A. Fritzsche, Eduardo Salas, and C. Shawn Burke. 2011. Managing adaptive performance in teams: Guiding principles and behavioral markers for measurement. Human Resource Management Review 21, 2: 107–122.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Michael A. Rosen, Eduardo Salas, Teresa S. Wu, 2008. Promoting teamwork: An event-based approach to simulation-based teamwork training for emergency medicine residents. Academic Emergency Medicine, 1190–1198.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Eduardo Salas, Dana E. Sims, and C. Shawn Burke. 2005. Is there A “big five” in teamwork? Small Group Research 36, 555–599.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Magy Seif El-Nasr, Bardia Aghabeigi, David Milam, 2010. Understanding and Evaluating Cooperative Games.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Robert A. Sottilare, C. Shawn Burke, Eduardo Salas, Anne M. Sinatra, Joan H. Johnston, and Stephen B. Gilbert. 2018. Designing Adaptive Instruction for Teams: a Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 28, 2: 225–264.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Michael J Stevens and Michael A Campion. 1994. The Knowledge, Skill, and Ability Requirements for Teamwork: implications for Human Resource Management.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Christopher W. Wiese, Marissa L. Shuffler, and Eduardo Salas. 2015. Teamwork and Team Performance Measurement. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: Second Edition. Elsevier Inc., 96–103.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Jason Wuertz, Sultan A. Alharthi, William A. Hamilton, 2018. A design framework for awareness cues in distributed multiplayer games. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings, Association for Computing Machinery.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Nelson Zagalo, Rui Prada, José Bernardo Rocha, and Samuel Mascarenhas. 2008. Game Mechanics for Cooperative Games.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    CHI PLAY '22: Extended Abstracts of the 2022 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play
    November 2022
    419 pages
    ISBN:9781450392112
    DOI:10.1145/3505270

    Copyright © 2022 Owner/Author

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 7 November 2022

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • extended-abstract
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate421of1,386submissions,30%
  • Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)24
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

    Other Metrics

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format