skip to main content
10.1145/3130859.3131436acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pageschi-playConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

AMELIO: Evaluating the Team-building Potential of a Mixed Reality Escape Room Game

Authors Info & Claims
Published:15 October 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

The authors investigate the potential of Mixed Reality (MR) games for team building and assessment. The AMELIO game was designed for a highly immersive MR lab. The game is a multi-player team challenge based on the concept of an escape room, staged in a space colony emergency situation. An explorative empirical pre-post measurement study was carried out to establish whether playing AMELIO influences team cohesiveness. Ten teams of three played AMELIO and filled out pre- and post-game questionnaires with validated measurements of team cohesiveness and mediating factors related to team composition, game experience and team dynamics. The findings show a positive and significant increase in team cohesiveness, with stronger effects for teams with lower pre-game familiarity. In terms of game experience and team dynamics, audio aesthetics and empathy proved to be significant mediating factors. This aids game validation and improvement, and understanding and guiding the team building process.

References

  1. G. Anderson and S. Hilton. 2015. Increase team cohesiveness by playing cooperative video games. CrossTalk, 33--37. http://www.crosstalkonline.org/storage/issuearchives/2015/201501/201501-Anderson.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. M.L. Bassford, A. Crisp, A. O'Sullivan, J. Bacon and M. Fowler. 2016. CrashEd -- A live immersive, learning experience embedding STEM subjects in a realistic, interactive crime scene. Research in Learning Technology 24, 1, 30089. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v24.30089Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. S. Clarke, S. Arnab, H. Keegan, L. Morini and O. Wood. 2016. EscapED: Adapting Live-Action, Interactive Games to Support Higher Education Teaching and Learning Practices. In Games and Learning Alliance, R. Bottino, J. Jeuring and R. C. Veltkamp (eds.), Springer International Publishing, Cham, 144--153. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978--3--31950182--6_13 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. S. Clarke, S. Arnab, L. Morini, O. Wood, K. Green, A. Masters, and A. Bourazeri. 2016. EscapED: A Framework for Creating Live-Action, Interactive Games for Higher/Further Education Learning and Soft Skills Development. In European Conference on Games Based Learning, 968--972. http://search.proquest.com/openview/17b244af64 09b746cf430396c94c0c52/1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. S. Daniau. 2016. The Transformative Potential of Role-Playing Games--: From Play Skills to Human Skills. Simulation & Gaming 47, 4(August 2016), 423--444. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878116650765 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Enversed Entertainment Eindhoven. 2017. Retrieved June 30, 2017 from https://www.enversed.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Escape Rooms Nederland. 2017. Escape rooms overzicht in Nederland. Retrieved April 13, 2017 from https://www.escaperoomsnederland.nl/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. A. Field. 2009. Discovering Statistics using SPSS. Third Edition. SAGE: London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. S. French and J.M. Shaw. 2015. The unbelievably lucrative business of escape rooms. Retrieved June 30, 2017 from http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-weirdnew-world-of-escape-room-businesses-2015-07--20Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. M. Haggis. 2016. Better world, better play: narrative design tools to enhance gameplay experiences. Presented at Develop:Brighton, July 11--13, Brighton, UK. http://www.developconference.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. W.A. IJsselsteijn, Y.A.W. de Kort and K. Poels. 2013. The Game Experience Questionnaire. FUGA The Fun of Gaming: Measuring the Human Experience of Media Enjoyment. https://pure.tue.nl/ws/files/21666907/Game_Exper ience_Questionnaire_English.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. D.I. Jung and J.J. Sosik. 2002. Transformational Leadership in Work Groups: The Role of Empowerment, Cohesiveness, and CollectiveEfficacy on Perceived Group Performance. Small Group Research 33, 3, 313--336. https://doi.org/10.1177/10496402033003002 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. K. Kraiger, J.K. Ford and E. Salas. 1993. Application of Cognitive, Skill-based, and Affective Theories of Learning Outcomes to New Methods of Training Evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology 78, 2, pp. 311--328. http://doi.org/10.1037/00219010.78.2.311Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. I.S. Mayer. 2016. Playful Organisations & Learning Systems. NHTV Breda University of Applied Science, Breda, the Netherlands.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. I.S. Mayer, G. Bekebrede, C. Harteveld, H. Warmelink, Q. Zhou, T. van Ruijven, J. Lo, R. Kortmann and I. Wenzler. 2014. The research and evaluation of serious games: Toward a comprehensive methodology. British Journal of Educational Technology 45, 3, 502--527. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12067 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. I.S. Mayer , H. Warmelink and G. Bekebrede. 2013 Learning in a game-based virtual environment: a comparative evaluation in higher education, European Journal of Engineering Education 38, 1, 85--106. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2012.742872 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. P. Milgram and F. Kishino. 1994. Taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. E77-D, 12, 1321-- 1329.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. S. Nicholson. 2016. The State of Escape: Escape Room Design and Facilities. Meaningful Play 2016. http://scottnicholson.com/pubs/stateofescape.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. T. Olsen, K. Procci, and C. Bowers. 2011. Serious Games Usability Testing: How to Ensure Proper Usability, Playability, and Effectiveness. Design User Experience and Usability Theory Methods Tools and Practice. Proceedings First International Conference DUXU 2011, 625--634. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--642--21708--1_70Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. E. Oprins, G. Visschedijk, M.B. Roozeboom, M. Dankbaar, W. Trooster and S.C.E. Schuit. 2015. The game-based learning evaluation model (GEM): measuring the effectiveness of serious games using a standardised method. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning 7, 4, 326. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2015.074189Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. E. Peters, B. Heijligers, J. de Kievith, X. Razafindrakoto, R. van Oosterhout, C. Santos, I.S. Mayer & M. Louwerse. 2016. Design for Collaboration in Mixed Reality: Technical Challenges and Solutions. International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications (VSGames 2016). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/VSGAMES.2016.7590343Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. M.H. Phan, J.R. Keebler and B.S. Chaparro. 2016. The Development and Validation of the Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale (GUESS). Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 58, 8, 1217--1247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720816669646 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. S. Ramachandran, B. Presnell and R. Richards. 2016. Serious games for team training and knowledge retention for long-duration space missions. Aerospace Conference 2016. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2016.7500503Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. E. Salas, D. DiazGranados, C. Klein, C.S. Burke, K.C. Stagl, G.F. Goodwin and S.M. Halpin. 2008. Does Team Training Improve Team Performance? A Meta-Analysis. Human Factors 50, 6, 903--933. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X375009Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. A. Seers. 1989. Team-member exchange quality: A new construct for role-making research. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 43, 1, 118--135. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749--5978(89)90060--5 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. M.L. Shuffler, D. DiazGranados and E. Salas. 2011. There's a Science for That: Team Development Interventions in Organizations. Current Directions in Psychological Science 20, 6, 365--372. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411422054Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Y. Van Dam. 2016. Escape Rooms; leuke teamactiviteit of nuttig instrument? Master's Thesis. Utrecht University, Utrecht, MA. https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874 /335025/Dam%2C%20Y.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. V. Vanden Abeele, L.E. Nacke, E.D. Mekler and D. Johnson. 2016. Design and Preliminary Validation of The Player Experience Inventory. CHI PLAY 2016, 335--341. ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/2968120.2987744Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Volfoni. 2017. Volfoni. Retrieved April 13, 2017 from http://volfoni.com/en/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. V. Wendel, M. Gutjahr, P. Battenberg, R. Ness, S. Fahnenschreiber, S. Göbel and R. Steinmetz. 2013. Designing a Collaborative Serious Game for Team Building Using Minecraft. C. Vaz de Carvalho & P. Escudeiro (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Games Based Learning, 569--578. ftp://ftp.kom.tu-darmstadt.de/papers/WGB+131.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Worldviz. 2017. Worldviz. Retrieved April 13, 2017 from http://www.worldviz.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. AMELIO: Evaluating the Team-building Potential of a Mixed Reality Escape Room Game

            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 '17 Extended Abstracts: Extended Abstracts Publication of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play
              October 2017
              700 pages
              ISBN:9781450351119
              DOI:10.1145/3130859

              Copyright © 2017 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part 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 components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 15 October 2017

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • research-article

              Acceptance Rates

              CHI PLAY '17 Extended Abstracts Paper Acceptance Rate46of178submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate421of1,386submissions,30%

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader