Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Games Based Learning Hosted by University College Cork And Waterford Institute of Technology Ireland 4-5 October 2012 Edited by Dr Patrick Felicia Waterford Institute of Technology Ireland
Copyright The Authors, 2012. All Rights Reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission may be made without written permission from the individual authors. Papers have been double-blind peer reviewed before final submission to the conference. Initially, paper abstracts were read and selected by the conference panel for submission as possible papers for the conference. Many thanks to the reviewers who helped ensure the quality of the full papers. These Conference Proceedings have been submitted to Thomson ISI for indexing. Further copies of this book and previous year’s proceedings can be purchased from http://academic-bookshop.com CD version ISBN: 978-1-908272-70-6 CD version ISSN: 2049-1018 Book version ISBN: 978-1-908272-69-0 Book Version ISSN: 2049-0992
Published by Academic Publishing International Limited Reading UK 44-118-972-4148
www.academic-publishing.org
Contents Paper Title
Author(s)
Page No.
Preface
vi
Conference Committee
vii
Biographies
ix
Making the Implicit Explicit: Game-Based Training Practices From an Instructor Perspective
Anna-Sofia Alklind Taylor and Per Backlund
1
Co-Designing Interactive Content: Developing a Traffic Safety Game Concept for Adolescents
Anissa All, Jan Van Looy and Elena Patricia Nunez CastellaI
11
Exploring the Educational Value of Children's Game Authoring Practises: A Primary School Case Study
Yasemin Allsop
21
Click, Share and Learn! Social Network Games as Serious Play
Suen de Andrade e Silva
31
FILTWAM - a Framework for Online Game-Based Communication Skills Training - Using Webcams and Microphones for Enhancing Learner Support
Kiavash Bahreini, Rob Nadolski, Wen Qi, and Wim Westera
39
Exploring University Library Induction Within an Undergraduate Serious Games Design Module
Matthew Bates, David Brown, Jon Fletcher and Sandra Price
48
Video Games and Civic Learning
Jeroen Bourgonjon, Kris Rutten and Ronald Soetaert
56
Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA) in the Continuing/ Higher Education Methods Using Games (CHERMUG) Project
Elizabeth Boyle, Peter van Rosmalen, Ewan MacArthur, Thomas Connolly, Thomas Hainey, Brian Johnston, Pablo Moreno Ger, Baltasar Fernández Manjón, Anne Kärki, Tiina Pennanen, Madalina Manea and Kam Starr
63
Digital Games and the Hero's Journey in Change and Innovation Management Workshops
Carsten Busch, Florian Conrad and Martin Steinicke
72
OpenGames: A Framework for Implementing 3D Collaborative Educational Games in OpenSim
Ioannis Champsas, Ioannis Leftheris, Thrasyvoulos Tsiatsos, Theodouli Terzidou and Apostolos Mavridis
82
Rapid Development of Games Inspired Metacognitive Learning Experiences Using Moodle and Gamemaker
Darryl Charles, Chris Hanna, Richard Paul and Therese Charles
93
Not Just for Children: Game-Based Learning for Older Adults
Nathalie Charlier Michela Ott, Bernd Remmele and Nicola Whitton
,
102
Reflective, Reflexive Guided Appropriation: Facilitating Teacher Adoption of Game Based Learning in Classrooms
Yam San Chee and Swati Mehrotra
109
Effective Citizenship Education Through Mobile Game Based Learning: The Statecraft X Curriculum
Yam San Chee, Swati Mehrotra and Qiang Liu
117
Pre-Service Teachers’ Views on Using Adventure Video Games for Language Learning
Howard Hao-Jan Chen, Ming-Puu Chen, Nian-Shing Chen and Christine Yang
125
Mastering Technology for Greater Autonomy: Device Familiarisation for Older Users via Games
Dimitri Darzentas, Jenny Darzentas and John Darzentase
131
i
Biographies of Presenting Authors Dr DJ Adams is a senior lecturer in Department of Education psychology and special education. Her research focus and interest includes HIV/AIDS, inclusive education, gender issues, life skills and theories of teaching and learning Minoo Alemi is a faculty member of Languages and Linguistics Department at Sharif University of Technology. She is a member of scientific board of some peer reviewed international journals. Her main areas of interest are Second Language Acquisition, ESP, Interlanguage Pragmatics, and Syllabus Design. Anna-Sofia Alklind Taylor is currently doing her PhD in serious games at the University of Skövde, Sweden. Apart from an enthusiastic interest in gaming, she has a background in cognitive science and human-computer interaction. Her current research is focused on system support for instructors in game-based training. Anissa All works as a junior researcher (since July 2011)at IBBT-MICT (Ghent University). She mainly is involved in projects concerning game-based learning, such as concept development of a road safety game and has been involved in a study conducted for IPTS concerning Digital Games for Empowerment and Inclusion. Further, Anissa is involved in Living lab research. Yasemin Allsop has been working as ICT Coordinator in various inner city schools in London for over eight years, currently based at Wilbury Primary School, London. MA ICT in Education from IOE, University of London and will start PhD in September at Goldsmiths College, University of London. Yasemin Interests are developing transferrable skills through technology, media literacy and game based learning. Suen de Andrade e Silva is finishing her research master’s studies in Media and Performance at Utrecht University. Her main research interest is on new media, digital culture, and video game culture. She is particularly concerned with the use of Social Networking Sites and the play of Social Network Games. Dr. Sylvester Arnab is a senior researcher at the Serious Games Institute, UK with an interest in immersive environments and the application of technologies to address health, learning and socio-cultural issues. He is currently involved in the EU-funded Games and Learning Alliance and the PRE:PARe game development project. Kristine Ask is currently in the last year of her phd project Kristine Ask is investigating expert players and culture in World of Warcraft. Her background is in Science and Technology Studies with a focus on user productions, knowledge management, everyday life and play. Kiavash Bahreini joined Center for Learning Sciences and Technologies (CELSTEC) in July 2011. He is a PhD candidate at Learning Media Department. His research topic is 'Learner support in serious games: enhancing online soft-skills training for lifelong learning'. He took his Master of Science in the field of Computer Science and Engineering in Turkey (T.R.N.C.). Dr Matthew Bates is a lecturer in multimedia applications and computer-assisted learning at Nottingham Trent University in the UK. His research interests include the positioning of games-based learning applications within educational programmes which encourage collaboration through the construction of new learning materials. Peter Blanchfield associate professor, School of Computer Science and member of management group of LSRI. Previously head of Computer Science, Nottingham University Malaysia Campus involved in lifelong learning. Long and varied publication record but recently concentrated on development of computer games in various educational contexts, especially work on development of games and game development approaches to teaching software engineering and coding curriculum. Andrej Jerman Blazic currently works in Laboratory for Open Systems and Networks at Jožef Stefan Institute as a researcher in the field of e-learning and organizational learning. His current research is focused mainly on applications of information and communication technology in education with focus on Web-based learning, Game-based learning, and standardization of e-learning and organizational learning. Jeroen Bourgonjon is an FWO-research fellow whose main research interest is video games as a form of and in education. He focuses on the research of the meanings (rhetorical) and effects (statistically) of video games in education. He has published before in journals as Computers & Education, Digital Creativity and CLCWeb.
xi
Liz Boyle is a lecturer in psychology and teaches modules on psychology and education, developmental psychology, psychological theory and psychology of language. Her research interests are in learning, motivation and communication and more recently she has looked at the relevance of these to computer games, working on the GALA NOE project and the CHERMUG project. Dr Tharrenos Bratitsis is a Lecturer at the Early Childhood Education Department, at the University of Western Macedonia, Greece. He teaches Informatics, emphasizing in the development and evaluation of Educational Software. His research interests include ICTs’ applications in Education, focusing on Web 2.0, GBL, CSCL, Distance Learning and Interaction Analysis. Thomas Bröker Researcher, chair of building physics, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar. Helped develop and implement eLearning Bauphysik, further education programme and masters course in field of building physics. Architectural background and worked/lectured on conjunction of architecture and civil engineering. Researches development of learning scenarios to mediate complex scientific and planning coherences in civil engineering;ways to unitize their implementation. Cyril Brom PhD degree in Computer Science from Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University in Prague. Currently employed as assistant professor there, and also head of Artificial Minds for Intelligent Systems research group. Research deals with serious games, artificial intelligence, 3D virtual reality, and computational ethology. Collaborated with Vit Sisler on several educational projects, including Europe 2045. Professor Carsten Busch earned his PhD at the TU-Berlin. He taught at a variety of Universities including the European Business School Oestrich-Winkel and the Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (Moscow). He currently teaches in Media Informatics at the HTW-Berlin and heads the HTW gameslab. He founded and leads the „Institute für Markenkommunikation“. Dale Cantwell is an MSc student at the Institute of Technology Carlow, where he obtained a BSc (Hons) in Computer Games Development. He is researching social exergames for elderly people on Join-In, a project of the AAL Joint Programme. His research interests focus primarily on adaptive difficulty systems and online technologies. Dr Darryl Charles joined the University of Ulster in 2001 where his research expertise falls in the areas of computational intelligence and serious games. He has made research contributions both nationally and internationally including a recent book based on biologically inspired AI and games and more than 70 peer-reviewed publications over the past 15 years. Nathalie Charlier. Lecturer at Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences and co-ordinator of the Teacher Training in Health Science Education at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium. Obtained BSc and MSc in Pharmaceutical Sciences in 1999 and PhD in Medical Sciences in 2003. Research interests are (i) game-based learning in health science education, (ii) the use of new technologies in education and (ii) health promotion and education in low-income countries. Stéphane Chaudron worked for several Educational Projects for last ten years. Has been in charge of coordination of a large Research Thematic Network dedicated to Science Teachers Education in Europe at Université catholique de Louvain. More recently, after working for the Distance Learning Programme at Imperial College, London, she coordinated several projects within European Schoolnet. Yam San Chee is an Associate Professor in the Learning Sciences & Technologies Academic Group and the Learning Sciences Lab at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. His research focuses on new literacies and new media in education, with a special emphasis on game-based learning. Howard Hao-Jan Chen is a professor of the Department of English at National Taiwan Normal University and is presently the Director of Mandarin Training Center at National Taiwan Normal University. His research interests include computer-assisted language learning, corpus linguistics, second language acquisition and vocabulary acquisition. Dimitri Darzentas completed his BSc in Cultural Informatics at the University of the Aegean in 2010 and is currently a postgraduate student finishing the two year “Game and Media Technology” MSc programme offered by the Computer Science Department at Utrecht University (Netherlands). Following his graduation he will begin his PhD on aspects of Ambient Intelligence.
xii
Mastering Technology for Greater Autonomy: Device Familiarisation for Older Users via Games Dimitri Darzentas1, Jenny Darzentas2 and John Darzentas2 1 Department of Computer Science, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands 2 Department of Product and Systems Design Engineering, University of the Aegean, Syros, Greece
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract: Technology is all around us, and many technologically enabled devices are not well used or understood. A case in point is that of kitchen appliances. The basic tool for familiarising oneself with these is via manuals, although in practice people also learn by watching others, by asking for advice from friends and relatives, and by trial and error. When people cannot learn in this way, the only resource is the (paper) manual, which is rarely motivating. Teaching and familiarisation techniques need a way to overcome this inadequacy and engage users’ attention, whatever their knowledge, background, or abilities. Ideally they should entice and motivate users to learn the paradigms and operating procedures of any device. This paper describes an attempt to introduce game design elements into the familiarisation process; as well as gamification layers; and for the manuals themselves follow the example of games, whose stand alone manuals have become “re-mediated” into in-game tutorials and instructions. Integrating the manual with the use of the device, which is technologically feasible, could offer a way to motivate users to become more proficient with domestic appliances. Simply put, using the device, and having fun doing so, rather than experiencing frustration and uncertainty, could aid in achieving the goal of understanding and using the device and its functionality more fully. The task of device familiarisation, although mundane, is not trivial. The importance of being autonomous in the home, that is, being able to prepare food and to carry out basic domestic chores, does not relate only to satisficing bodily needs, but to social functioning and self-esteem, and this is especially important for older people. Moreover, this approach could be generalised to other technological devices, beyond kitchen appliances. Designing the interaction experience to be attractive and engaging, by using game properties, could offer a new worthwhile approach to this problematic situation, and be of interest to the field of games based learning. Keywords: games, gamification, in-game learning, manuals; domestic appliances, device familiarisation
1. Introduction The importance of being autonomous in the home - that is - being able to prepare food and to carry out basic domestic chores is well understood. Those without the knowledge required to operate domestic devices lose time and money (e.g. using laundry facilities outside of the home, buying expensive ready-made food, etc.). However, it is not just a question of satisficing bodily needs, but also one of social functioning and self-esteem (Wherton & Monk, 2010; Brill, 2011; Hynes & Thu, 2008). Loss of independence has serious social and psychological effects on individuals, influencing their general activity performance and community participation (Yang & Sanford, 2012). This applies to people in all walks of life and all ages, from refugees (Hynes &Thu, 2008); to young people with learning difficulties (Brill, 2011), but especially to older people, to whom old age brings sensory, dexterity and cognitive deprivations, which may mean that learning how to operate (new) devices requires a lot more effort, (Hilton et al. 2011; Wherton & Monk, 2010; Hawkey et al. 2005, Yang & Sanford, 2012). The reasons why devices are not used, or underused, are many. They include unhelpful manuals and incomprehensible procedures relying on memory recall instead of recognition. Also the anxiety of making costly mistakes (ruining food or clothes) can make users hesitant. They do not have the luxury of experimenting and acquiring over time the requisite mental models that would allow them to operate the devices with confidence. Following the paradigm of the “smart home” (Siemens, 2006) there have been several attempts to leverage the power of internet connected devices in the domestic setting to alleviate this problem. Much of this work, for various reasons, including user acceptance, remained in the laboratory. The domestic setting continues to be part of the focus of several sustained research endeavours (Cook & Das, 2007; Cook et al, 2009); including the EU’s Ambient Assisted Living (AAL) programme, which looks at trying to increase the independence of those who, because of age or disability, are most at risk when living alone and unassisted (Stephanidis, 2011).
131
Dimitri Darzentas, Jenny Darzentas and John Darzentas Still the current reality is that people purchase and install domestic appliances, and with them acquire a (printed) manual. These are often badly printed, poorly worded or woefully translated, with unintelligible illustrations and diagrams, all of which make it hard to make the correspondence between the device itself and the printed representation (Newell, 2011). This paper suggests that gaming and gamification techniques might be applied to encourage and motivate better usage. Capitalising on the general properties of games, we try to exploit the way that users of games learn about games and apply these techniques to device familiarisation.
2. Related work A starting point for our work is to examine how people familiarise themselves with devices. Dryburgh (2002) noted that this type of learning is typically self teaching rather than formal training, and that people make use of four sources: watching others; asking advice from friends and family (rather than from professionals); trial and error, and finally, using manuals or instructions that come with the device. Of these four sources, the only one that the user can be sure to have access to is the manual. The limitations of instructional manuals are not insignificant. They are often ignored by users, who prefer other learning styles, especially trial and error. This is in line with the work of Carroll (1990) on the design of computer training materials. He was influential in creating “minimalist” manuals based upon the principles of helping the user learn by exploring. Despite efforts by scientific technical communicators, (Staples, 1999) to follow these guidelines, not much of this work has filtered into manuals that accompany domestic appliances. Since these are mandatory legal documents (Niemans, 2002), they often contain little beyond stipulated requirements. For example, the legal requirements for the contents of user manuals for products sold in the EU state that they must contain, amongst other things: information on risks; identification and discouragement of hazardous applications; and instructions on how the product can be put to safe use. Also, these types of manuals are normally provided in a traditional paper based inflexible format. Supporting the understanding that people learn by watching others, it is now common to find on the Internet “how to” videos and instructions. The popularity of these resources attests to the need for this type of information. However, this information is piecemeal and not authoritative, and produced by enthusiasts, rather than by companies. Furthermore, it assumes that people have access to the internet and have both the technical competence and motivation to search for the information. Thus, current approaches are struggling to be effective. What has not been seen, to our knowledge, is the use of games to help people to learn to use devices. Yet a growing area of research is examining how games can be effective for learning cognitive and perceptual skills (Connolly et al, 2012.). In addition, games themselves require a period of familiarisation by their respective users. Thus, in the paragraphs below, besides looking at what games and gamification might offer to the device familiarisation process, we also examine the way that players familiarise themselves with games. Device familiarisation is mundane, and of little interest to most people, games in contrast are very successful at engaging and maintaining users’ interest. According to Malone’s heuristics (1981) games rely on challenges, flow and control (Malone and Lepper, 1987) to draw in users. Whitton (2011) considered engagement and how it applied to encouraging learning, specifically with adult users. This work is of particular relevance, because of our interest in older users. Her phenomenographical study revealed that two further factors were crucial for engagement of adult learners; those of interest and purpose. That is, individuals must have some intrinsic interest in the activity or its subject matter, and secondly they must see purpose to the activity. Adult learners, in contrast to younger learners, are more cautious about investing their time and energy in learning, but “they become ready to learn something when they need to apply it to be able to cope effectively with real life situations” (Whitton, 2011, p604). Finally, games, in common with device familiarisation processes, exploit the fact that people learn by watching others (Dyck et al. 2003) and games take care to use less interruptive means of communicating information (Dyck et al., 2003; Bopp, 2006). In section 3 we examine how these properties might be used in the device familiarisation process. Besides games, gamification is considered. Deterding et al. (2011) define gamification as “the use of game design elements in non-game contexts”, making it appropriate to apply to the device familiarisation process. More specifically, they claim that gamified applications “offer a more fragile, unstable “flicker” of experiences” (Deterding et al 2011, p11). Evidence from applications with gamification layers, appear to show that these “flickers” can be effective. In a Japanese application for crowd sourcing of translation services, translators were motivated to adopt gamelike behaviours
132
Dimitri Darzentas, Jenny Darzentas and John Darzentas resulting in them focusing on the task at hand; multitasking under pressure; keeping working without complaint; and keeping on trying even after failures (Liu, 2011). In a competition for design ideas, a gamification layer, although optional, was popular with users, leading the researchers to conclude that gamification layers carry their own inherent reward and engage users because of joy, curiosity, self expression, personal challenge, as well as interest (Wit, 2011). Finally, in an application to orient students on a university campus, the gamification layer, on its own, was enjoyed by the students as an achievement system (Fitz-Walter & Tjondronegoro, 2011). In the light of these successes, it seems safe to conclude that adding appropriate gamification layers to device familiarisation would be a worthwhile exercise to encourage engagement. Finally, the game familiarisation process is now an integral part of gameplay; manuals accompanying computer games have gradually become “remediated” into the game world itself in the guise of in-game tutorials (Bopp, 2006).Studying the way games teach their users to play games, offers a useful parallel to understand how users might be motivated to engage with device familiarisation. In the next section a comparison is made between the way gamers learn games and people learn to use devices, to investigate what may be learnt from the similarities and differences.
3. Playing the manual: an approach for device familiarisation Game design is also concerned with efficient gameplay: to achieve this, players learn as they play, and various techniques are used to help them familiarise themselves with learning the game. Depending on the kind of games, techniques have been evolved that provide players with just-in-time, accurate and relevant information. The simplest example is the tooltip: a useful snippet of information, detailing the effects and consequences of use. Other examples include context sensitive action feedback in the form of messages or alerts. Just as these techniques for giving instructions and advice for game familiarisation are incorporated into gameplay, so could the manual for device familiarisation be incorporated into device use, that is device users could “play the manual”. The following table, (Table 1) shows a comparison of the processes of device and game familiarisation. It confirms that the two processes possess a number of similarities, and helps to support the hypothesis that the advantages offered by games and gamification, could be successfully leveraged to make for a more effective means of device familiarisation. Table 1: Comparison between game and device familiasation processes Feature Manual? Instruction style? How people learn?
What do they need to know? (knowledge types)
Games Familiarisation Process (Virtual World) Integrated into gameplay No formal training-(self taught) Observe others (a short video clip, illustrating how to perform an action/ the consequences of an action) Get just in time or context sensitive advice from a friendly figure in the game (NPC), e.g. “you should think about acquiring some items now” Trial and error (but without serious consequences) Background descriptive, or Declarative knowledge (“What is” the game Setting, Purpose) Procedural “How-To” knowledge (Controls and Interaction)
133
Device Familiarisation Process (Real World) Standalone (often paper) No formal training-(self taught) Observe others(real life, video, etc) Ask for advice from friends and relatives (“people they know” not necessarily experts Trial and error (often at the risk of making costly mistakes)
Background descriptive Declarative knowledge (e.g. “What is” cooking by microwaves) Procedural “How to” knowledge (How to cook a chicken) Safety and security knowledge (uneven heating, metal and sparking)
Comments/ Possible actions
In the game familiarisation process, people learn in a make believe world, whereas in the device familiarisation process, people learn in the real world For trial and error, the device familiarisation could offer risk free simulation
In the real world, users are worried about mistakes, damage and safety concerns (fires, electrical problems,
Dimitri Darzentas, Jenny Darzentas and John Darzentas
Feature
Feedback? (Game design)
Warnings Confirmations
Device Familiarisation Process (Real World) Functions and operations Basic and advanced functions Safety Maintenance Uses (recipes, tips, tricks) Warnings ----
Narrative?
Plot
Anecdotes
Flow?
Smooth (support game familiarisation at just-in-time, accurate and relevant information)
Interrupted (user needs to try to make correspondences between (paper) manual and device
Challenges?
Overcoming obstacles and achieving a sense of progression
Purpose of familiarisation process?
Developing proficiency and confidence in use (within the game)
Developing proficiency and confidence in use (of device)
Interest in familiarisation process?
Entertainment Attaining sense of achievement
Familiarisation Attaining sense of achievement and attaining real world achievements.
Learning Content?
Games Familiarisation Process (Virtual World) Functions and operations Basic and advanced functions Uses ( tips, tricks)
etc.). This is not a problem in the game world. Comments/ Possible actions The device user needs added content about safety measures and maintenance procedures. Confirmations are important in game world, and should be provided in real world. No plot as such, but inclusion of mini story lines, of the type ”do you want to hear what happened when x did y?” Typically in the real world, the user is looking from manual to device, trying to make sense of text and diagrams Micro challenges as gamification layers could be set up in addition to the overall device familiarisation challenge Introduce levels of proficiency and confidence within device familiarisation Familiarisation removes frustration and uncertainty Real world achievements: e.g. a cake
Taking first the similarities between the processes shown by the table, both consider users who are self taught and both use the same learning strategies of observing others; friendly advice; and trial and error. Gamers may be shown video clips, so that they can observe how something is done, or what the consequences of actions are; NPCs offer the equivalent of “friendly advice”. Should the gamer prefer to experiment (trial and error), there is feedback on the negative or positive aspects of the action. In terms of the learning that is required, device familiarisation users need to acquire both declarative knowledge of the operation of the device (e.g. How microwaves work? How do they heat objects?) and device-specific procedural knowledge (e.g. What button does what?). Such knowledge types also apply in games, for instance, in strategy games where the best uses for certain types of tactics (declarative knowledge) may be explained and ‘how to’ (procedural) knowledge offered as the user requires it. In addition, in games, there is immediate feedback on the effectiveness of user actions. By highlighting differences between the two processes, the table offers an understanding of elements of device familiarisation which are not covered in game familiarisation. An important difference is that game actions have consequences only in the virtual world whereas device use has consequences in the real world. Trial and error in the virtual world can be “undone”. real world trial and error would need to be simulated, that is, put temporarily in the virtual world, to allow the device user the same “what happens if” freedom as experienced by gamers. Immediate feedback on the consequences of
134
Dimitri Darzentas, Jenny Darzentas and John Darzentas intended actions, as given in the game world, would help device users to experiment and learn. Interms of learning content, in the real world of device familiarisation, users need to learn about safety (e.g. electrocution and fires) and avoiding damage and accidents. There is no equivalent content in game familiarisation, but this knowledge can be considered as further instances of declarative and procedural knowledge, and dealt with in the same way as other content. Next, the table includes those features of games, such as “narrative”, ”flow”, “challenge”, also “interest” and “purpose” (Whitton,2011) that have been shown to aid engagement, in order to see if they can be translated into the device familiarisation process. While it would be very artificial to include narrative into the device familiarisation process, narrative elements could be included: an explanation about safety might include an illustrative example of what happened when a fork was accidentally left on a plate and heated in the microwave. Such anecdotal types of storytelling increase interest, although they are not anchoring features as in game play. Comparing “flow” across the two processes, the separate (paper) manual in the device familiarisation process leads to interruptions, as users look from the manual to the device and back. Presently there are no defined “challenges” in the device familiarisation process, but small challenges could be devised to pique the curiosity and interest of the device user, e.g. “have you tried baking a cake in a microwave?”. Overcoming these challenges can afford a sense of achievement and progression. In a similar way, the “purpose” of the familiarisation process could be matched to specifically stated goals in proficiency and confidence in use. While we do not expect “Interest” to reach the level of entertainment, we speculate that sense of achievement along with real world achievements (like cakes!) are sufficient to keep the device user interested in “playing” the device manual. Having identified these areas, it is easier to pinpoint what needs to be done to create device familiarisation with playing the manual, in terms of when and how to instruct the device user. As a guide, the information could be distinguished into situation dependent, time dependent and socially oriented information (Bopp 2006). In a safety and warning scenario for a microwave oven, this might look like the following: when heating membrane covered food in a microwave, the user is given a “notification” that the membrane should be pierced (situation dependent knowledge); when the door of the microwave is opened, a warning about scalding dangers from escaping steam is given (time dependent knowledge), and users are offered socially oriented information, “would you like to know how others dealt with this situation?” Implied in this approach is that technology enabled devices will be context aware and user sensitive, with a simulation mode, where users are able to experience the result of their intended actions. Given the advances in smart technology, we see this as feasible. For instance, by building on current research with ‘instrumented’ kitchens (Wahlster et al 2011) where a combination of motion sensors and web enabled devices are able to communicate users’ actions back to users. One immediately applicable communication platform is that of the kitchen appliances’ detachable touch screens, or hand held tablets, that allow users the flexibility to interact with the screens in a variety of ways (held vertically, or at an angle, or placed horizontally, and at a distance comfortable to the reader). We envisage that a variety of ‘manual playing’ interactions could take place located both on the real appliance, (in game or simulation mode) and the touch screen, used as a communication device with both text and visualisations to communicate with users. However, our concern is less in the configuration of the game based manual, and more in the designing of the experience so as to achieve the engagement of device users. This may also help guide the direction of smart technology which does not offer services needed by users (Steiner, 2011). User needs are discussed in the next section.
4. Towards evaluating the approach While there may seem to be some very clear advantages to gamifying the manual and integrating the familiarisation process into the use of the device, is such an approach desirable? An expected evaluation method is to create a prototype, test it with users, and see whether or not learning has occurred. However, our approach is not only looking to educational effectiveness, but to understand engagement and motivation. Also we are trying to stress the approach, by not targeting young users, who have grown up with the internet and who are competent information seekers. Instead, we would like to see whether our ideas have currency with users who are unused to this way of working, such as older users.
135
Dimitri Darzentas, Jenny Darzentas and John Darzentas In order to get some first feedback, we organised focus group sessions with five users, all 60+ years of age. These users were recruited because they had expressed frustration with kitchen devices. Two of the participants were grandmothers who regularly carried out domestic chores for their working children, including cooking meals and washing clothes. Two of the participants were widowers who had begun to try to use the devices since their bereavements. The fifth participant was a spinster who lives alone, and often receives devices as gifts from friends and family. They normally help her with installation and set-up procedures, but she confessed the devices mostly stay unused, often to her embarrassment and the donors’ disappointment. She said that she had sometimes tried to use the manuals, but with little success, and also said that many of the devices she had not felt the need for, so she was not so motivated to use them. Other participants also expressed that they were often in the same situation. The users were asked to describe what problems they faced, and what bothered them the most, these are listed below:
Uncertainty with the operation of devices, and anxiety as to what was happening.
All noted a preference for appliances with windows (oven doors, microwaves, washing machines, bread makers) so that they could visually check the procedure.
Complaints regarding “locus of control” of the devices
Since the possibility for “manual override” was often invisible, widower B reported resorting to unplugging the devices on a regular basis.
Not understanding the stages of the operations and unable to calculate the time to complete processes,
e.g. machine cycles, etc.
Not understanding how to recover from mistakes (by far the most common complaint)
e.g. forgetting to put detergent in the machine; accidentally setting the time for the device to start later, etc.. Often this was the most distressing, not least because, it was not just that clothes were not washed or food was not cooked on time, but also because of either damage to the device (“I did not know what to do when the gold trim on a plate started sparking, I ruined the microwave”), or damage to the device environment (“I opened the washing machine door by mistake, the water flooded out and damaged the kitchen cupboards”).
These sessions did not explicitly reveal the expected issues of difficulties with the manual and learning to use the device. Rather the expressed problems centred on lack of confidence, including uncertainty regarding use; anxiety that the appliances could not be left alone; control versus autonomy; recovery from error and that outcomes were unpredictable. One of the grandmothers said, “I never know until the last minute, if it is going to be OK”, and one of the widowers concurred, saying, “It is like a lottery, I am never sure if it is going to do what I expect.” Whether or not the ideas for gamifying the device familiarisation process would be acceptable to older people depends on many factors, including familiarity with technology. All our users were proficient with mobile phones, and 3 of the 5 were familiar with computers having used them in the workplace, and still using them to surf the web, and to email. All had played casual games they found on the computer or phone (e.g. Solitaire and Sudoku), but only one had played for a short while, alongside his grandson, a car racing simulation game. He said he had enjoyed it, but found it very fast paced. This kind of technological acceptance was not as important to us as the implications for design from the focus group results. These increased our awareness of the necessity of removing anxiety and uncertainty from device use and that familiarisation, in a way that promotes confidence, should be a main goal. We should try to enable users to experiment and explore, in a safe, risk free environment, just as the learning gamers do.
5. Discussion and future work Adding properties of games and gamification to device familiarisation is a novel approach that has not yet been tried and that could offer some useful ways to deal with the situation that users invest in technology, but do not follow through with understanding and learning how to make use of it. Since games also teach game familiarisation using understandings of how people like to learn in a self taught –as opposed to formal training- mode, we contend borrowings from one domain to another are theoretically feasible.
136
Dimitri Darzentas, Jenny Darzentas and John Darzentas This paper has attempted to demonstrate that there is merit in applying a games-based approach to the process of device familiarisation, which is not a trivial problem, having implications for the well being of humans well beyond their bodily needs. More specifically, we have set out the reasoning for our belief that moving from a (paper) manual based approach to “playing the manual” following the model of in-game manuals is worthwhile. We believe that this approach offers opportunities for attracting interest, providing motivation and could keep people engaged. Moreover, it could help them to make knowledge transfer by building mental models, and applying them to other situations and technologies, and finally, but no less importantly, to relieve anxiety and uncertainty felt by some in connection with technology, by building confidence in this but also other domains. Our motivations for undertaking this approach are several. We seek to provide purpose and interest to otherwise mundane tasks, which are nevertheless important to humans. We want to design better interaction experiences with devices, especially to relieve anxiety and uncertainty. Further, we would like to understand whether familiarisation with domestic technologies can be generalised to other devices. Finally, we are interested in what this work can offer to the games based learning research field. Our future work is to continue to develop prototypes to establish whether gamification layers attract and motivate particularly older users to persevere with device familiarisation. Our goal is that people become easy and familiar with the technologies that surround them, to better benefit from the advantages they offer.
References Bopp, M. (2006) “Didactic analysis of digital games and game-based learning” in Pivec, M. (Ed) Affective and Emotional aspects of Human Computer Interaction: Game based and Innovative Approaches to Learning, IOS Press, pp 8-37 Brill, M.F. (2011) “Teaching the Special Needs Learner: When Words Are Not Enough” in Journal of Extension, 49, 5, article no. 5TOT4 Cook, D.J., Augusto, J.C., Jakkula, V.R. (2009) “Ambient intelligence: Technologies, applications, and opportunities.” Pervasive and Mobile Computing 5 pp 277-298 Cook, D.J. & Das, S.K. (2007) “How Smart are our environments? An updated look at the state of the art” Pervasive and Mobile Computing 3 pp 53-73 Connolly, T.M., Boyle, E.A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., Boyle, J.M. (2012) “A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games” Computers & Education 59, 2, pp 661–686 Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., Nacke, L. (2011b)”From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining Gamification” Proceedings of MindTrek’11 Dyck, J., Pinelle, D., Brown, B., Gutwin, C. (2003) “Learning from Games: HCI Design Innovations in Entertainment Software” in Proceedings of Graphics Interface pp 237-246. Fitz-Walter, Z. & Tjondronegoro, D. (2011) “Exploring the opportunities and challenges of using mobile sensing for gamification” Proceedings of UbiComp’11 Hawkey, K., Inkpen, K.M., Rockwood, K., McAllister, M. and Slonim, J. (2005) “Requirements Gathering with Alzheimer’s Patients and Caregivers” in Proceedings of ASSETS’05 Hilton, D., Cobb, S., Pridmore, T., Gladman, J., and Edmans, J. (2011) “Development and Evaluation of a Mixed Reality System for Stroke Rehabilitation”, pp. 193-228 (Chapter 10) in Brahman, S. & Jain, L.C. (Eds) Advanced Computational Intelligence Paradigms in Healthcare 6, SCI 337 Carroll, J.M. (1990) The Nurnberg Funnel: Designing Minimalist Instruction for Practical Computer Skill, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press Hynes, P. & Thu, Y.M. (2008) “To Sheffield with love” Forced Migration Review, Refugee Studies Centre, University of Oxford Liu, Y., Alexandrova, T. and Nakajima, T. (2011) “Gamifying Intelligent Environments” in Proceedings of UbiMUI’11 Malone, T. W. (1980) “What makes things fun to learn? Heuristics for designing instructional computer games”, Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGSMALL symposium, pp 162 - 169, Malone, T.W. and Lepper, M.R. (1987) “Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motives for learning” in Snow, R.E. & Farr, M.J.(Eds) Aptitude, learning and instruction, III: Conative and Affective Process Analyses, Lawrence Erlbaum,pp 223-253 Newell, A. F., Gregor, P., Morgan, M., Pullin G. and Macaulay C. (2011) “User-Sensitive Inclusive Design” Universal Access in the Information Society 10, 3, pp235- 243 Niemands, K. (2002) Exporting to the EU, Export Tutorials, Section 3 User Manual available from http://www.export61.com/export-tutorials.asp?ttl=eteu Siemens Smart Home Solutions (2006) https://www.siemens.be/cmc/ccmi/smarthome/presentations/TIH_Lutz_Gartner.pdf
137
Dimitri Darzentas, Jenny Darzentas and John Darzentas Stephanidis, C. (2011) “Ambient Assisted Living and Ambient Intelligence: Improving the Quality of Life for European Citizens” Introduction to special themed issue of ERCIM News, no 87, Oct available online at http://ercim-news.ercim.eu Staples, K. (1999) “Technical communication from 1950–1998: Where are we now?” Technical Communication Quarterly, Vol 8, no. 2, pp153-164 th Steiner, S. (2012) “Smart Fridge, Idiot fridge more like” Guardian Online, 12 January http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/jan/11/homes-fooddrinks Wahlster, W., Kroner, A. Schneider, M., Baus, J. (2011) Sharing memories of smart products and their consumers in instrumented environments, Schwerpunktthema available online at http://www.dfki.de/~wahlster/Publications/itti0801_045a.pdf Witt, M., Scheiner, C., Robra-Brissantz, S. (2011) “Gamification of Online Idea Competitions: Insights from an Explorative Case” in INFORMATIK 2011 TUBerlin Wherton, J.P. & Monk, A.F. (2010) “Problems people with dementia have with kitchen tasks: The challenge for pervasive computing” in Interacting with Computers 22, pp253-266 Whitton, N. (2010) “Game Engagement Theory and Adult Learning” in Simulation & Gaming, 42(5), pp596-609 Yang, H.-Y. & Sanford, J.A. (2012) “Home and Community Environmental Features, Activity Performance, and Community Participation among Older Adults with Functional Limitations” Journal of Aging Research
138
