Engagement in educational games: An exploration of the interaction between game features, players’ perceptions and learning. Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Dr. phil. der Fakultät für Bildungswissenschaften an der Universität Duisburg-Essen vorgelegt von Michael Karlheinz Filsecker Wagner geboren am 25.05.1976 in Los Angeles, Chile Tag der Disputation: 21. Noviembre 2013 Erster Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Michael Kerres Zweiter Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Dominik Petko ABSTRACT Educational games’ effectiveness relies on games’ engagement power. However, this concept has seldom been examined. To fill this gap, this dissertation explored engagement by using multiple sources of data such as interviews, questionnaires and eye movements. In particular, this dissertation examined the effect of manipulating individuals’ perception of the demand characteristics (PDC) of playing an educational computer game (i.e., to learn versus for fun) on individuals’ content knowledge, cognitive engagement (CE) (i.e., mental effort and information processing strategies) and behavioral engagement (i.e., eye tracking data), while exploring the influence of self-efficacy and the perceived general mental effort (General AIME) on individuals’ actual CE. Data analysis consisted of student’s T (one tailed), bootstrap confidence interval, winsorized correlations and Pearson correlation coefficient comparisons. Results showed that participants increased their recall of content knowledge, but contrary to the expectations, no effect of the PDC manipulation on individuals recall test and CE was found. As expected, a positive effect of PDC on behavioral engagement was established. Likewise, a positive correlation of recall with behavioral engagement and one measure of CE was found. A positive correlation showed CE and emotional engagement. Finally, the CE employed was influenced by individuals’ initial General AIME. For the general lack of effect of PDC on CE, it is suggested that some CE measures might have not been sensitive to the PDC manipulation. Competition for participants’ cognitive resources coming from both the game (i.e., cognitive overload) and the participants (i.e., volitional judgments), and a relinquishment to cognitively engage with physics content may have hindered the PDC manipulation. The lack of relationship between CE measures and recall may be due to the inappropriate cognitive processing employed. In this sense, it was suggested that 1) CE measures tapped different processes and learning outcomes, 2) participants may have not allocated the adequate strategies, and 3) CE may have affected “inferential activity” instead of the information processing strategies. Finally, the positive relationship between CE and emotional engagement suggested either an integrated (i.e., not disrupted) subjective experience - as expected - or the presence of competing goals as suggested by the games for entertainment literature. Implications for theory building, game design and research were provided. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Michael Kerres for having trusted on me and having provided me with ideas, support and critical appraisals of the previous drafts that led to the present dissertation. His critical perspective on educational games together with his knowledge of cognitive psychology and instructional design turn out to be a fertile ground for my ideas as they are expressed through these pages. I would like also to thank Prof. Dr. Dominique Petko from The Schwyz University of Teacher Education for having accepted to be the Korreferent and for having provided thoughtful suggestions for improving both the overall quality and the discussion section of this dissertation. I want also to thank my colleagues at the Duisburg Lab for helping and encouraging me through the different stages of this process. Special thanks to Dr. Judith Budgen- Kosten and Andreas Schmidt for helping me with the translation of some instruments used in this dissertation and for their comments on early versions of the introduction of this dissertation. I would also want to thank Tatjana Steinhaus for her help in the transcription and coding of the interviews, and the coding of the pre and posttest for reliability purposes. I also want to thank my friend Paula Grez for her willingness to provide me with material central for this dissertation. Last but not least I want to thank my wife Daniela and more recently my little one Dominique. Daniela is just one of a kind woman and I feel blessed to have her with me. If Love had a face, that’s hers. My beautiful and smart Dominique surprises me every day with her accomplishments and her love towards me and her mother. Thanks and I love you. For these two women I have finished this dissertation on the time scheduled. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................................... iii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. ix List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... xii List of Equations ...................................................................................................................... xv 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1. Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................... 3 1.2. Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................................... 4 1.3. Significance of the Study ............................................................................................... 5 1.4. Overview of the Method ................................................................................................ 7 1.5. Organization of the Dissertation ..................................................................................... 7 2. Literature Review ............................................................................................................... 9 2.1. Computer Games for Entertainment: What makes them Special as a Medium? ......... 12 2.1.1. Rules ......................................................................................................................... 17 2.1.1.1. Design Patterns ......................................................................................................... 19 2.1.1.2. Artificial Intelligence ............................................................................................... 23 2.1.2. Fiction ....................................................................................................................... 27 2.1.3. Gameplay: Rules and Players ................................................................................... 30 2.1.4. Games as Simulations .............................................................................................. 34 2.2. Educational Games: What are they? ............................................................................ 37 2.2.1. Definitions of Educational Games ........................................................................... 39 2.2.1.1. Simulation and Games: Simulating a Model versus Playing a Game ...................... 43 2.2.1.2. Defining an Educational Game ................................................................................ 53 2.2.2. Educational Games: Claims and Issues .................................................................... 54 2.2.3. Thomas Malone’s Legacy ........................................................................................ 63 2.2.4. Educational Game Design ........................................................................................ 70 iv 2.2.4.1. Endogenous Fantasy ................................................................................................. 72 2.2.4.2. Intrinsic Integration .................................................................................................. 74 2.2.4.3. Interactive Narrative ................................................................................................. 75 2.2.5. Educational Games Research ................................................................................... 76 2.3. Engagement .................................................................................................................. 86 2.3.1. Dimensions and Indicators of Engagement .............................................................. 87 2.3.1. Measuring Engagement ............................................................................................ 90 2.3.2. Engagement as a Volitional Construct ...................................................................... 93 2.3.3. Engagement and Mindfulness .................................................................................. 94 2.3.4. Engagement and Flow .............................................................................................. 96 2.3.5. Other conceptualizations of Engagement ................................................................. 98 2.4. Cognitive Engagement ..............................................................................................