A Brief Measure of Interpersonal Interaction for 2-Player Serious Games: Questionnaire Validation
A Brief Measure of Interpersonal Interaction for 2-Player Serious Games: Questionnaire Validation
复制标题
DOI：
10.2196/12788
复制
发表时间：
2019-07-01
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
Novak, Domen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gorsic, Maja;Clapp, Joshua D.;Novak, Domen
背景：竞技和合作的严肃游戏在康复和教育等领域越来越受欢迎，与单人游戏相比有几个潜在的优势。然而，它们并不是每个人都适合的，竞技合作类严肃游戏的用户体验取决于很多因素。一个重要的因素是玩家之间的言语互动，但由于缺乏有效的测量工具，这一因素的影响还没有得到广泛的研究。目的：本文旨在验证一个简单的问卷，该问卷测量了一场严肃的游戏中两名玩家之间的言语互动。问卷由8个问题组成，涉及会话的数量、其效度(积极或消极情绪)和与游戏的相关性。方法：对30对参与者进行验证，这些参与者在摄像机前玩了10分钟的严肃竞技游戏。问卷由两名参与者填写，一名面对面的观察员，以及我们研究组的两名观看视频的成员。这些评分员的结果被用来制定问卷说明，并将最终的问卷发放给另外2名评分员，他们接受了5个视频的培训，然后对另外25个视频进行独立评分。结果：问卷的评分员间信度在对话量和游戏关联性方面都很好(组内相关系数[ICCs]>0.9)。评价者之间的可信度在会话价位上是中等到很好的(ICCS在0.4到0.7之间)。我们认为，评价者之间对价值的可靠性较低，主要是因为我们样本中的价值分布有限。此外，问卷评分与玩家的个性特征(如交谈次数与外向性相关)和在竞技游戏中所经历的压力/紧张显著相关。结论：有效问卷有可能成为研究竞技和合作类严肃游戏中用户体验的有用工具。此外，它还可以改编成其他应用程序，如娱乐游戏。然而，它只在双人竞技严肃游戏中得到了未受损的大学生的验证，接下来应该在不同的目标人群(如中风幸存者)和不同的游戏设计(如合作游戏)中进行验证。
Background: Competitive and cooperative serious games have become increasingly popular in areas such as rehabilitation and education and have several potential advantages over single-player games. However, they are not suitable for everyone, and the user experience in competitive and cooperative serious games depends on many factors. One important factor is the verbal interaction between players, but the effect of this factor has not been extensively studied because of the lack of a validated measurement tool.Objective: This paper aimed to validate a brief questionnaire that measures the verbal interaction between 2 players of a serious game. The questionnaire consists of 8 questions pertaining to the amount of conversation, its valence (positive or negative emotion), and its game relatedness.Methods: The questionnaire was validated with 30 pairs of participants who played a competitive serious game for 10 min while being recorded with cameras. The questionnaire was filled out by both participants, an in-person observer, and 2 members of our research group who watched the videos. Results from these raters were used to develop questionnaire instructions, and the finalized questionnaire was given to 2 additional raters who were trained on 5 videos and then rated the other 25 videos independently.Results: The questionnaire's interrater reliability is excellent for the amount of conversation and its game relatedness (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs] above 0.9). Interrater reliability is fair to good for conversation valence (ICCs between 0.4 and 0.7). We believe that the lower interrater reliability for valence is primarily because of a limited spread of valence values in our sample. Furthermore, questionnaire ratings were significantly correlated with players' personality characteristics (eg, amount of conversation was correlated with extraversion) and pressure/tension experienced in the competitive game.Conclusions: The validated questionnaire has the potential to be a useful tool for studying user experience in competitive and cooperative serious games. Furthermore, it could be adapted for other applications such as entertainment games. However, it has only been validated with unimpaired university students in a 2-player competitive serious game and should next be validated with different target populations (eg, stroke survivors) and different game designs (eg, cooperative games).