15 MMOG Experiments

Thanks to Lisa Galarneau for pointing out a this 60-page Technical Report made for the ADL of the DOD by Curtis Bonk of Indiana U and Vanessa Dennen of Florida State: Massive Multiplayer Online Gaming: A Research Framework for Military Training and Education.  Though styled as a report, it's essentially a blueprint of what the authors think they could do with a bunch of military research money earmarked for the study of MMOGs.  The Executive Summary begins:

The United States Military is undergoing significant change in the training of its workforce. Massive multiplayer online gaming (MMOG) is one technology that offers unique education, training, and performance support opportunities. While the research on MMOG is scant, there is a need for a review of measurement methodologies related to MMOGs for adult learners. In particular, this document notes trends in the use of games and simulations for education and training purposes, common and preferred communication features, motivational aspects of multiplayer games, and the results of preliminary research in this field. In addition, it outlines completed and ongoing efforts to develop training games in a military context as well as findings related to the transfer of performance in games to performance on occupational tasks. As is evident in this document, there is a pressing need to know how problem solving and decision-making skills are being measured in online gaming environments.

Since MMOG research is the unifying topic here at Terra Nova, and it's a comparatively young field, it's interesting to see how the authors of this document frame that area for their audience.  Generally, the "scant" research listed in the references section is skewed toward the educational and empirical, though it seems somewhat eclectic.  The names  that make the references list are all familiar, though.  Constance, Nick, Richard, J.C. Herz, Liz Kolbert, and James Gee are mentioned.  Other than Richard, it seems there is not much mention of MUDs.

Anyway, the substantive bit here is the 15 research topics that Bonk  & Dennen propose.  Those headings are, in order:

• Impact of After Action Review (AAR) on MMOG
• Performance and Decision Making Style
• Impact of Addiction to MMOG
• Sense of Community and Group Longevity or Persistence
• Describe the Apprenticeship Process in MMOG
• Game Authenticity and Constructivism
• Bandwidth Constraints and Differences
• Role Assignment: Achievers, Socializers, Explorers, Killers
• Cognitive Tools and MMOG Performance and Dialogue
• Collaboration and Virtual Teaming in MMOG: Co-located and Distance Groups
• Decision-making, Leadership, and Interpersonal Conflict in MMOGs
• Learning from Mistakes and Learning Histories
• Learning Style and Game Selection
• Game-based Motivation
• Problem Solving Processes and Types of Knowledge Facilitated by MMOGs
• Social Skills and Friendship Development

For the particulars of each of these, see the report. 

Thoughts on these topics?  Thoughts on other topics that the military might fund?

Comments

[dmyers]

1.

I think the question is really whether computer games simply serve designers’ goals, or whether games function somehow apart from -- or regardless of -- designers’ intentions. That is, do computer games -- games in general -- have formal properties determining an objective game aesthetic?

This is basically the position of formalism, which assumes that literature has formal properties determining a literary aesthetic (i. e., "literariness"), regardless of the more “applied” intentions of literature writers. Thus, to consider the “application” of literature in criticism or analysis is to commit an intentional or affective fallacy.

I think computer games -- games in general -- do have formal properties that determine their aesthetic qualities. In brief, the relationship of literature to language (as described by early formalists) is similar to the relationship of games to semiosis (as described by current formalists -- of which there are very, very few).

If you take a non-formalist approach -- if you are a culturalist, for instance -- then you indeed emphasize applications and goals and agendas and trainings of games -- ultimately to the detriment, I believe, of an understanding of the more fundamental forms of games and play. This particular detriment, however, seems to be commonly outweighed by a significantly increased likelihood of getting funded.

[Edward Castronova]

2.

There are a number of game-related people here at IU, but I didn't know about Bonk. Here are some others, if you're local and want to meet people:

Robert Appelman

Sasha Barab

Thom Gillespie

Joshua Fairfield is coming to the Law School this fall. (Click on 'F' - it's not in his vita, but he's got characters in DAoC and WoW.)

In Telecommunications, we will have several openings for lecturers and assistant professors next year. I will be pushing for games scholars.

[Richard Bartle]

3.

I'd be interested to discover how Bonk and Dennen went about their investigation into virtual worlds. Given their extensive reference to Constance's work, my guess is that this was their route in. They seem to have found quite a lot of stuff, but I don't believe the field is quite as research-impoverished as they make out.

Richard

PS: Bonk is a mildly amusing word in the UK.