ABSTRACT
The unique characteristics of games have led scientific research to increasingly focus on their potential role in learning processes. Currently, their effectiveness in fostering experiential learning and skill acquisition in several areas is already supported by the existing evidence, mainly about the potential of digital games. Paradoxically, the current post-digital era seems to have led to a growing popularity of analog games. The present Systematic Literature Review aimed to map the existing literature on the potential of board, tabletop, or other analog games in learning processes. It intended to systematize the contemporary state of the art (2012-2022) around the pedagogical role of these games, their effectiveness, the promoted learning outcomes, the methodological aspects of the interventions, the used games-including mechanics and other characteristics-and the current discussions around inclusion and accessibility in analog game-based learning. Adopting the PRISMA methodology, we searched ACM Digital Library, EBSCO, ERIC, Scopus-Elsevier, and Web of Science databases, as well as other peer-reviewed "grey literature" sources. The search resulted in an initial sample of 2,741 articles that was then screened by inclusion and exclusion criteria previously defined according to the research objectives. We obtained a final sample of 45 articles. To formulate the mapping of existing research, these studies were analyzed using a combination of statistical, content, and critical analysis procedures. The obtained results support the role of board, tabletop, and other analog games in educational contexts-based on their educational potential-with a broad range of knowledge, cognitive, and psychological outcomes. The study also emphasized the relevance of these games in the promotion of soft skills and other aspects typically associated with meaningful learning, such as engagement, satisfaction, flexibility, and freedom of experimentation. However, important limitations were found in a fair amount of the pedagogical approaches studied, which can be mostly attributed to the low prevalence of modern board games that relate what is intended to be learned to aspects of game design and have little to no consideration of accessibility and inclusion aspects in these studies.
ABSTRACT
In this paper, we validate PREDIS, a decision support system for disaster management using serious games to collect experts' judgments on its performance. PREDIS is a model for DISaster response supplier selection (PREDIS). It has a PREDictive component (PRED) for predicting the disaster human impact and an estimation component to Estimate the DISaster (EDIS) needs to optimise supplier-based resource allocation. A quasi-experiment design embedded in a participatory simulation game is conducted to compare the opinions of equal samples of 22 experts and non-experts. The following questions are put forward. First, "Does PREDIS model assists the decision makers to make the same decisions faster?" Second, "Does the PREDIS model assist the non-experts as simulated decision makers to decide like an expert?" Using AHP weights of decision makers' preferences as well as Borda counts, the decisions are compared. The result shows that PREDIS helps to reduce the decision-making time by experts and non-experts to 6 h after the disaster strike, instead of the usual 72 h. It also assists 71% of the non-experts to make decisions similar to those made by experts. In summary, the PREDIS model has two major capabilities. It enables the experts and non-experts to predict the disaster results immediately using widely available data. It also enables the non-experts to decide almost the same as the experts; either in predicting the human impact of a disaster and estimating the needs or in selecting suitable suppliers.
