Onstage or behind the scenes? Relative learning benefits of simulation role-play and design

In this article, the authors report the results of two experiments that explored hypotheses about the relative learning advantages of role-play and scenario design. The experiments were conducted with similar student populations in Australia and Israel. Using a matched-pairs design, participants were randomly assigned to design and role-play conditions. They worked on their tasks following an hour-long lecture on three negotiation concepts: alternatives, time pressure, and negotiating power. A lecture-only control group was implemented in the Australian experiment. In both experiments, designers, working “behind the scenes,” indicated better concept learning in the short run than their role-play counterparts performing “onstage,” as well as in comparison with the control group. They showed better understanding of the way the concepts are related and retained the learning gains over time. Moreover, the designers were at least as motivated as role-players and controls and, for the Israel participants, showed more motivation. The results, favoring designers, spread widely across the various questions, asked immediately after the experience and 1 week later: 86% of the answers given favored designers in terms of direction; 52% of these were statistically significant. Implications are discussed for explanatory mechanisms, programmatic research, and teaching/training approaches.

[1]  Brigitte Poulin,et al.  BUTORSTAR: A role-playing game for collective awareness of wise reedbed use , 2007 .

[2]  M. Clements,et al.  THEORY AND RESEARCH in Social Education , 2007 .

[3]  J. Magee,et al.  Review of Doing Research: Methods of Inquiry for Conflict Analysis , 2006 .

[4]  Chris Bateman,et al.  21st Century Game Design , 2005 .

[5]  Noam Ebner,et al.  Using Tomorrow's Headlines for Today's Training: Creating Pseudo-Reality in Conflict Resolution Simulation-Games , 2005 .

[6]  Daniel Druckman,et al.  Doing Research: Methods of Inquiry for Conflict Analysis , 2005 .

[7]  Leigh Thompson,et al.  Learning Negotiation Skills: Four Models of Knowledge Creation and Transfer , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[8]  Gaming-Simulation : Rationale , Design and Applications , 2003 .

[9]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Influence of social motives on integrative negotiation: a meta-analytic review and test of two theories. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[10]  Michael Wheeler Teaching negotiation : ideas and innovations , 2000 .

[11]  Henry Ellington,et al.  Using Games and Simulations in the Classroom: A Practical Guide for Teachers , 1998 .

[12]  David Crookall,et al.  Developing a Scientific Knowledge of Simulation/Gaming , 1998 .

[13]  Druckman,et al.  From Research to Application: Utilizing Research Findings in Negotiation Training Programs , 1998 .

[14]  Henry Ellington,et al.  Using games & simulations in the classroom , 1998 .

[15]  D. Druckman Bridging the gap between negotiating experience and analysis , 1996 .

[16]  Bertram I. Spector,et al.  Creativity Heuristics for Impasse Resolution: Reframing Intractable Negotiations , 1995 .

[17]  Ferenc L. Toth,et al.  Simulation/Gaming for long-term policy problems , 1995 .

[18]  Albert W. Jones Simulation: State of the Art in Japan , 1995 .

[19]  Daniel Druckman,et al.  The educational effectiveness of interactive games , 1995 .

[20]  Daniel Druckman,et al.  Determinants of Compromising Behavior in Negotiation , 1994 .

[21]  A. M. Faure Some Methodological Problems in Comparative Politics , 1994 .

[22]  Daniel Druckman,et al.  The Situational Levers of Negotiating Flexibility , 1993 .

[23]  C. Douglas Wetzel,et al.  The Effectiveness of Games for Educational Purposes: A Review of Recent Research , 1992 .

[24]  Cathy S. Greenblat,et al.  Designing Games and Simulations: An Illustrated Handbook , 1987 .

[25]  Ken Jones,et al.  Simulations: a Handbook for Teachers and Trainers , 1987 .

[26]  David Crookall,et al.  Towards a Reconceptualization of Simulation: From Representation to Reality. , 1987 .

[27]  Jeanne M. Brett The mediation process , 1987 .

[28]  Ronald L. Vansickle A Quantitative Review of Research on Instructional Simulation Gaming: A Twenty-Year Perspective , 1986 .

[29]  R. Rosenthal,et al.  Mediation of interpersonal expectancy effects: 31 meta-analyses. , 1985 .

[30]  Ken Jones Designing your own simulations , 1985 .

[31]  D. Kolb Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development , 1983 .

[32]  M. Bredemeier,et al.  The Educational Effectiveness of Simulation Games , 1981 .

[33]  Peter deLeon,et al.  The Analytic Requirements for Free-Form Gaming , 1981 .

[34]  J. Tedeschi Impression Management Theory and Social Psychological Research , 1981 .

[35]  Richard B. Felson,et al.  9 – An Interactionist Approach to Aggression1 , 1981 .

[36]  Training,et al.  Simulation and games : the real and the ideal : the proceedings of the 1980 conference of SAGSET, the Society for Academic Gaming and Simulation in Education and Training , 1981 .

[37]  Richard D. Duke,et al.  Gaming: The Future's Language , 2014 .

[38]  Michael Inbar,et al.  Simulation and gaming in social science , 1972 .

[39]  William A. Gamson SIMSOC: Establishing Social Order in a Simulated Society. , 1971 .

[40]  Daniel Druckman,et al.  Understanding the Operation of Complex Social Systems , 1971 .

[41]  Cleo H. Cherryholmes Some Current Research On Effectiveness of Educational Simulations: Implications for Alternative Strategies , 1966 .

[42]  M. Orne On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. , 1962 .

[43]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.