Evaluating the Validity of a Non-invasive Assessment Procedure

Recent developments in serious games allow for in-game adaptations to enhance the learner's current cognitive, motivational or emotional state. Providing suitable adaptations requires a valid assessment of the psycho-pedagogical constructs the game should adapt to. An explicit assessment, e.g. by questionnaires occurring repeatedly on the screen, would impair the learner's game flow. Therefore, a non-invasive and implicit assessment procedure is required. In the course of the European research project TARGET, we established an assessment procedure which is based on the interpretation of the learner's actions in the virtual environment, called Behavioural Indicators (BIs). A set of 16 BIs has been formulated to assess the learner's current emotional, motivational and clearness state. In this present work, we describe how these BIs can be validated and focus on the innovative elements of the methodological procedure, the material, experiential considerations and the statistical analysis to be applied in an empirical study.

[1]  C. Spielberger,et al.  Stress And Emotion : Anxiety, Anger, & Curiosity , 2013 .

[2]  W. D. Spangler Validity of questionnaire and TAT measures of need for achievement: Two meta-analyses. , 1992 .

[3]  Hua Cai,et al.  Modeling of operators' emotion and task performance in a virtual driving environment , 2011, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[4]  K. Scherer,et al.  Psychophysiological responses to appraisal dimensions in a computer game , 2004 .

[5]  L. Nadel,et al.  Cognitive neuroscience of emotion , 2000 .

[6]  H. M. Kehr,et al.  Zum differentiellen Einfluß von Motiven auf die Wirkungen von Führungstrainings (MbO) , 1999 .

[7]  Christian Peter,et al.  Emotion representation and physiology assignments in digital systems , 2006, Interact. Comput..

[8]  Regina Vollmeyer,et al.  FAM: Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung aktuller Motivation in Lern- und Leistungssituationen , 2001 .

[9]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Recognizing, defining, and representing problems. , 2003 .

[10]  Rosa Maria Puca,et al.  Task Enjoyment: A Mediator Between Achievement Motives and Performance , 1999 .

[11]  Janet E. Davidson,et al.  The psychology of problem solving , 2003 .

[12]  T. A. Williams,et al.  Technology in mental health care delivery systems , 1980 .

[13]  J. Russell,et al.  An approach to environmental psychology , 1974 .

[14]  Julius Kuhl,et al.  Motivation, Intention, and Volition , 1987 .

[15]  M. Bradley,et al.  Measuring emotion: the Self-Assessment Manikin and the Semantic Differential. , 1994, Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry.

[16]  D. Mcclelland Biological Aspects of Human Motivation , 1987 .

[17]  M. Ziegler,et al.  Investigating Measures of Achievement Motivation(s) , 2010 .

[18]  J. W. Atkinson Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. , 1957, Psychological review.

[19]  K Sokolowski,et al.  Assessing Achievement, Affiliation, and Power Motives All at Once: The Multi-Motive Grid (MMG) , 2000, Journal of personality assessment.

[20]  M. Csíkszentmihályi Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience , 1990 .

[21]  R. Larsen,et al.  Promises and problems with the circumplex model of emotion. , 1992 .

[22]  G. Riva,et al.  Being There: Concepts, Effects and Measurements of User Presence in Synthetic Environments , 2003 .