基于游戏的学习研究的随机对照试验的困境-过去的问题和潜在的解决方案

Andrea Gauthier, J. Jenkinson
{"title":"基于游戏的学习研究的随机对照试验的困境-过去的问题和潜在的解决方案","authors":"Andrea Gauthier, J. Jenkinson","doi":"10.1109/VS-GAMES.2016.7590382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for scientific research but pose many obstacles for game-based learning (GBL) studies. This poster is intended to foster a discussion about RCTs by summarizing two recent trials performed by the authors and comparing the distinctly different protocols including length of stimulus exposure, levels of internal and external validity, and sample size considerations. Finally, a proposed protocol for a third RCT is presented that attempts to reconcile the pros and cons from the previously described studies, while maintaining rigour in the research - the authors seek feedback from conference attendees as to the protocol's viability.","PeriodicalId":239485,"journal":{"name":"2016 8th International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications (VS-GAMES)","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Woes of an RCT for Game-Based Learning Research - Past Problems and Potential Solutions\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Gauthier, J. Jenkinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/VS-GAMES.2016.7590382\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for scientific research but pose many obstacles for game-based learning (GBL) studies. This poster is intended to foster a discussion about RCTs by summarizing two recent trials performed by the authors and comparing the distinctly different protocols including length of stimulus exposure, levels of internal and external validity, and sample size considerations. Finally, a proposed protocol for a third RCT is presented that attempts to reconcile the pros and cons from the previously described studies, while maintaining rigour in the research - the authors seek feedback from conference attendees as to the protocol's viability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":239485,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2016 8th International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications (VS-GAMES)\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2016 8th International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications (VS-GAMES)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/VS-GAMES.2016.7590382\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2016 8th International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications (VS-GAMES)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/VS-GAMES.2016.7590382","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

随机对照试验(rct)是科学研究的黄金标准,但却给基于游戏的学习(GBL)研究带来了许多障碍。这张海报旨在通过总结作者最近进行的两个试验,并比较明显不同的方案,包括刺激暴露的长度,内部和外部有效性水平,以及样本量考虑,来促进对随机对照试验的讨论。最后,提出了第三项RCT的建议方案,该方案试图调和先前描述的研究的利弊,同时保持研究的严谨性-作者寻求会议与会者对方案可行性的反馈。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Woes of an RCT for Game-Based Learning Research - Past Problems and Potential Solutions
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for scientific research but pose many obstacles for game-based learning (GBL) studies. This poster is intended to foster a discussion about RCTs by summarizing two recent trials performed by the authors and comparing the distinctly different protocols including length of stimulus exposure, levels of internal and external validity, and sample size considerations. Finally, a proposed protocol for a third RCT is presented that attempts to reconcile the pros and cons from the previously described studies, while maintaining rigour in the research - the authors seek feedback from conference attendees as to the protocol's viability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信