Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/73218
|
| Title: | 嚴肅遊戲中感知之精熟經驗、角色依附與內在政治效能之路徑模式
A path model of perceived mastery experiences, character attachment and internal political efficacy in serious games |
| Authors: | 黃齡儀
Huang, Ling Yi |
| Contributors: | 葉玉珠
彼得.霍德和
Yeh,Yu Chu
Vorderer, Peter
黃齡儀
Huang, Ling Yi |
| Keywords: | 嚴肅遊戲
政治效能
路徑分析
角色依附
精熟經驗
serious game
political efficacy
path analysis
character attachment
mastery experience |
| Date: | 2014 |
| Issue Date: | 2015-02-03 10:15:01 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究區分中介之精熟經驗與感知之精熟經驗。前者為玩家在角色扮演遊戲中所獲得之成功經驗，後者指玩家對此中介經驗之整體評估感受，且包含過去經驗。玩家在遊戲中不斷接受挑戰並破關的過程，即包含了成功的中介精熟經驗，此經驗與感知之精熟經驗應為正向相關，且為遊戲中必要之一環。角色依附是探討玩家與其角色關係之重要變項，當玩家越依附於其角色時，越能將此中介精熟經驗轉換成其感知之精熟經驗，越能對其效能感產生正面影響。本研究因此嘗試探討嚴肅遊戲中提供的中介精熟經驗是否會影響內部政治效能感，並探討在這影響機制中，感知精熟經驗，角色依附與內在政治效能感之路徑關係。
本研究採對照組前後測實驗設計。參與者為131位大學生，在本研究發展之政策嚴肅遊戲中，參與者被隨機分派到實驗組與控制組。兩組皆接受遊戲之中介精熟經驗處理，但為了檢驗遊戲中介之精熟經驗與玩家感知之精熟經驗之關係，實驗組提供不同場景以演練技巧之遊戲，控制組則未提供不同場景以演練技巧之遊戲。此實驗過程費時大約60分鐘。玩家在實驗前後於線上填寫問卷。本研究首先使用重複量數單因子變異數分析以檢驗不同性別與組別之實驗結果，接著，再以結構方程模型探討感知精熟經驗，角色依附與內在政治效能感之路徑關係。
研究結果發現：(一) 實驗組與控制組之內在政治效能感皆明顯提升，然而，實驗組之提升幅度並未顯著高於控制組。(二) 在路徑模式中，角色依附會透過感知之精熟經驗間接影響內在政治效能，而前測內在政治效能會透過感知精熟經驗間接影響後測內在政治效能，亦會對後測內在政治效能造成直接影響。
本研究有助於了解嚴肅遊戲之心理機制，其結果對於應用嚴肅遊戲設計與公民教育有重要啟示。
This study distinguished “mediated enactive experience” and “perceived mastery experience”. The former referred to the experience when a player plays an avatar in a game and the latter referred to a player’s psychological evaluations of the experience including past experience. Mediated enactive experiences is positively related to perceived mastery experiences when players play and make progresses in a game. The experiences are an essential part of a game. Yet character attachment may influence the relationship between players and avatars. If a player attaches to his or her own avatar more, he or she may perceive the mediated enactive experiences more his or her mastery experience, therefore, character attachment should positively contribute to internal political efficacy through perceived mastery experience.
A control group pretest-posttest experimental design was conducted in this study. Both groups received policy-related mediated enactive experiences from the serious game. In order to test if players who received more policy-related mediated enactive experiences will upgrade their internal political efficacy to a higher level, 113 college students were randomly assigned to one of the two groups: In the experimental group, players played an avatar with chances for practicing learned skills in three different settings; In the control group, players played an avatar without chances for practicing learned skills. Two repeated-Measure ANOVAs were conducted to analyze if there were gender and group differences on manipulation effects. Moreover, structural equation modelling (SEM) was employed to analyze the proposed path model of character attachment, perceived mastery experiences, prior and posttest internal political efficacy.
The results showed that the internal political efficacy of both groups was significantly enhanced. However, the experimental group did not upgrade to a higher level than the control group. Furthermore, in the path model, character attachment influenced posttest internal political efficacy indirectly through perceived mastery experiences; moreover, prior internal political efficacy influenced posttest internal political efficacy through perceived mastery experiences indirectly and also influenced posttest internal political efficacy directly.
To conclude, the findings of this study can help understand psychological mechanisms related to gaming as well as can be applied to civic education and serious game design in the future. |
| Reference: | Abramson, P. R., & J.H. Aldrich (1982). The Decline of Electoral Participation in America.American Political Science Review, 76, 502-21.
1.Adams, E. (2010). Fundamentals of Game Design (2nd Ed). New Riders: Berkeley, CA.
2.Allan, J.D. (2010). An introduction to videogame self-efficacy. (Master`s thesis, California State University).
3.Andsager, J. L., Bemker, V., Choi, H. L., & Torwel, V. (2006). Perceived similarity of exemplar traits and behavior. Communication Research, 33, 3–18.
4.Ashe, D. D., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2001). Shyness, loneliness, and attitude toward celebrities. Current Research in Social Psychology, 6,124-133.
5.Balch, George I. (1974). Multiple Indicators in Survey Research: The Concept ‘Sense of Political Efficacy’. Political Methodology, 1(2), 1-43.
6.Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
7.Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
8.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9.Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press.
10.Blinka, L. (2008). The Relationship of Players to Their Avatars in MMORPGs: Differences between Adolescents, Emerging Adults and Adults. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 2(1), article 5.
11.Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Academy of Marking Science, 16, 76–94
12.Bowman, L. S. (2011). The Functions of Role-Playing Games: How Participants Create Community, Solve Problems and Explore Identity. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
13.Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes (1960). The
American Voter. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
14.Campbell, A., Gurin, G., & Miller, W. E. (1954). The Voter Decides. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson and Company.
15.Chavis, D. M., & Wandersman A. (1990). Sense of community in the urban environment: Acatalyst for participation and community development. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 55-81.
16.Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of
audiences with media characters. Mass Communication and Society, 4(3), 245-264.
17.Coleman, S., Morrison, D. E., & Svennevig, M. (2008) New Media and Political efficacy.
International Journal of Communication, 2, 771-791.
18.Converse, Philip E. (1972). Change in the American electorate. In Angus Campbell and Philip E. Converse (Eds.), The human meaning of social change (pp. 338-347). New York: Russell Sage.
19.Cover, J. G. (2010). The Creation of Narrative in Tabletop Role-Playing Games. Jefferson,
NC: McFarland & Company.
20.Critcher, C. R., & Gilovich, T. (2010). Self perception theory: Inferring attitudes from mind wandering. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1255-1266.
21.Djaouti, D., Alvarez, J., & Jessel, J. P. (2011). Classifying serious games: The G/P/S model. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi: http:// www. ludoscience.com /files/ressources /classifying serious_games.pdf
22.Egenfeldt-Nielsen, Simon (2005). Beyond Edutainment: Exploring the Educational Potential of Computer Games. Copenhagen, Denmark: IT-University.
23.Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. 24.Feltovich, and R. R. Hoffman, (Eds.). Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 685-706). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
25.Feltz, D. L., Lirgg, C. D. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs of athletes, teams, and coaches. In
R.N. Singer, H. A. Hausenblas, & C. M. Janelle(Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology(2nd ed., pp. 340-361). New York, NY: John Wiley.
26.Finkel, S.E. (1985). Reciprocal Effects of Participation and Political Efficacy: A Panel Analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 29(4), 891-913.
27.Finkel, S. E., E. N. Muller &K. D. Opp. (1989). Personal influence, collective rationality,
and mass political action. American Political Science Review, 83, 885-903.
28.Garris, R., Ahlers, R., & Driskell, J. E. (2002). Games, motivation, and learning: A research
and practice model. Simulation & Gaming, 33(4), 441-467.
29.Greenberg, B. (1972). Children’s reasons for watching TV, Audience research report, VR/72/147.London: British Broadcasting Corporation.
30.Hair, J. F., Jr, Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006).Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
31.Harrison, A. W., Rainer, R. K., & Hochwrter, W. A. (1997). Testing the self-efficacy performance linkage of social-cognitive theory. The Journal of Social Psychology, 137(1), 79-87.
32.Hefner, D., Klimmt, C. & Rieger, D. (2011, May). Can serious games contribute to political education? Evidence from two field experiments. Paper presented at the 61st annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
33.Hilmert, C., Kulik, J.A., & Christenfeld, N. (2006). Positive and negative opinion modeling:
The influence of another`s similarity and dissimilarity. Journal of personality and social psychology 90 (3), 440.
34.Hoffman, L. H., & Thomson, T. L. (2009). The effect of television viewing on adolescents’ civic participation: Political efficacy as a mediating mechanism. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(1), 3-21.
35.Hoffner, C., & Cantor, J. (1991). Perceiving and responding to mass media characters. In
Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Responding to the screen: Reception and reaction processes (pp. 63–101). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
36.Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19, 215–229.
37.Huang, M. Y. & Chang, S. H. (2008). The effects of political media on voting behavior via political efficacy and political trust: Taking the example of Taiwan`s 2005 election. Taiwan journal of Democracy, 5(1), 45-85.
38.Huizinga, Johan (1955) Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Boston: Beacon Press. (Original work published 1938).
39.Jang, YB, Kim, WR, & Ryu, SH. (2010, February). An exploratory study on avatar-self similarity, mastery experience and self-efficacy in games. International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology, Phoenix Park.
40.Jin, S. A. (2010). Parasocial interaction with an avatar in second life: A typology of the self and an empirical test of the mediating role of social presence. Presence, 19(4), 321-340.
41.Jin, S. A. &Park, N. (2009). Parasocial Interaction with My Avatar: Effects of Interdependent Self-Construal and the Mediating Role of Self-Presence in an Avatar-Based Console Game, Wii. Cyber Psychology Behavior, 12. doi: www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/cpb.2008.0289
42.Juul, J. (2005).Half-real: Video Games between Real Rules and. Fictional Worlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kato, P. M. (2010).Video Games in Health Care: Closing the Gap. Review of General Psychology, 14(2), 113-121.
43.Kenski, K., & Stroud, N. J. (2006). Connections between Internet use and political efficacy, knowledge, and participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50, 173-192.
44.Ketelhut, D. J. (2007). The impact of student self-efficacy on scientific inquiry skills: An
exploratory investigation in River City, a multi-user virtual environment. The Journal
of Science Education and Technology, 16 (1), 99–111.
45.Kiili, K. (2005). Digital game-based learning: Towards an experiential gaming model. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(1), 13-24.
46.Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
47.Kolln, A.K. and Esaiasson, P. and Turper, S. (2013, September) External efficacy and
perceived responsiveness same, same or different? Paper presented at Annual conference of the Elections, Public Opinion and Parties (EPOP) specialist group, Lancaster.
48.Kramer, W. (2000). What is a game? The Games Journal, December. doi:
http://www.thegamesjournal.com/articles/WhatIsaGame.shtml
Kromand, D. (2007). Avatar Categorization. In Proceedings of DiGRA2007: Situated Play.
Tokyo, University of Tokyo, 400-406.
49.Lewis, M. L., & Weber, R. (2009). Character attachment in games as moderator for learning. In R. Ferdig (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Effective Electronic Gaming in Education (pp. 593-605). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
50.Lewis, M. L., Weber, R., & Bowman, N. D. (2008). They may be pixels, but they’re MY pixels: developing a metric of character attachment in role-playing video games. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 11(4), 515–518.
51.Maddux, J.E. (2002). Self-Efficacy: The Power of Believing You Can. In C. R. Snyder, &
S. J. Lopez (Eds.). Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 277-287). New York: Oxford University Press.
52.Maroney, K. (2001). My Entire Waking Life. The Games Journal, May. doi: www.thegamesjournal.com/articles/MyEntireWakingLife.shtml
McNamara, D.S., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from text: Effects of prior knowledge and
text coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, 247-288.
53.Meluso, A., Zheng, M., Spires, H., & Lester, J. C. (2012). Enhancing 5th graders` science
content knowledge and self-efficacy through game-based learning. Computers and Education, 59(2), 497-504.
54.Michael, D., &Chen, S. (2006). Serious games: Games that educate, train and inform. Thomson: Boston, MA.
55.Morrell, M. E. (2005). Deliberation, democratic decision-making and internal political
efficacy. Political Behavior, 27, 49–69.
56.Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet
worldwide. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
57.Orvis, K. A., Horn, D. B., & Belanich, J. (2006, July). Technical Report. Videogame-based
training success: The impact of trainee characteristics. Retrieved from http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a457396.pdf.
58.Pavlas, D. (2010). A Model of Flow and Play in Game-based Learning: The Impact of Game
Characteristics, Player Traits, and Player States. (PhD Dissertation, University of Central Florida). doi: http://www.navistudios.net/Pavlas_Davin_A_201012_PhD.pdf.
59.Peng, W., Lee, M., & Heeter, C. (2010).The effects of a serious game on role-taking and willings to help. Journal of Communication, 60, 723-742.
60.Peng, W. (2009). Design and evaluation of a computer game to promote a healthy diet for young adults. Health Communication, 24, 115-127.
61.Peng, W.(2008). The mediational role of identification in the relationship between experience mode and self-efficacy: Enactive roe-playing versus passive observation. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 11, 649-652.
62.Perse, E. M. (1986). Soap opera viewing patterns of college students and cultivation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 30, 175-193.
63.Prior, M. (2007).Post-broadcast democracy. How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
64.Prior, M. (2005). News v. entertainment: How increasing media choice widens gaps in political knowledge and turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 594–609.
65.Quintelier, E., Hooghe, M. (2011).Television and Political Participation among Adolescents: The Impact of Television Viewing, Entertainment and Information Preferences, Mass Communication and Society, 14:5, 620-642.
66.Riedel, J.L., & E. Sullivan(2001). Efficacy: Political. In Neil J. Smelser and Paul B. Baltes (Eds), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp.4353-4356). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
67.Ritterfeld, U., Cody, M. J., &Vorderer, P. (Eds.). (2009). Serious games: Mechanism and effects. New York: Routledge.
68.Rodriguez, H. (2006). The Playful and the Serious: An approximation to Huizinga’s Homo Ludens’ Game Studies. The International Journal of Computer Game Research, 6(1). doi: http://gamestudies.org/0601/articles/rodriges.
69.Rovniak, L. S. (2007). Operationalizing mastery experiences in e-mail-based fitness walking
programs. US: ProQuest Information & Learning.
70.Salen, K. and E. Zimmerman (2003). Rules of play. Game design fundamentals. Cambridge,MA: The MIT Press.
71.Singhal, A., & Rogers, E. M. (1999). Entertainment education: A communication strategy for social change. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
72.Susi, T., Johannesson, M., & Backlund, P. (2007, February 5). Technical Report. Serious games - An overview. Retrieved from http://www.scangames.eu/downloads/HS-IKI-TR-07 001_PER.pdf.
73.Starks K (2014) Cognitive behavioral game design: a unified model for designing serious games. Front. Psychol. 5:28. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00028
74.Taiwan`s Market Intelligence & Consulting Institute(2012). Global Video Game Market 2011-2015. doi: http://www.marketresearchreports.biz/analysis-details/global-video-game-market-2011-2015.
75.Thompson, D. (2012). Designing Serious Video Games for Health Behavior Change: Current Status and Future Directions. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 6 (4): 807- 811.
76.Verhagen, H., Noriega, P., & D’Inverno M.(2013). Towards a Design Framework for Controlled Hybrid Social Games. In H. Verhagen, P. Noriega, T. Balke, M. de Vos
(Eds.), Social Coordination: Principles, Artefacts and Theories (SOCIAL.PATH), AISB symposium (pp. 83-89). Exeter, UK: University of Exeter.
77.Zyda, M. (2005). From Visual Simulation to Virtual Reality to Games. Computer, 38 (9), 25-32. |
| Description: | 博士
國立政治大學
新聞研究所
97451504
103 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0974515041 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [新聞學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 504101.pdf | 1591Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 84 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
