IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v39y2008i4p465-497.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Druckman

    (University of Queensland, Australia, & George Mason University, USA)

  • Noam Ebner

    (Tel-Hai College, Israel, & Sabanci University, Turkey, noam@tachlit.net)

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Druckman & Noam Ebner, 2008. "Onstage or behind the scenes? Relative learning benefits of simulation role-play and design," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 39(4), pages 465-497, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:39:y:2008:i:4:p:465-497
    DOI: 10.1177/1046878107311377
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1046878107311377
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1046878107311377?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:39:y:2008:i:4:p:465-497. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.