IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v41y2010i5p705-723.html

Educational Validity of Business Gaming Simulation: A Research Methodology Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew J. Stainton

    (University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, UK, a.stainton@soton.ac.uk)

  • Johnnie E. Johnson

    (University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, UK, j.johnson@soton.ac.uk)

  • Edward P. Borodzicz

    (University of Portsmouth, Portland Street, Portsmouth, UK, edward.borodzicz@port.ac.uk)

Abstract

Many past educational validity studies of business gaming simulation, and more specifically total enterprise simulation, have been inconclusive. Studies have focused on the weaknesses of business gaming simulation; which is often regarded as an educational medium that has limitations regarding learning effectiveness. However, no attempts have been made to provide guidelines for assessing educational validity in terms of building, implementing, and validating business gaming simulation. Accordingly, this study has combined literature on learning, simulation design, and research methods to formulate a methodology to assess the educational validity of total enterprise simulation; the concepts of which can be applied more broadly to business gaming simulation. The authors propose that the framework introduced within this article can provide a foundation for future educational validity studies that can assist simulation designers to implement valuable and powerful simulation learning media in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew J. Stainton & Johnnie E. Johnson & Edward P. Borodzicz, 2010. "Educational Validity of Business Gaming Simulation: A Research Methodology Framework," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 41(5), pages 705-723, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:41:y:2010:i:5:p:705-723
    DOI: 10.1177/1046878109353467
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1046878109353467
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1046878109353467?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timo Lainema & Olli-Pekka Hilmola, 2005. "Learn more, better and faster: computer-based simulation gaming of production and operations," International Journal of Business Performance Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(1), pages 34-59.
    2. A. J. Faria & William J. Wellington, 2005. "Validating business gaming: Business game conformity with PIMS findings," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 36(2), pages 259-273, June.
    3. A. J. Faria, 2001. "The Changing Nature of Business Simulation/ Gaming Research: A Brief History," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 32(1), pages 97-110, March.
    4. J. Michael Spector, 2000. "System Dynamics and Interactive Learning Environments: Lessons Learned and Implications for the Future," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 31(4), pages 528-535, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bindu Kulkarni & Ranjan Banerjee & Rajasekaran Raghunathan, 2022. "Why Students Should Be Taught Differently: Learner Characteristics, Learning Styles and Simulation Performance," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 53(1), pages 56-74, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jan Hense & Willy Christian Kriz & Joseph Wolfe, 2009. "Putting Theory-Oriented Evaluation Into Practice," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 40(1), pages 110-133, February.
    2. Geertje Bekebrede & Julia Lo & Heide Lukosch, 2015. "Understanding Complex Systems Through Mental Models and Shared Experiences," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(5), pages 536-562, October.
    3. Hassan Qudrat-Ullah, 2007. "Debriefing can reduce misperceptions of feedback: The case of renewable resource management," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 38(3), pages 382-397, September.
    4. Timo Lainema, 2009. "Perspective Making," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 40(1), pages 48-67, February.
    5. Eva D. Regnier & Cameron A. MacKenzie, 2019. "The Hurricane Decision Simulator: A Tool for Marine Forces in New Orleans to Practice Operations Management in Advance of a Hurricane," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 103-120, January.
    6. Lauri-Matti Palmunen & Elina Pelto & Anni Paalumäki & Timo Lainema, 2013. "Formation of Novice Business Students’ Mental Models Through Simulation Gaming," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 44(6), pages 846-868, December.
    7. Tsolakis, Naoum & Zissis, Dimitris & Tjahjono, Benny, 2023. "Scrutinising the interplay between governance and resilience in supply chain management: A systems thinking framework," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 164-180.
    8. Sol Klapztein & Carla Cipolla, 2016. "From Game Design to Service Design," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(5), pages 566-598, October.
    9. Precha Thavikulwat & Sharma Pillutla, 2010. "A constructivist approach to designing business simulations for strategic management," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 41(2), pages 208-230, April.
    10. PÃ¥l I. Davidsen & J. Michael Spector, 2015. "Critical Reflections on System Dynamics and Simulation/Gaming," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(3-4), pages 430-444, June.
    11. Giovanni Cunico & Eirini Aivazidou & Edoardo Mollona, 2022. "System dynamics gamification: A proposal for shared principles," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 723-733, July.
    12. Tibor Kiss & Roland Schmuck, 2021. "A Longitudinal Study of the Skills and Attitudes Conveyed by Two Business Simulation Games in Pécs, Hungary," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 52(4), pages 435-464, August.
    13. Willy Christian Kriz & Jan Ulrich Hense, 2006. "Theory-oriented evaluation for the design of and research in gaming and simulation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 37(2), pages 268-283, June.
    14. Jerry Gosen & John Washbush, 2004. "A Review of Scholarship on Assessing Experiential Learning Effectiveness," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 35(2), pages 270-293, June.
    15. A. J. Faria & William J. Wellington, 2005. "Validating business gaming: Business game conformity with PIMS findings," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 36(2), pages 259-273, June.
    16. Willy C. Kriz & Eberhard Auchter, 2016. "10 Years of Evaluation Research Into Gaming Simulation for German Entrepreneurship and a New Study on Its Long-Term Effects," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(2), pages 179-205, April.
    17. Philip H. Anderson & Leigh Lawton, 2009. "Business Simulations and Cognitive Learning," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 40(2), pages 193-216, April.
    18. Federico Barnabè, 2015. "Managerial Myopia in Mismanaging Renewable Resources," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(6), pages 763-791, December.
    19. Herbert H. Wideman & Ronald D. Owston & Christine Brown & Andre Kushniruk & Francis Ho & Kevin C. Pitts, 2007. "Unpacking the potential of educational gaming: A new tool for gaming research," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 38(1), pages 10-30, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:41:y:2010:i:5:p:705-723. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.