IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v48y2017i1p131-152.html

Designing a Digital Medical Management Training Simulator Using Distributed Cognition Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Jonas Rybing
  • Erik Prytz
  • Johan Hornwall
  • Heléne Nilsson
  • Carl-Oscar Jonson
  • Magnus Bang

Abstract

Background . Training of medical professionals is important to improve care during mass-causality events. Therefore, it is essential to extend knowledge on how to design valid and usable simulation-based training environments. Purpose . This article investigates how distributed cognition and simulation theory concepts can guide design of simulation-based training environments. We present the design and user evaluation of DigEmergo , a simulator for training and assessing emergency medicine management. Design approach . A prior Distributed Cognition in Teamwork (DiCoT) analysis of the Emergo Train System (ETS) guided the design process. The design objective of DigEmergo was to be useful, usable, retain distributed cognition features of ETS, and strengthen validity and output reliability. Evaluation . Eight expert ETS instructors participated in a formative system evaluation. The Technology Assessment Model (TAM) questionnaire was used to measure usefulness and ease of use. Observations and post-test interviews were conducted to contextualize the measures. Results . The results showed that DigEmergo was perceived as somewhat to quite useful and somewhat easy to use. Overall, expert users considered DigEmergo promising and successful in retaining core ETS features. Conclusions . The study indicates that a design methodology based on distributed cognition and simulation theory can be successfully combined to guide simulator (re)design and strengthen simulator validity.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonas Rybing & Erik Prytz & Johan Hornwall & Heléne Nilsson & Carl-Oscar Jonson & Magnus Bang, 2017. "Designing a Digital Medical Management Training Simulator Using Distributed Cognition Theory," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(1), pages 131-152, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:48:y:2017:i:1:p:131-152
    DOI: 10.1177/1046878116676511
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1046878116676511
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1046878116676511?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. Andrew Hale Feinstein & Hugh M. Cannon, 2002. "Constructs of Simulation Evaluation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 33(4), pages 425-440, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hugh M. Cannon & Manfred Schwaiger, 2005. "The role of company reputation in business simulations," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 36(2), pages 188-202, June.
    2. Martijn C. Koops & Ineke Verheul & Rinus Tiesma & Cees-Willem de Boer & Ruben T. Koeweiden, 2016. "Learning Differences Between 3D vs. 2D Entertainment and Educational Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(2), pages 159-178, April.
    3. Andrew Hale Feinstein & Hugh M. Cannon, 2003. "A Hermeneutical Approach to External Validation of Simulation Models," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 34(2), pages 186-197, June.
    4. Sebastiaan Meijer, 2015. "The Power of Sponges," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(5), pages 512-535, October.
    5. Precha Thavikulwat, 2004. "The Architecture of Computerized Business Gaming Simulations," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 35(2), pages 242-269, June.
    6. Peter Korfiatis & Robert Cloutier & Teresa Zigh, 2015. "Model-Based Concept of Operations Development Using Gaming Simulation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(5), pages 471-488, October.
    7. Martin S. Schilling & Matthew A. Mulford & Ingmar R. Geiger, 2006. "Collective bargaining as a two-level game: Direct learner-expert interactions," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 37(3), pages 326-338, September.
    8. G. van Lankveld & E. Sehic & J. C. Lo & S. A. Meijer, 2017. "Assessing Gaming Simulation Validity for Training Traffic Controllers," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(2), pages 219-235, April.
    9. Joseph Wolfe & Steven Gold, 2007. "A study of business game stock price algorithms," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 38(2), pages 153-167, June.
    10. Dana Tschannen & Joseph D. Yaksich & Michelle Aebersold & Antonia Villarruel, 2016. "Fidelity After SECOND LIFE Facilitator Training in a Sexual Risk Behavior Intervention," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(1), pages 130-150, February.
    11. Katherine A. Wilson & Wendy L. Bedwell & Elizabeth H. Lazzara & Eduardo Salas & C. Shawn Burke & Jamie L. Estock & Kara L. Orvis & Curtis Conkey, 2009. "Relationships Between Game Attributes and Learning Outcomes," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 40(2), pages 217-266, April.
    12. Precha Thavikulwat & Sharma Pillutla, 2010. "A constructivist approach to designing business simulations for strategic management," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 41(2), pages 208-230, April.
    13. Precha Thavikulwat, 2009. "Social Choice in a Computer-Assisted Simulation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 40(4), pages 488-512, August.
    14. Mathieu Dionnet & Marcel Kuper & Ali Hammani & Patrice Garin, 2008. "Combining role-playing games and policy simulation exercises: An experience with Moroccan smallholder farmers," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 39(4), pages 498-514, December.
    15. 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.
    16. Jimmy Kyaw Tun & Guillaume Alinier & Jessica Tang & Roger L. Kneebone, 2015. "Redefining Simulation Fidelity for Healthcare Education," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(2), pages 159-174, April.
    17. Jerry Gosen & John Washbush, 2004. "A Review of Scholarship on Assessing Experiential Learning Effectiveness," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 35(2), pages 270-293, June.
    18. Dirk-Jan Koch, 2011. "NGOs—Cooperation and Competition," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 42(6), pages 690-710, December.
    19. Martin A. Lynch & Richard J. Tunstall, 2008. "When worlds collide: Developing game-design partnerships in universities," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 39(3), pages 379-398, September.
    20. 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.

    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:48:y:2017:i:1:p:131-152. 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.