IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v48y2017i2p219-235.html

Assessing Gaming Simulation Validity for Training Traffic Controllers

Author

Listed:
  • G. van Lankveld
  • E. Sehic
  • J. C. Lo
  • S. A. Meijer

Abstract

Background. The Dutch railway company ProRail is performing large-scale capacity upgrades to their infrastructure network. As part of these upgrades, ProRail uses gaming simulations to help prepare train traffic controllers for new infrastructure situations. Researching the validity of these gaming simulations is essential, since the conclusions drawn from gaming simulation use may result in decisions with large financial and social impact for ProRail and Dutch train passengers. Aim. In this article, we aim to investigate the validity of the gaming simulations for training traffic controllers for new situations in rail infrastructure. We also aim to contribute to the discussion on the minimum level of fidelity required to develop and conduct gaming simulations in a valid way. Method. We investigate the validity by using training sessions in conjunction with questionnaires . We based the approach and questionnaires on the earlier work of Raser. Results. Our results show that the validity of the gaming simulation ranges from medium to good. They also show that while the fidelity of the gaming simulation is not like the real-world operating conditions, this does not reduce validity to low levels. Conclusions. We conclude that the gaming simulation used in this study was of medium to good validity. We also conclude that maximum fidelity is not required in order to run a valid gaming simulation session.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:48:y:2017:i:2:p:219-235
    DOI: 10.1177/1046878116683578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1046878116683578
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1046878116683578?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. Joris Dormans, 2011. "Beyond Iconic Simulation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 42(5), pages 610-631, October.
    2. 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)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Timothy C. Clapper, 2017. "Simulation and Gaming can be Used to Determine Validity While Engaging in Collaborative Environments," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(2), pages 175-177, April.

    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. Sebastiaan Meijer, 2015. "The Power of Sponges," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(5), pages 512-535, October.
    2. Hugh M. Cannon & Manfred Schwaiger, 2005. "The role of company reputation in business simulations," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 36(2), pages 188-202, June.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    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. Joseph Wolfe & Steven Gold, 2007. "A study of business game stock price algorithms," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 38(2), pages 153-167, June.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Precha Thavikulwat & Sharma Pillutla, 2010. "A constructivist approach to designing business simulations for strategic management," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 41(2), pages 208-230, April.
    12. 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.
    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:2:p:219-235. 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.