Fri, Jun 6, 2025
[Archive]
Volume 15, Issue 47 (2022)
JMED 2022, 15(47): 36-42 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.TUMS.MEDICINE.REC.1400.358
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Alizadeh M, Heidari F, Mirzazadeh A, Peighambardoust S S, Beheshtizadeh F, Angouraj Taghavi A, et al . Comparing flow experience of medical students in cognitive, behavioral, and social educational games: A quasi-experimental study. JMED 2022; 15 (47) :36-42
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-1617-en.html
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-1617-en.html
Maryam Alizadeh *1 
, Fatemeh Heidari2 , Azim Mirzazadeh3 , Sana Sadat Peighambardoust4 , Fatemeh Beheshtizadeh4 , Azadeh Angouraj Taghavi4 , Alireza Saramad4 , Leila Janani5 , Gholamreza Hassanzadeh6
, Fatemeh Heidari2 , Azim Mirzazadeh3 , Sana Sadat Peighambardoust4 , Fatemeh Beheshtizadeh4 , Azadeh Angouraj Taghavi4 , Alireza Saramad4 , Leila Janani5 , Gholamreza Hassanzadeh6
1- Education Development Center (EDC), and Medical Education Department, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , alizade.aban@gmail.com
2- M.Sc of medical education, Virtual University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3- 3MD, Professor at Department of Internal Medicine and Department of Medical Education, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4- School of medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
5- Dep. of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
6- Dep. of Neuroscience and Addiction studies, School of Advanced technologies in medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
2- M.Sc of medical education, Virtual University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3- 3MD, Professor at Department of Internal Medicine and Department of Medical Education, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4- School of medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
5- Dep. of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
6- Dep. of Neuroscience and Addiction studies, School of Advanced technologies in medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract: (2298 Views)
Background & Objective: This study contributed to the current body of literature on educational games by comparing medical students’ flow experience in three types of educational games developed based on three learning theories: behavioral, cognitive, and social.
Materials & Methods: A quasi-experimental repeated measure design was employed. A total of 39 second-year medical students played three neuroanatomy educational games developed based on cognitive, behavioral, and social learning theories. At the end of each game, students completed a standard flow experience scale developed by Pearce et al. (2005) with Content Validity Ratio=0.65 and Alpha=0.76 in our context. The repeated-measures ANOVA was used for the comparisons of three games.
Results: No evidence was found to indicate that the flow experience of medical students differs when they play cognitive, behavioral, or social educational games (P=0.40). The repeated measure test showed that the mean of students’ scores on subdomains of flow experience (Enjoyment (P=0.10), engagement (P=0.46), and control (P=0.82) did not differ significantly in three different games.
Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, it was observed that the different dimensions of flow (i.e., engagement, control, and enjoyment) are not statistically significant in the three types of games. It seems that all three types of games have brought a high level of engagement, a sense of control over learning, and a high level of enjoyment for students. However, considering the lessons learned from this intervention, the social game could be seen as a “learning ground” for enabling a host of skills, including the ability to engage in shared decision-making in teams.
Materials & Methods: A quasi-experimental repeated measure design was employed. A total of 39 second-year medical students played three neuroanatomy educational games developed based on cognitive, behavioral, and social learning theories. At the end of each game, students completed a standard flow experience scale developed by Pearce et al. (2005) with Content Validity Ratio=0.65 and Alpha=0.76 in our context. The repeated-measures ANOVA was used for the comparisons of three games.
Results: No evidence was found to indicate that the flow experience of medical students differs when they play cognitive, behavioral, or social educational games (P=0.40). The repeated measure test showed that the mean of students’ scores on subdomains of flow experience (Enjoyment (P=0.10), engagement (P=0.46), and control (P=0.82) did not differ significantly in three different games.
Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, it was observed that the different dimensions of flow (i.e., engagement, control, and enjoyment) are not statistically significant in the three types of games. It seems that all three types of games have brought a high level of engagement, a sense of control over learning, and a high level of enjoyment for students. However, considering the lessons learned from this intervention, the social game could be seen as a “learning ground” for enabling a host of skills, including the ability to engage in shared decision-making in teams.
Article Type : Orginal Research |
Received: 2022/05/26 | Accepted: 2022/11/25 | Published: 2022/12/19
Received: 2022/05/26 | Accepted: 2022/11/25 | Published: 2022/12/19
References
1. Abdulmajed H, Park YS, Tekian A. Assessment of educational games for health professions: A systematic review of trends and outcomes. Medical Teacher. 2015;37(sup1):S27-S32. [DOI]
2. Aksoy E. Comparing the effects on learning outcomes of tablet-based and virtual reality–based serious gaming modules for basic life support training: randomized trial. JMIR serious games. 2019;7(2):e13442. [DOI]
3. Beylefeld AA, Struwig MC. A gaming approach to learning medical microbiology: students’ experiences of flow. Medical Teacher. 2007;29(9-10):933-40. [DOI]
4. Cheng M-T, Annetta L. Students’ learning outcomes and learning experiences through playing a Serious Educational Game. Journal of Biological Education. 2012;46(4):203-13. [DOI]
5. Ober CP. Examination outcomes following use of card games for learning radiographic image quality in veterinary medicine. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education. 2018;45(1):140-4. [DOI]
6. Teng YY, Chou WC, Cheng MT. Learning immunology in a game: Learning outcomes, the use of player characters, immersion experiences and visual attention distributions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2020. [DOI]
7. Perttula A, Kiili K, Lindstedt A, Tuomi P. Flow experience in game based learning–a systematic literature review. International Journal of Serious Games. 2017;4(1):57-72. [DOI]
8. Erhel S, Jamet E. Improving instructions in educational computer games: Exploring the relations between goal specificity, flow experience and learning outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior. 2019;91:106-14. [DOI]
9. Peifer C, Tan J. The psychophysiology of flow experience. Advances in flow research: Springer; 2021. p. 191-230.
10. Gorbanev I, Agudelo-Londoño S, González RA, Cortes A, Pomares A, Delgadillo V, et al. A systematic review of serious games in medical education: quality of evidence and pedagogical strategy. Medical Education Online. 2018;23(1):1438718. [DOI]
11. Taylor DCM, Hamdy H. Adult learning theories: Implications for learning and teaching in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 83. Medical Teacher. 2013;35(11):e1561-e72. [DOI]
12. Tsopra R, Courtine M, Sedki K, Eap D, Cabal M, Cohen S, et al. AntibioGame®: A serious game for teaching medical students about antibiotic use. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2020;136:104074. [DOI]
13. Palee P, Wongta N, Khwanngern K, Jitmun W, Choosri N. Serious Game for Teaching Undergraduate Medical Students in Cleft lip and Palate Treatment Protocol. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2020;141:104166. [DOI]
14. Agudelo-Londoño S, Gorbanev I, Delgadillo V, Muñoz Ó, Cortes A, González RA, et al. Development and Evaluation of a Serious Game for Teaching ICD-10 Diagnosis Coding to Medical Students. Games for health journal. 2019;8(5):349-56. [DOI]
15. Felszeghy S, Pasonen-Seppänen S, Koskela A, Nieminen P, Härkönen K, Paldanius KMA, et al. Using online game-based platforms to improve student performance and engagement in histology teaching. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19(1):273. [DOI]
16. Hill RV, Nassrallah Z. A Game-Based Approach to Teaching and Learning Anatomy of the Liver and Portal Venous System. MedEdPORTAL. 2018;14:10696. [DOI]
17. Larche CJ, Dixon MJ. The relationship between the skill-challenge balance, game expertise, flow and the urge to keep playing complex mobile games. Journal of behavioral addictions. 2020;9(3):606-16. [DOI]
18. Yeh YC, Chen SY, Rega EM, Lin CS. Mindful Learning Experience Facilitates Mastery Experience Through Heightened Flow and Self-Efficacy in Game-Based Creativity Learning. Frontiers in psychology. 2019;10:1593. [DOI]
19. Maciejewski ML. Quasi-experimental design. Biostatistics & Epidemiology. 2020;4(1):38-47. [DOI]
20. Pearce JM, Ainley M, Howard S. The ebb and flow of online learning. Computers in Human Behavior. 2005;21(5):745-71. [DOI]
21. Artino Jr AR, La Rochelle JS, Dezee KJ, Gehlbach H. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87. Medical Teacher. 2014;36(6):463-74. [DOI]
22. Colby R, Colby RS. Game design documentation: Four perspectives from independent game studios. Communication Design Quarterly Review. 2019 Nov 15;7(3):5-15. [DOI]
23. Akl EA, Pretorius RW, Sackett K, Erdley WS, Bhoopathi PS, Alfarah Z, et al. The effect of educational games on medical students’ learning outcomes: A systematic review: BEME Guide No 14. Medical Teacher. 2010;32(1):16-27. [DOI]
24. Gall MD, Gall JP, Borg WR. Educational Research: an Introduction. Pearson Education; 2003.
25. Kim J, Jung J, Kim S. The relationship of game elements, fun and flow. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2015;8(8):405-11. [DOI]
26. Barzilai S, Blau I. Scaffolding game-based learning: Impact on learning achievements, perceived learning, and game experiences. Computers & Education. 2014;70:65-79. [DOI]
27. Admiraal W, Huizenga J, Akkerman S, Ten Dam G. The concept of flow in collaborative game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior. 2011;27(3):1185-94. [DOI]
28. Parmelee D, Michaelsen LK, Cook S, Hudes PD. Team-based learning: a practical guide: AMEE guide no. 65. Medical Teacher. 2012;34(5):e275-e87. [DOI]
29. Shiroma PR, Massa AA, Alarcon RD. Using game format to teach psychopharmacology to medical students. Medical Teacher. 2011;33(2):156-60. [DOI]
30. Parmelee D, Roman B, Overman I, Alizadeh M. The lecture-free curriculum: Setting the stage for life-long learning: AMEE Guide No. 135. Medical Teacher. 2020;42(9):962-9. [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
