The%20Effect%20of%20Navigation%20Maps%20on%20Problem%20Solving%20Tasks%20Instantiated%20in%20a%20Computer-Based%20Video%20Game

1
The Effect of Navigation Maps on Problem
SolvingTasks Instantiated in a Computer-Based
Video Game

• Committee Members Dr. Harold ONeil (Chair)
• Dr. Richard Clark
• Dr. Edward Kazlauskas
• Dr. Janice Schafrik
• Dr. Yanis Yortsos (Outside Member)
• Richard Wainess
• Dissertation Proposal Presented to the
• Faculty of the Graduate School
• University of Southern California
• April 27, 2004

Slide 1 of 16
2
Research Questions

• Will the problem solving performance of
  participants who use a navigation map in a 3-D,
  occluded, computer-based video game (i.e.,
  SafeCracker) be better than the problem solving
  performance of those who do not use the map (the
  control group)?
• Will the continued motivation of participants who
  use a navigation map in a 3-D, occluded,
  computer-based video game (i.e., SafeCracker) be
  greater than the continued motivation of those
  who do not use the navigation map (the control
  group)?

Slide 2 of 16
3
Cognitive Load Theory

• Auditory/Verbal and Visual/Spatial
  Channels/Memory(Baddeley,1986 Mayer Moreno,
  2003)
• Limited Working Memory (Brunken et al., 2003)
• 7 /- 2 (Miller, 1956)
• Possibly only 2 or 3 novel elements (Paas et al.,
  2003)
• Unlimited Long-Term Memory (Mousavi et al., 1995)
• Cognitive Load mental capacity imposed on
  working memory (Sweller Chandler, 1994)
• Controlled by schema development Automation

Mayer Moreno, 2001
Working Memory
Audio/Visual Info
Sensory Memory
Selecting Words
Words
Ears
Prior Knowledge
Integrating
Selecting Images
Pictures
Eyes
Slide 3 of 16
4
Cognitive Load Theory (contd)

• Intrinsic Cognitive Load The process of
  integrating new information with existing
  knowledge e.g., working memory, long term
  memory, metacognition (Brunken et al., 2003 Paas
  et al., 2003).
• Germane Cognitive Load The cognitive load
  required to process intrinsic load (Renkl
  Atkinson, 2003).
• Imposed by the environmental requirements related
  to learning (e.g., instruction, reading,
  searching, problem solving, interface elements)
• Extraneous Cognitive Load Imposed by an
  unnecessary stimuli e.g., interface artwork,
  extraneous sounds (Brunken et al. 2003).
• Seductive Details (Mayer et al., 2001 Schraw,
  1998).
• Learner Control pacing navigation (Barab et
  al., 1999 Cutmore et al., 2000)
• Mixed or Negative Results (Bernard et al., 2003
  Niemiec et al., 1996)

Slide 4 of 16
5
Games and Simulations

• Games rules, constraints/privileges,
  imaginative, linear (Gredler, 1996)
• Simulation-Games combination of games and
  simulations (Gredler, 1996)
• Motivation in games fantasy, control
  manipulation, challenge complexity, curiosity,
  competition, feedback, fun

Slide 5 of 16
6
Games and SimulationsOutcomes with Games and
Simulations

• Positive outcomes
• Numerous knowledge outcomes attributed to games
  and simulations
• Warning about anecdotal and descriptive
  evaluations (Leemkuil et al., 2003 Wolfe, 1997)
• Generalizable skills outcomes(Day et al. 2001
  Green Bavelier, 2003 Greenfield et al., 1994)
• Negative or null outcomes
• Reviews and meta-analyses cite mixed or negative
  reviews(Dekkers Donatti, 1981 Druckman, 1995)
• Positive attitude toward games doesnt
  necessarily equal learning(Brougere, 1999 Salas
  et al., 1998 Salomon, 1984)
• Outcomes related to Instructional Design, not
  games/simulations(de Jong van Joolingen, 1998
  Garris et al., 2002 Gredler, 1996 Leemkuil et
  al., 2003 Thiagarajan, 1998)

Slide 6 of 16
7
Scaffolding(including Graphical Scaffolding)

• Instructional methods
• Should keep cognitive load low (Clark, 2003)
• External methods which replace internal processes
  (Clark, 2001)
• Scaffolding is an instructional method
• Scaffolding provides support during
  learning(Allen, 1997 Chalmers, 2003 van
  Merrienboer et al., 2002, 2003)
• Graphical Scaffolding
• Includes maps and menus as advance organizers
  (Jones et al., 1995)
• Maps supported by researchers as visual aids and
  organizers(Benbasat Todd, 1993 Chou Lin,
  1998 Ruddle et al., 1999)
• Should be used for visual tasks (Mayer et al.,
  2002)

Slide 7 of 16
8
Navigation Maps

• Navigation maps effective in 3-D, occluded,
  environments with simple problem solving tasks
  (Galimberti, 2001)
• Not yet examined
• Navigation in 3D, occluded, environments
• with complex problem solving tasks

Slide 8 of 16
9
Navigation Map
Floor Plan of Mansions First Floor from
SafeCracker
Slide 9 of 16
Slide 9 of 16
10
Research Hypotheses

• Problem Solving
• Hypothesis 1 Navigation maps will produce a
  significant increase in content understanding
  compared to the control group.
• Hypothesis 2 Navigation maps will produce a
  significant increase in problem solving strategy
  retention compared to the control group.
• Hypothesis 3 Navigation maps will produce a
  significant increase in problem solving strategy
  transfer compared to the control group.
• Hypothesis 4 There will be no significant
  difference in self-regulation between the
  navigation map group and the control group.
  However, it is expected that higher levels of
  self-regulation will be associated with better
  performance.
• Motivation
• Hypothesis 5 Navigation maps will produce a
  significantly greater amount of optional
  continued game play compared to the control group.

Slide 10 of 16
11
Method

• Design
• Experimental Random Assign to Treatment or
  Control Group
• Treatment receives navigation map Control Group
  doesnt
• Segregated group sessions all Treatment or all
  Control
• Participants
• 60 males females, ages 18-25, undergraduates at
  USC
• No prior experience playing SafeCracker
• Procedure (90 minutes)
• Demographic Information Self-Regulation
  Questionnaire
• Introduced to Knowledge Map
• Handout Navigation Map to treatment group only
• Introduced to the game (interface, opening locks,
  finding objects)
• Pretest Knowledge map

Slide 11 of 16
12
Method (contd)

• Procedure (contd)
• Play game (first set of rooms)
• Intermediate Test
• Knowledge Map Retention/Transfer Questions Task
  Check-List
• Play Game (second set of rooms)
• Post Test
• Knowledge Map Retention/Transfer Questions, Task
  Check-List
• Debriefing
• Optional playing time (up to 30 minutes)
• Measures
• Problem Solving (ONeil, 1999)
• Content Understanding
• Problem Solving Strategies
• Self Regulation
• Motivation
• Verbalized desire to continue playing
• Amount of free play minutes

Slide 12 of 16
13
Sample SafeCracker Knowledge Map
desk
brochure
contains
contains
results from
part of
contains
clue
room
safe
causes
contains
contains
key
results from
contains
results from
contains
crack
causes
part of
uses
books
used for
causes
used for
tool
map
direction
used for
Slide 13 of 16
14
Instrument Problem SolvingRetention Transfer
Questions

• Retention questions
• List how you opened the safe in the first room.
• List how you opened the safe in the second room.
• Transfer questions
• List some ways to improve the way you solved
  opening the safe in room 1.
• List some ways to improve the way you solved
  opening the safe in room 2.
• List some ways to improve the way you navigated
  from room 1 to room 2.

Slide 14 of 16
15
Instrument Self-RegulationSelf-Regulation
Questionnaire

• Based on ONeil (1999) Problem Solving Model
• Trait self-regulation questionnaire (ONeil
  Herl, 1998).
• 32 Questions 8 each of four measures
• planning
• self-checking/monitoring
• self-efficacy
• effort

Slide 15 of 16
16
Data Analysis

• Descriptive statistics Means, Standard
  Deviation, etc., for all measures
• T-Tests for the following
• Hypothesis 1 Navigation maps will produce a
  significant increase in content understanding
  compared to the control group.
• Hypothesis 2 Navigation maps will produce a
  significant increase in problem solving strategy
  retention compared to the control group.
• Hypothesis 3 Navigation maps will produce a
  significant increase in problem solving strategy
  transfer compared to the control group.
• Hypothesis 5 Navigation maps will produce a
  significantly greater amount of optional
  continued game play compared to the control
  group.
• Pearsons Correlation Effect of the four
  self-regulation variables (planning,
  self-checking/monitoring, self-efficacy, and
  effort) on content understanding and problem
  solving strategies.
• Hypothesis 4 There will be no significant
  difference in self-regulation between the
  navigation map group and the control group.
  However, it is expected that higher levels of
  self-regulation will be associated with better
  performance.

Slide 16 of 16
17
BACK UP
Slide 17
18
Problem Solving Assessment
ONeil (1999) Problem Solving Model
Slide 18
19
Navigation Maps

• Navigation Tracking ones position in an
  environment to arrive at a destination (Cutmore
  et al., 2000)
• Occlusion when a path is blocked visually
  (Cutmore et al., 2000)
• Navigation maps effective for occluded 3-D
  navigation(Cutmore et al. 2000 Dempsey, 2002)
• Navigation maps effective in 2-D environments
  with complex problem solving tasks (Baylor, 2001
  Chou Lin, 1998 Chou et al., 2000)
• Navigation maps effective in 3-D occluded
  environments with simple problem solving tasks
  (Galimberti, 2001)
• Not yet examined
• Navigation in 3D, occluded, environments
• with complex problem solving tasks

Slide 19
20
Instrument Content UnderstandingKnowledge
Mapping Software
Slide 20
21
Problem Solving Assessment

• Based on ONeils (1999) Problem Solving Model
• Requires content understanding, problem solving
  strategies, self-regulation
• Transfer questions are alternative to transfer
  tasks (Moreno Mayer, 1998)
• Declarative knowledge measured by retention (Day
  et al., 2001)
• Knowledge map concepts and links (Schau
  Mattern, 1997)
• Reflects the organization of knowledge (Day et
  al., 2001)
• Reliable and efficient measure of Content
  Understanding(Herl et al., 1999 ONeil, 1999
  Ruiz-Primo et al., 1997 Schacter et al., 1999)
• Predictive of both retention and transfer (Day et
  al., 2001)
• Reliable measure of Problem Solving Strategies
  (Baker Mayer, 1999)

Slide 21
22
Problem Solving Assessment (contd)

• Measuring Problem Solving Strategies
• Domain general and specific (Alexander, 1992
  Bruning et al., 1999)
• Knowledge Mapping (Baker Mayer, 1999)
• Problem solving questions
• Positively correlated with retention and transfer
  (Mayer Baker, 1998)
• Measuring Self-Regulation
• Includes Metacognition Self-efficacy (ONeil,
  1999)
• Metacognition planning self-checking (Pintrich
  DeGroot, 1990)
• Self-efficacy mental effort and self-efficacy
  (Zimmerman, 1994, 2000)
• Trait self-regulation questionnaire (Hong
  ONeil, 2001)
• Includes planning, self-checking, mental effort,
  and self-efficacy
• 32 questions 8 for each of the four
  sub-categories

Slide 22