Emotional reactions of different interface formats: Comparing digital and traditional board games

Abstract

Some games provide both traditional board games and digital versions at the same time in the market. Why the rise of virtual games has not forced traditional physical board games to disappear? Do traditional physical games evoke different emotional reactions and interpersonal relationships? This article explored the subjects' preferences toward traditional and digital versions of the same game and investigated social interaction while playing games. Based on Norman's three emotional design levels-visceral, behavioral, and reflective levels-this study examined players' satisfaction degree. This study also applied Positive and Negative Affect Schedule to measure subjects' emotional reactions. Monopoly and Jenga games were selected as stimuli. A total of 77 subjects received tests of three different interface formats (physical, desktop, and tablet) and then filled out the questionnaire. The findings successfully evidenced the significant differences between digital and traditional board games. The statistical results indicated that satisfaction degrees of digital games declined in visceral, behavioral, and reflective levels. Traditional games not only evoked users' stronger emotional reactions but also received higher preferences. Traditional games could improve interpersonal relationships as well.

A Cognitive-Based Board Game With Augmented Reality for Older Adults: Development and Usability Study

“…Though digital games are becoming more prolific, studies seem to suggest that board games can attain emotional satisfaction more effectively. Using Norman’s 3 emotional design levels—the visceral level, behavioral level, and reflective level—as a measure [ 32 ], a study comparing video games to board games found that the satisfaction levels declined on all 3 levels for study participants when playing digital games [ 33 ]. Another study found that older populations specifically are less drawn to video games than young adults and are more inclined to play board games [ 26 ].…”

Iterations on a Transmedia Game Design Experience for Youth’s Autonomous, Collaborative Learning

“…address the technological hurdles to designing a digital game. Indeed, non-digital games lower equipment costs; broaden accessibility to youth who may range in their technical interests and proficiencies; introduce physical representations useful for coordinating collaboration; and provide opportunities to promote social and emotional learning in ways that digital games cannot (Fang et al, 2016).…”

Reinventing the Rules: Emergent Gameplay for Civic Learning

“…Even when players play competitively, learning still happens in a cooperative way (Oertig 2010), and positive social interaction among the players during the game has also been connected to increased learning (Padilla Zea et al 2009). Particularly, board games provide more fun and immersion (Gajadhar et al 2008) and can improve interpersonal relationships (Fang et al 2016) leading to trust development among players and possibilities for collaboration in contexts external to the game.…”

“…However, games have also always been collective activities and social experiences that allowed players to relate to one another. This social aspect adds a layer of complexity to the rule-based gameplay, which is associated with several benefits, such as improving interpersonal relations between players (Fang et al 2016), increasing the fun aspect (Gajadhar et al 2008) and contributing to learning (Abdul Jabbar and Felicia 2015;Dahlgren 2009;Whitton 2011).…”