skip to main content
10.1145/2967934.2968110acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pageschi-playConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Honorable Mention

A Breathtaking Journey. On the Design of an Empathy-Arousing Mixed-Reality Game

Authors Info & Claims
Published:15 October 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Persuasive games exist for a wide variety of objectives, from marketing, to healthcare and activism. Some of the more socially-aware ones cast players as members of disenfranchised minorities, such as migrants, prompting them to 'see what they see'. In parallel, a growing number of designers has recently started to leverage immersive technologies to enable the public to temporarily inhabit another person, to 'sense what they sense'. From these two converging perspectives, we hypothesize a still-uncharted space of opportunities at the crossroads of games, empathy, persuasion, and immersion. Following a Research through Design approach, we explored this space by designing A Breathtaking Journey, an embodied and multisensory mixed-reality game providing a first-person perspective of a refugee's journey. A qualitative study was conducted with a grounded theory/open coding methodology to tease out empathy-arousing characteristics, and to chart this novel game design space. As we elaborate on our analysis, we provide insights on empathic mixed-reality experiences, and conclude with offering three design opportunities: visceral engagement, reflective moments and affective appeals, to spur future research and design.

References

  1. 11 Bit Studios. 2014. This War of Mine. Retrieved from http://www.11bitstudios.com/games/16/this-war-of-mineGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Anne Adams, Peter Lunt, and Paul Cairns. 2008. A qualititative approach to HCI research. In Research Methods for Human-Computer Interaction, Paul Cairns and Anna Cox (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 138--157.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Craig A. Anderson, Akiko Shibuya, Nobuko Ihori, et al. 2010. Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: a meta-analytic review. Psychological bulletin 136, 2: 151--17Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jamie Antonisse and Devon Johnson. 2013. Hush.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Arduino. 201 Arduino Microprocessor. Retrieved from https://www.arduino.ccGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Gabo Arora, Barry Pousman, and Chris Milk. 2015. Clouds over Sidra. Vrse. Retrieved from http://with.in/watch/clouds-over-sidraGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Audio-Technica. 2014. ATH-M40x. Retrieved from http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/headphones/75b2f282c93a7651Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Jeffrey Bardzell and Shaowen Bardzell. 2015. Humanistic HCI. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 8, 4: 1--185.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Jonathan Belman and Mary Flanagan. 2010. Designing games to foster empathy. International Journal of Cognitive Technology 15, 1: 11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Steve Benford and Gabriella Giannachi. 2011. Performing Mixed Reality. The MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 1Steve Benford, Chris Greenhalgh, Gabriella Giannachi, Brendan Walker, Joe Marshall, and Tom Rodden. 2012. Uncomfortable Interactions. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 2005-2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Mark A. Blythe, Kees Overbeeke, Andrew F. Monk, and Peter C. Wright (eds.). 2005. Funology: From Usability to Enjoyment. Springer Netherlands. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Ian Bogost. 2007. Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames. Mit Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Ian Bogost. 2011. How to do things with videogames. U of Minnesota Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Liz Owens Boltz, Danah Henriksen, and Punya Mishra. 20 Rethinking Technology & Creativity in the 21st Century: Empathy through Gaming-Perspective Taking in a Complex World. TechTrends 59, 6: 3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology 3, 2: 77--101.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Emily Brown and Paul Cairns. 2004. A Grounded Investigation of Game Immersion. CHI '04 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 1297--1300. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. James Brown, Kathrin Gerling, Patrick Dickinson, and Ben Kirman. 2015. Dead Fun: Uncomfortable Interactions in a Virtual Reality Game for Coffins. Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play, ACM, 475--480. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Richard Byrne, Joe Marshall, and Florian Floyd Mueller. 2016. Designing the Vertigo Experience: Vertigo As a Design Resource for Digital Bodily Play. Proceedings of the TEI '16: Tenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction, ACM, 296--303. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Karl-Erik Bystrom, Woodrow Barfield, and Claudia Hendrix. 1999. A Conceptual Model of the Sense of Presence in Virtual Environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 8, 2: 241--244. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Jordan M. Carpenter and Melanie C. Green. 2012. Flying with Icarus: narrative transportation and the persuasiveness of entertainment. Psychology of entertainment media, 2nd edn. Routledge, Florence: 169--194.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. John W. Creswell. 2014. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. H. Q. Dinh, N. Walker, L. F. Hodges, Chang Song, and A. Kobayashi. 1999. Evaluating the importance of multi-sensory input on memory and the sense of presence in virtual environments. Virtual Reality, 1999. Proceedings., IEEE, 222--228. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Paul Dourish. 2001. Where the Action is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Epic Games. 2015. Unreal Engine 4. Retrieved from www.unrealengine.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. J. E. Escalas and B. B. Stern. 2003. Sympathy and empathy: Emotional responses to advertising dramas. The Journal of consumer research.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Salvatore Fiore, Peter Wright, and Alistair Edwards. 2005. A Pragmatist Aesthetics Approach to the Design of a Technological Artefact. Proceedings of the 4th Decennial Conference on Critical Computing: Between Sense and Sensibility, ACM, 129--132. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Mary Flanagan. 2009. Critical Play: Radical Game Design. MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Gonzalo Frasca. 2004. Madrid. Retrieved from http://www.newsgaming.com/games/madridGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Gonzalo Frasca. 2007. Play the message: Play, game and videogame rhetoric. Unpublished PhD dissertation. IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Rosemary Garris, Robert Ahlers, and James E. Driskell. 2002. Games, Motivation, and Learning: A Research and Practice Model. Simulation & gaming 33, 4: 441--467.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Marientina Gotsis, Judith Piggot, Diana Hughes, and Wendy Stone. 2010. SMART-games: A Video Game Intervention for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, ACM, 194--197. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. D. Grigorovici. 2003. Persuasive Effects of Presence in Immersive Virtual Environments. In G. Riva, F. Davide, & W. IJsselsteijn (Eds.), Being there: Concepts, effects and measurement of presence in synthetic environments.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Douglas Harper. 2002. Talking about pictures: A case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies 17, 1: 13--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Teresa de la Hera Conde-Pumpido. 2013. A Conceptual Model for the Study of Persuasive Games. Proceedings of DiGRA 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Ioanna Iacovides and Anna L. Cox. 2015. Moving Beyond Fun: Evaluating Serious Experience in Digital Games. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 2245--2254. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. ImpactGames. 2007. PeaceMaker. Retrieved from http://www.peacemakergame.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Henry Jenkins. 2004. Game design as narrative architecture. Computer 44, 3: 118--130.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Dan R. Johnson. 2012. Transportation into a story increases empathy, prosocial behavior, and perceptual bias toward fearful expressions. Personality and individual differences 52, 2: 150--155.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Dena M. Jones. 1997. Advertising Animal Protection. Anthrozoös 10, 4: 151--159.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Hartmut Koenitz, Gabriele Ferri, Mads Haahr, Diădem Sezen, and Tonguç Ibrahim Sezen. 2015. Interactive Digital Narrative: History, Theory and Practice. Routledge. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Sara H. Konrath, Edward H. O'Brien, and Courtney Hsing. 2011. Changes in dispositional empathy in American college students over time: a meta-analysis. Personality and social psychology review: an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc 15, 2: 180--198.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Martijn Kors. 2015. Towards Design Strategies for the Persuasive Gameplay Experience. Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play, ACM, 407--410. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Martijn Kors, Erik van der Spek, and Ben Schouten. 2015. A Foundation for the Persuasive Gameplay Experience. Proceedings of the 10th Foundations of Digital Games Conference (FDG '15).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Petri Lankoski. 2007. Goals, affects, and empathy in games. Philosophy of computer games.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Brenda Laurel. 1991. Computers as Theatre. Addison-Wesley. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Aaron Levisohn, Jayme Cochrane, Diane Gromala, and Jinsil Seo. 2007. The Meatbook: Tangible and Visceral Interaction. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction, ACM, 91--92. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Amy Shirong Lu, Tom Baranowski, Debbe Thompson, and Richard Buday. 2012. Story Immersion of Videogames for Youth Health Promotion: A Review of Literature. Games for health journal 1, 3: 199--204.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Andrés Lucero, Evangelos Karapanos, Juha Arrasvuori, and Hannu Korhonen. 2014. Playful or Gameful?: creating delightful user experiences. Interactions 21, 3: 34--39. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Gregory Maio and Geoffrey Haddock. 2009. The psychology of attitudes and attitude change. Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Joe Marshall, Brendan Walker, Steve Benford, et al. 2011. The Gas Mask: A Probe for Exploring Fearsome Interactions. CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 127--136. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Tim Marsh. 2016. Slow serious games, interactions and play: Designing for positive and serious experience and reflection. Entertainment computing 14: 45--53.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Tim Marsh and Brigid Costello. 2013. Lingering Serious Experience as Trigger to Raise Awareness, Encourage Reflection and Change Behavior. Persuasive Technology, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 116--124. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. John McCarthy and Peter Wright. 2004. Technology As Experience. Interactions 11, 5: 42--43. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Paul Milgram and Fumio Kishino. 1994. A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE transactions on information and systems 77, 12: 1321--1329.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Chris Milk. 2015. How virtual reality can create the ultimate empathy machine. TED. Retrieved April 18, 2016 from https://www.ted.com/talks/chris_milk_how_virtual_reality_can_create_the_ultimate_empathy_machine?language=enGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Janet Horowitz Murray. 1997. Hamlet on the holodeck: The future of narrative in cyberspace. Simon and Schuster. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Donald A. Norman. 2005. Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. Basic books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Oculus. 2014. Oculus Development Kit 2. Retrieved from https://www.oculus.com/en-us/dk2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Daniel J. O'keefe. 2002. Persuasion: Theory and research. Sage Publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. W. Gerrod Parrott. 2001. Emotions in social psychology: Essential readings. Psychology Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Nonny de la Peña, Peggy Weil, Joan Llobera, et al. 2010. Immersive Journalism: Immersive Virtual Reality for the First-Person Experience of News. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 19, 4: 291--301. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Wei Peng, Mira Lee, and Carrie Heeter. 2010. The Effects of a Serious Game on Role-Taking and Willingness to Help. The Journal of communication 60, 4: 723--742.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Richard M. Perloff. 2008. The dynamics of persuasion: communication and attitudes in the twenty-first century. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Mick Power and Tim Dalgleish. 2008. Cognition and emotion: From order to disorder (2nd ed.). Psychology Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Stanley Presser, Jennifer M. Rothgeb, Mick P. Couper, et al. 2004. Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires. John Wiley & Sons.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Andrew K. Przybylski, Edward L. Deci, Edward Deci, C. Scott Rigby, and Richard M. Ryan. 2014. Competence-impeding electronic games and players' aggressive feelings, thoughts, and behaviors. Journal of personality and social psychology 106, 3: 441--457.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  68. Susana Ruiz, Ashley York, Mike Stein, Noah Keating, and Kellee Santiago. 2006. Darfur is dying. Retrieved from http://www.darfurisdying.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. 6Marie-Laure Ryan. 2001. Narrative As Virtual Reality: Immersion and Interactivity in Literature and Electronic Media. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Marie-Laure Ryan. 2015. Narrative as Virtual Reality 2: Revisiting Immersion and Interactivity in Literature and Electronic Media. JHU Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. B. A. M. Schouten, Menno Deen, and M. M. Bekker. 2010. Playful Identity in game design and open ended play. Proceedings of the Homo Ludens conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. P. Shaver, J. Schwartz, D. Kirson, and C. O'Connor. 1987. Emotion knowledge: further exploration of a prototype approach. Journal of personality and social psychology 52, 6: 1061--1086.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  73. Mary Lou Shelton and Ronald W. Rogers. 1981. Fear-Arousing and Empathy-Arousing Appeals to Help: The Pathos of Persuasion. Journal of applied social psychology 11, 4: 366--378.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  74. L. Shen. 2011. The effectiveness of empathy-versus fear-arousing antismoking PSAs. Health communication.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Richard Shusterman. 2014. Somaesthetics. In The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd Ed.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Michael D. Slater and Donna Rouner. 2002. Entertainment-Education and Elaboration Likelihood: Understanding the Processing of Narrative Persuasion. Communication theory: CT: a journal of the International Communication Association 12, 2: 173--191.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Toby Smethurst and Stef Craps. 2014. Playing with Trauma: Interreactivity, Empathy, and Complicity in The Walking Dead Video Game. Games and Culture. http://doi.org/10.1177/1555412014559306Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  78. Omar Sosa-Tzec, Erik Stolterman, and Martin A. Siegel. 2015. Gaza Everywhere: Exploring the Applicability of a Rhetorical Lens in HCI. Proceedings of The Fifth Decennial Aarhus Conference on Critical Alternatives, Aarhus University Press, 69--72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  79. Kurt D. Squire. 2005. Educating the fighter: buttonmashing, seeing, being. On The Horizon - The Strategic Planning Resource for Education Professionals 13, 2: 75--88.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Luke Stark. 2015. Making Values Visceral. Aarhus Conference 2015 Workshop: "Charting the Next Decade for Value Sensitive Design".Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. Sharon T. Steinemann, Elisa D. Mekler, and Klaus Opwis. 2015. Increasing Donating Behavior Through a Game for Change: The Role of Interactivity and Appreciation. Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play, ACM, 319--329. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  82. Jonathan Steuer. 1992. Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence. The Journal of communication 42, 4: 73--93.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  83. Tale of Tales. 2008. The Graveyard. Retrieved from http://tale-of-tales.com/TheGraveyard/index.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  84. Tom Van Laer, Ko De Ruyter, Luca M. Visconti, and Martin Wetzels. 2014. The extended transportation-imagery model: A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of consumers' narrative transportation. The Journal of consumer research 40, 5: 797--817.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  85. T. Wiseman. 1996. A concept analysis of empathy. Journal of advanced nursing 23, 6: 1162--1167.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  86. Pieter Wouters, Erik D. Van der Spek, and Herre Van Oostendorp. 2009. Current practices in serious game research: A review from a learning outcomes perspective. Games-based learning advancements for multi-sensory human computer interfaces: techniques and effective practices: 232--250.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  87. Yager Development. 2012. Spec Ops: The Line. Retrieved from http://www.specopstheline.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  88. John Zimmerman, Jodi Forlizzi, and Shelley Evenson. 2007. Research Through Design As a Method for Interaction Design Research in HCI. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 493--502. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  89. Games for Change. Games for Change. Retrieved April 18, 2016 from http://www.gamesforchange.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  90. Amnesty International | Voor de mensenrechten. Amnesty International Nederland. Retrieved September 10, 2014 from https://www.amnesty.nlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  91. Flickr, a Yahoo company. Flickr. Retrieved October 4, 2015 from https://www.flickr.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. A Breathtaking Journey. On the Design of an Empathy-Arousing Mixed-Reality Game

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          CHI PLAY '16: Proceedings of the 2016 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play
          October 2016
          424 pages
          ISBN:9781450344562
          DOI:10.1145/2967934

          Copyright © 2016 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 15 October 2016

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          CHI PLAY '16 Paper Acceptance Rate36of124submissions,29%Overall Acceptance Rate421of1,386submissions,30%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader