論文

The study aims to highlight the issue of “reality” within the Simulation and Gaming (S&G) domain, which has been largely overlooked. The research community has struggled to connect game experiences to realities, especially from the perspectives of game designers and facilitators. Awareness of differing perceptions of reality has grown significantly, driven in part by the rapid spread of misinformation and conspiracy theories on social media. Consequently, the realities perceived by players may differ from those intended to be shared by game designers and facilitators. However, this awareness within the S&G community is insufficient. To address this, the authors explore the issue theoretically. First, the importance of increasing awareness is explained using various concrete examples. Second, the role of facilitators, who play an essential role in the S&G process, is explored. Third, insights are derived from foundational research in this field, offering various perspectives to address the issue. Lastly, the authors emphasize the need for actively discussing the issue of realities in the S&G community and reiterate the associated risks.

This paper explores the ethical issues of Simulation and Gaming. Although there has been an extensive discussion on this topic, it has recently gained increasing relevance within a time of defying borders. Therefore, a reexamination of these topics from this new point of view becomes necessary. Firstly, the importance of this research is further elaborated on. When we refer to a border, we may imagine a country’s border. However, we have created many kinds of ‘borders’ around us, for instance the dividing lines we have drawn and continue to draw between different cultures or gender identities. The need for defying and crossing these self-imposed borders has become clearly evident in a world full of diversity. The issue of crossing and overcoming these boundaries can then be interpreted as to how sustainably and appropriately we deal with this diversity. Managing diversity, equity and inclusion thus becomes increasingly ethical issue also for the discipline of Gaming Simulation. In the paper, the presented ethical viewpoints are explored from three perspectives, namely the ones of game design, game facilitation and debriefing, and game content. Lastly, we conclude with some proposals for the Simulation and Gaming community based on our discussion.

In this study, we investigated the effects of debriefing on 196 Japanese University students as part of an international collaboration between Austria and Japan. Based on the results of our previous studies [19–21], we showed that debriefing can bolster learning from the perspective of attitude changes and performance in games. However, there were weaknesses to previous studies in the sense that there were no facilitators to conduct the debriefings. In the experiments, all types of debriefing were carried out by students, i.e. self-guided. However, debriefing is usually conducted by a facilitator and carried out in a group. To address this weakness, we introduced facilitator-guided debriefing for the experimental conditions. Therefore, there were two experimental conditions: facilitator-guided debriefing and self-guided debriefing. After debriefing, groups of four participants played the Highway Planning game, which deals with co-operation and conflict. According to the results, the participants under facilitator-guided debriefing conditions showed more cooperative attitudes than did those under self-guided debriefing conditions, while participants in the self-guided debriefing group showed more competitive attitudes.

Background: “Message order” and “active participation” could be effective as risk communication methods. “Anticipated regret” (AR) has also been recognized as affecting risk perception and vaccine uptake in vaccination risk communication. We aimed to evaluate the effects of message order and active participation and the interactions between these two interventions on AR for vaccination. Methods: We conducted a 2 (message order: positive-negative or negative-positive) × 2 (message calendar: with or without planning) factorial design study among 81 study participants. The effects of message order and active participation of mothers, using a message calendar, were evaluated on mothers’ decision-making regarding vaccination with Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine and pneumococcal conjugate vaccine for their children. Participants completed questionnaires to evaluate the AR of infection if unvaccinated (anticipated regret of inaction) and of side effects if vaccinated (anticipated regret of action, ARA) twice: immediately after interventions and 1 month later. Results: An interaction between message order and active participation was significant with regard to anticipated regret of inaction immediately after interventions (P = 0.01), but this effect disappeared 1 month after interventions. The message order showed no main effect with regard to ARA. However, the main effect of active participation was marginally significant with regard to ARA 1 month after intervention (P = 0.09); AR over vaccine side effects was lower when vaccination was planned than in the condition without planning. Conclusions: The effect of message order was hardly detectable in a clinical setting. However, active participation induced by planning may affect AR. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effect of active participation in decision-making for vaccination.

Background: The supplementary immunization activity (SIA) for the rubella vaccination of adult men born between 1962 and 1978 began in 2019 in Japan because of a vaccine gap in the cohort, as vaccination was not mandatory for those born in that period. However, SIA coverage remains low, despite an active campaign and financial support. Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled study based on a 2 (scenario: self-vaccination, child vaccination) × 2 (message: self-interest, group-interest) factorial design, using a Japanese online panel. Participants with children were assigned to the child vaccination scenario in Intervention 1, whereas others were assigned to the self-vaccination scenario. After Intervention 1, all participants were given the same information about rubella. In Intervention 2, participants assigned to self-interest messages received a message emphasizing the risk of rubella, and those assigned to group-interest messages received a message emphasizing herd immunity. After Intervention 2, we evaluated the effects using a questionnaire. Results: Among the 2,206 participants, information regarding rubella was evaluated as more reliable in the group—than in the self-interest message condition, especially among women. Women evaluated the necessity of rubella vaccination for adult men and women to be higher in the child-vaccination scenario and group-interest messages. However, no differences were found among men. By contrast, men exposed to the self-interest message positively evaluated the reliability of the rubella explanation. Conclusion: The findings indicate that emphasizing self-interest messages is more effective for men in promoting herd immunity against rubella.

Two-sided messages that include two perspectives (i.e., risks and benefits) are more effective than one-sided messages that convey only one perspective (usually only the benefits). Refutational two-sided messages are effective for communicating risks regarding vaccines. To examine the effectiveness of refutational two-sided messages in risk communication regarding novel vaccines against emerging infectious diseases, we conducted the randomized controlled study based on a 3 × 3 × 2 mixed design (Intervention 1: vaccines against subcutaneous influenza, “novel severe infectious disease,” or intranasal influenza; intervention 2: one-sided, non-refutational two-sided, or refutational two-sided messages; two questionnaires) using a Japanese online panel. Participants completed questionnaires before and after receiving an attack message (negative information). We evaluated the impact of attack messages on the willingness to be vaccinated, and the anticipated regret of inaction (ARI). Among 1,184 participants, there was a significant difference in the willingness to be vaccinated among the message groups (p < 0.01). After receiving the attack message, willingness to be vaccinated decreased in the one-sided message group and increased in the non-refutational two-sided and refutational two-sided message groups. Additionally, ARI in the refutational two-sided message groups was significantly higher than in the one-sided groups (p = 0.03). In conclusion, two-sided messages are more effective than one-sided messages in terms of willingness to be vaccinated. Furthermore, the high ARI in the refutational two-sided message group indicated that refutational two-sided messages were more effective than one-sided messages for communicating the risks of vaccines, especially those against emerging infectious diseases.

After briefly suspending the 2-valent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in 2013, Japan's Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare (MHLW) reinstated the recommendation that people receive the newly approved and updated 9-valent HPV vaccine in 2022. We investigated the influence of anticipated regret (AR) and spontaneous thought on individuals' willingness to receive the HPV vaccine, as the 2013 controversy over the HPV vaccine's side effects could lead to public distrust, impeding vaccination coverage despite government-funded initiatives. Using a Japanese-speaking online panel, we conducted a randomized controlled study based on a 3 (Intervention 1, questionnaire for AR: AR for inaction [ARI] vs. AR for action [ARA] vs. without AR) × 2 (Intervention 2, spontaneous thought: task with spontaneous thought vs. distraction) factorial design. Those assigned to the ARI scenario in Intervention 1 were given messages highlighting AR for HPV infection if they did not receive the vaccine, whereas those assigned to the ARA scenario were given messages emphasizing AR for the vaccine's side effects if they were vaccinated; participants assigned to the without AR group were given messages being not emphasizing any AR. In Intervention 2, participants assigned to the spontaneous thought group had 3 min to write freely their opinions about the HPV vaccine. In contrast, those assigned to the distraction group were asked to think about the HPV vaccine. After Intervention 2, we assessed the effects using several questionnaires. Among the 2140 participants, those in the ARI and those in the spontaneous thought groups expressed that female children would be highly willing to get vaccinated. However, no significant main effect of spontaneous thought on male children's willingness to get vaccinated was found; participants in the ARI and spontaneous thought conditions expressed the highest degree of willingness. In summary, spontaneous thought can mitigate the negative impacts of AR in a purely experiential setting.

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018. The present study examined the effects of debriefing on 171 Japanese university students as part of an international collaboration between Austria and Japan. There were eight experimental conditions, as follows: control group without treatment, fun game with no debriefing, Prisoner’s Dilemma (PD) game with no debriefing, PD game with self-completed debriefing, PD game with guided written debriefing, PD game with guided written debriefing and a conceptual frame, no game but reading of a text, and no game but study of a picture. Following completion of these activities, groups of four participants then played the Highway Planning Game [1], which deals with cooperation and conflict. Although performance during the Highway Planning Game did not significantly differ among the groups (probably because of the small number of groups), there were interesting differences in terms of performance and attitudes that will stimulate further research.