Abstract
How can we improve business ethics education for the twenty first century? This study evaluates the effectiveness of a visual case exercise in the form of a 3D immersive game given to undergraduate students at two UK Universities as part of a mandatory business ethics module. We propose that due to evolving learning styles, the immersive nature of interactive games lends itself as a vehicle to make the learning of ethics more ‘concrete’ and ‘personal’ and therefore more engaging. To achieve this, we designed and built an immersive 3D simulation game in the style of a visual case. The effectiveness of the game was evaluated using a mixed methods approach measuring recognised and adapted constructs from the technology acceptance model. Results demonstrate that students found the game beneficial to their learning of ethics with the development of knowledge and skills applicable to the real world and that they engaged with the process due to game elements. Findings demonstrate the potential for the development of simulated games to teach ethics at all levels and modes of delivery and the contribution of this type of visual case model as a pedagogic method.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Afari, E., Aldridge, J., Fraser, B., & Khine, M. (2013). Students perceptions of the learning environment and attitudes in game-based mathematics classrooms. Learning Environments Research, 16(1), 131–150. doi:10.1007/s10984-012-9122-6.
Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665–694. doi:10.2307/3250951.
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality and behavior. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 665–683.
Anastasi, A. (1988). Psychological testing (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Anderson, P. H., & Lawton, L. (2009). Business simulations and cognitive learning: developments, desires, and future directions. Simulation & Gaming, 40(2), 193–216. doi:10.1177/1046878108321624.
Annetta, L. A., Cheng, M.-T., & Holmes, S. (2010). Assessing twenty-first century skills through a teacher created video game for high school biology students. Research in Science & Technological Education, 28(2), 101–114.
Arbaugh, J. B. (2002). Managing the on-line classroom: A study of technological and behavioral characteristics of web-based MBA courses. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 13(2), 203–223. doi:10.1016/S1047-8310(02)00049-4.
Babyak, M. A. (2004). What you see may not be what you get: A brief, nontechnical introduction to overfitting in regression-type models. Psychosomatic Medicine, 66(3), 411–421.
Bajaj, A., & Nidumolu, S. (1998). A feedback model to understand information system usage. Information & Management, 33(4), 213–224.
Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 25(3), 285–301. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(91)90021-H.
Benowitz, M. L., & Busse, T. V. (1970). Material incentives and the learning of spelling words in a typical school situation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61(1), 24–26. doi:10.1037/h0028822.
Benowitz, M. L., & Busse, T. V. (1976). Effects of material incentives on classroom learning over a four-week period. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(1), 57–62. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.68.1.57.
Berlyne, D. E. (1965). Structure and direction in thinking. New York: Wiley.
Bisett, B. M., & Rieber, M. (1966). The effects of age and incentive value on discrimination learning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 3(2), 199–206. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(66)90094-4.
Bruner, J. S. (1965). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Buck, W. (2014). Theory of business ethics simulation games. Journal of Business Ethics Education, 11.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105.
Carrington, M., Neville, B., & Whitwell, G. (2010). Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behaviour of ethically minded consumers. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 139–158. doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0501-6.
Cartwright, C. A. (1970). Efficacy of preferential incentives with elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61(2), 152–158. doi:10.1037/h0028904.
Churchill, G. A. J. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64–73.
Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cooley, D. R. (2004). The moral paradigm test. Journal of Business Ethics, 50(3), 289–294. doi:10.1023/B:BUSI.0000024661.94386.47.
Crossan, M., Mazutis, D., & Seijts, G. (2013). In search of virtue: The role of virtues, values and character strengths in ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(4), 567–581. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1680-8.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1979). Intrinsic rewards and emergent motivation. In M. R. Lepper & D. Greene (Eds.), The hidden costs of reward. Morristown, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. doi:10.2307/249008.
Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475–487. doi:10.1006/imms.1993.1022.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology—A comparison of 2 theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.
Dede, C. (2005). Planning for neomillennial learning styles. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 28(1), 7–12.
Edmunds, R., Thorpe, M., & Conole, G. (2012). Student attitudes towards and use of ICT in course study, work and social activity: A technology acceptance model approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 71–84. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01142.x.
Facteau, J. D., Dobbins, G. H., Russell, J. E., Ladd, R. T., & Kudisch, J. D. (1995). The influence of general perceptions of the training environment on pretraining motivation and perceived training transfer. Journal of Management, 21(1), 1–25.
Falkenberg, L., & Woiceshyn, J. (2008). Enhancing business ethics: Using cases to teach moral reasoning. Journal of Business Ethics, 79(3), 213–217. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9381-9.
Felton, E. L., & Sims, R. R. (2005). Teaching business ethics: Targeted outputs. Journal of Business Ethics, 60, 377–391.
Figlio, D. N., & Kenny, L. W. (2007). Individual teacher incentives and student performance. Journal of Public Economics, 91(5–6), 901–914. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006.10.001.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. London: Addison-Wesley.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update (10th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Gibson, A., & Frakes, A. (1997). Truth or consequences: A study of critical issues and decision making in accounting. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(2), 161–171. doi:10.1023/A:1017914713375.
Gioia, D. A., & Brass, D. J. (1986). Teaching the TV generation: The case for observational learning. Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 10, 11–18.
Gu, J., & Neesham, C. (2014). Moral identity as leverage point in teaching business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics,. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-2028-0.
Guadagnoli, E., & Velicer, W. F. (1988). Relation to sample size to the stability of component patterns. Psychological Bulletin, 103(2), 265.
Hair, J. F. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.
Hardy, M. A. (1993). Regression with dummy variables Quantitative applications in the social sciences 07-093 (pp. 1 online resource (vi, 90 p.)). Retrieved from http://SRMO.sagepub.com/view/regression-with-dummy-variables/SAGE.xml.
Hassan, L., Shiu, E., & Shaw, D. (2014). Who says there is an intention–behaviour gap? Assessing the empirical evidence of an intention–behaviour gap in ethical consumption. Journal of Business Ethics,. doi:10.1007/s10551-014-2440-0.
Hsu, C.-L., & Lu, H.-P. (2004). Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experience. Information & Management, 41(7), 853–868. doi:10.1016/j.im.2003.08.014.
Huang, J.-H., Lin, Y.-R., & Chuang, S.-T. (2007). Elucidating user behavior of mobile learning: A perspective of the extended technology acceptance model. The Electronic Library, 25(5), 585–598.
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. doi:10.3102/0013189x033007014.
Jondle, D., Ardichvili, A., & Mitchell, J. (2014). Modeling ethical business culture: Development of the ethical business culture survey and its use to validate the CEBC model of ethical business culture. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(1), 29–43. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1601-2.
Kachigan, S. K. (1991). Multivariate statistical analysis: A conceptual introduction (2nd ed.). New York: Radius Press.
Kennedy, W. A., & Willcutt, H. C. (1964). Praise and blame as incentives. Psychological Bulletin, 62(5), 323–332. doi:10.1037/h0042917.
Kidwell, L. (2001). Student honor codes as a tool for teaching professional ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 29(1–2), 45–49. doi:10.1023/A:1006442925586.
Kim, S. S., & Malhotra, N. K. (2005). A longitudinal model of continued IS use: An integrative view of four mechanisms underlying postadoption phenomena. Management Science, 51(5), 741–755. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1040.0326.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., & Salen, K. (2009). Moving learning games forward: Obstacles, opportunities and openness. Cambridge, MA: The Education Arcade, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Creative Commons.
Knowles, J. B. (1963). Acquiescence response set and the Questionnaire Measurement of Personality. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 2(2), 131–137. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8260.1963.tb00385.x.
Kolb, A. Y., Kolb, D. A., Passarelli, A., & Sharma, G. (2014). On becoming an experiential educator: The educator role profile. Simulation & Gaming, 45(2), 204–234. doi:10.1177/1046878114534383.
Koufaris, M. (2002). Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to on-line consumer behavior. Information System Research Information System Research, 13(2), 205–223.
Kuss, D. J., Griffiths, M. D., & Binder, J. F. (2013). Internet addiction in students: Prevalence and risk factors. Computers in Human Behaviour, 29, 959–966.
Laditka, S., & Houck, M. (2006). Student-developed case studies: An experiential approach for teaching ethics in management. Journal of Business Ethics, 64(2), 157–167. doi:10.1007/s10551-005-0276-3.
Landry, B. J. L., Griffeth, R., & Hartman, S. (2006). Measuring student perceptions of blackboard using the technology acceptance model. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(1), 87–99. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4609.2006.00103.x.
Lawrence, K. E., & Reed, K. L. (2011). Experiencing and measuring the unteachable: Achieving AACSB learning assurance requirements in business ethics. Journal of Education for Business, 86, 92–99.
Lepper, M. R. (1988). Motivational considerations in the study of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 5(4), 289–309.
Liao, C., Lin, H., & Liu, Y. (2010). Predicting the use of pirated software: A contingency model integrating perceived risk with the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2), 237–252. doi:10.1007/s10551-009-0081-5.
Lin, J., & Lu, H. (2000). Toward an understanding of the behavioural intention to use a web site. International Journal of Information Management, 20, 197–208.
Litwin, M. S., & Fink, A. (1995). How to measure survey reliability and validity. London: Sage.
Lloyd, P., & Van De Poel, I. (2008). Designing games to teach ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14(3), 433–447.
MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84.
Macchiarella, P. (2012). Trends in digital gaming: Free-to-play, social, and mobile games. Author: Dallas, TX.
Malhotra, N. K. (2010). Marketing research: An applied orientation (6th ed.). London: Prentice Hall.
Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Patil, A. (2006). Common method variance in IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science, 52(12), 1865–1883. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1060.0597.
Malone, T. W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction. Cognitive Science, 4, 333–369.
May, D., Luth, M., & Schwoerer, C. (2013). The influence of business ethics education on moral efficacy, moral meaningfulness, and moral courage: A quasi-experimental study. Journal of Business Ethics,. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1860-6.
McWilliams, V., & Nahavandi, A. (2006). Using live cases to teach ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(4), 421–433. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9035-3.
Moon, Y.-L. (1986). A review of cross-cultural studies on moral judgment development using the defining issues test. Cross-Cultural Research, 20(1–4), 147–177. doi:10.1177/106939718602000107.
Moore, O. K., & Anderson, A. R. (1969). Some principles for the design of clarifying educational environments. In D. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research. New York: Rand McNally.
Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 129–152.
Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Duhachek, A. (2003). The influence of goal-directed and experiential activities on online flow experiences. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(1–2), 3–16. doi:10.1207/S15327663JCP13-1&2_01.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Nyberg, D. (2008). The morality of everyday activities: Not the right, but the good thing to do. Journal of Business Ethics, 81, 587–598.
Piaget, J. (1951). Play, dreams, and imitation in childhood. New York: Norton.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.
Princeton University. (2007). Working with dummy variable. Retrieved 04/04/2014, from http://dss.princeton.edu/online_help/analysis/dummy_variables.htm.
Proserpio, L., & Gioia, D. A. (2007). Teaching the virtual generation. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(1), 69–90.
Reynolds, J., & Santos, A. (1999). Cronbach’s alpha: A tool for assessing the reliability of scales. Journal of Extension, 37(2), 34–36.
Ricci, P., & Markulis, P. M. (1990). Can ethics be taught? A Simulation tests a traditional ethics pedagogy. Developments in Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 17, 141–145.
Roca, E. (2008). Introducing practical wisdom in business schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(3), 607–620. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9580-4.
Roca, J. C., Chiu, C., & Martínez, F. J. (2006). Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(8), 683–696. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.01.003.
Sauve, L., Renaud, L., Kaufman, D., & Marquis, J. S. (2007). Distinguishing between games and simulation: A systematic review. Education Technology & Society, 10(3), 247–256.
Sicart, M. (2009). The ethics of computer games. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Steinkuehler, C., & Duncan, S. (2008). Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(6), 530–543. doi:10.1007/s10956-008-9120-8.
Stern, L. (2010). A visual approach to SPSS for Windows: A guide to SPSS 17.0 (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Stevens, J. P. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Stevens, J. M., Kevin Steensma, H., Harrison, D. A., & Cochran, P. L. (2005). Symbolic or substantive document? The influence of ethics codes on financial executives’ decisions. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2), 181–195. doi:10.1002/smj.440.
Szajna, B. (1994). Software evaluation and choice: Predictive validation of the technology acceptance instrument. MIS Quarterly, 18(3), 319–324.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). London: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
The Ethics Game. (2014). Core values. Retrieved August 15, 2014, from http://www.ethicsgame.com/exec/site/core_values.html.
Thorne LeClair, D., & Ferrell, L. (2000). Innovation in experiential business ethics training. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(3), 313–322. doi:10.1023/A:1006266526120.
Van Liedekerke, L., & Demuijnck, G. (2011). Business Ethics as a field of training, teaching and research in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics, 104, 29–41.
Vos, L., & Brennan, R. (2010). Marketing simulation games: Student and lecturer perspectives. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 28(7), 882–897. doi:10.1108/02634501011086472.
Wallop, H., Gen Z, & Gen Y. (2014). Baby boomers—A guide to the generations. The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/features/11002767/Gen-Z-Gen-Y-baby-boomers-a-guide-to-the-generations.html.
Ware, J. E, Jr. (1978). Effects of acquiescent response set on patient satisfaction ratings. Medical Care, 16(4), 327–336. doi:10.2307/3763452.
Weber, J., & Gillespie, J. (1998). Differences in ethical beliefs, intentions, and behaviors: The role of beliefs and intentions in ethics research revisited. Business and Society, 37(4), 447–467. doi:10.1177/000765039803700406.
Webster, J., & Ho, H. (1997). Audience engagement in multimedia presentations. SIGMIS Database, 28(2), 63–77. doi:10.1145/264701.264706.
Webster, J., Trevino, L. K., & Ryan, L. (1993). The dimensionality and correlates of flow in human–computer interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 9(4), 411–426. doi:10.1016/0747-5632(93)90032-N.
Whitton, N. (2012). The place of game-based learning in an age of austerity. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 10(2), 249–256.
Witryol, S. L., & Hayne, W. R. (1971). Incentives and learning in children. In Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 6, pp. 1–61). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Yi, M. Y., & Hwang, Y. (2003). Predicting the use of web-based information systems: Self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 431–449. doi:10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00114-9.
Yusoff, A., Crowder, R., & Gilbert, L. (2010). Validation of serious games attributes using the technology acceptance model. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 2010 second international conference on games and virtual worlds for serious applications.
Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1982). Factors influencing four rules for determining the number of components to retain. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17(2), 253–269.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The software development was part of a matched funding project between the University of Roehampton, the UK Higher Education Academy, and a European NGO, ORT France, and involved the design of a pedagogic framework and accompanying web-based interactive 3D animated game to support and develop ethical decision-making skills and moral sensitivity set within a professional business context.
Appendices
Appendix 1
Measurement construct | Acronym/code | Description |
|---|---|---|
Ease-of-Use (TAM) | EOU | Ease-of-use is where participants feel that minimal effort is required to learn the Game |
Perceived Playfulness (TAM) | PP | Perceived enjoyment in playing the game (hedonic) |
Perceived Practicability of Learnt Skills and Knowledge (New Constructa) | PPSK | Drawn from the items that represent the U and TS constructs and thus is defined as the extent to which respondents believe the game was useful in acquiring and relating knowledge and practical ethical skills to business decisions |
Reward (Yusoff et al. 2010) | R | The feedback arrangement in the game to encourage participants and keep motivation high to complete |
Situated Learning (Yusoff et al. 2010) | SL | The provision of a gaming environment or world where the participants can relate their learning to their needs and interests in the outside world |
Transfer of Learnt Skills (Yusoff et al. 2010) | TS | Perception of use to relate learned knowledge and skill to business decisions |
Perceived Usefulness (TAM) | U | Participants’ belief that using the game helps them in making better business ethical decisions |
Glossary of constructs | ||
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Measurement scale | Initial | Extraction |
|---|---|---|
EOU1 | .698 | .447 |
EOU2 | .843 | .791 |
EOU3 | .891 | .839 |
EOU4 | .907 | .781 |
EOU5 | .865 | .730 |
U1 | .899 | .784 |
U2 | .890 | .843 |
U3 | .887 | .830 |
U4 | .863 | .744 |
TS1 | .926 | .848 |
TS2 | .943 | .840 |
TS3 | .951 | .771 |
TS4 | .953 | .805 |
R1 | .823 | .751 |
R2 | .933 | .869 |
R3 | .926 | .860 |
R4 | .872 | .773 |
SL1 | .908 | .837 |
SL2 | .894 | .868 |
SL3 | .864 | .881 |
SL4 | .761 | .595 |
Extraction method: Maximum likelihood Communality scores of scale items | ||
Appendix 4
Construct | Sample question | Total % for each construct | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Agree | Disagree | Neither | Un-answered | ||
EOU | I find this game easy to use. | 66 | 15 | 10 | 9 |
PP | This game makes completing a task fun and entertaining | 70 | 12 | 9 | 9 |
R | I felt rewarded when I got points | 71 | 6 | 16 | 7 |
SL | After playing this game, I feel that I have learned new skills which I can apply in different situations | 69 | 7 | 10 | 14 |
TS | I feel that I have acquired new knowledge that is useful in day-to-day business decisions. | 64 | 10 | 17 | 9 |
U | This game can help me make better ethical decisions | 62 | 7 | 18 | 13 |
Sample questions by construct and results (n = 103) | |||||
Appendix 5
Research question and sub questions | Focus group questions—Semi-structured—be flexible in terms of order of questions to promote discussion |
|---|---|
How and to what extent can an immersive interactive Business Ethics game contribute to the development of knowledge, skills and values of Business Ethics students? | |
How effective it is in aiding students’ development of ethical sensitivity? (skills) | What were the ethical concepts you experienced in the first level (the office)? What were the ethical issues you experienced in the park? What were the ethical issues you experienced in the party? Were you able to identify the ethical issues or did you get help from a friend? |
How does it contribute to the development of students’ situated learning of ethics? (skills) | Did the game help you identify the ethical issues in each level? If so, in what way? Do you think there are any benefits to the game approach to understanding ethics?—establish whether there was any personal involvement—If so, did this help you relate to the ethics in the situation? If so what elements made you feel this way? Does this prepare you for the work environment? |
What impact does game progression have on deep learning of ethical constructs? (gamification) | Were you motivated to complete the game? If so, what made you carry on? If not, what stopped you? How did your motivation impact on your learning? [was it negative or positive?] In what way? Who chose to hack into the system? Ask why Who chose to use Gilly’s company instead? Ask why Did the ending have an impact on your ethical insights/values? [make you think again about the issue]? |
How does use of a computer game contribute to the learning experience? | |
What are the benefits of using a computer game over more traditional methods? | Would you have preferred this exercise as a text document/case study? If so why or why not? What extra benefit (if any) does the game provide? Do you think the functionality could be improved and, if so, would this make it of more benefit? What would you like to see changed? |
How does it contribute to knowledge acquisition? | Do you remember anything from the game with regard to assessed knowledge? If so, ask them what Are there improvements you would recommend to improve your retention of knowledge? Did you read the quiz feedback? Was this useful or not? Did you engage with the quiz or just click anything to get through? [If clicked anything]—why do you think that was? What would motivate you to actually do the quiz? Do you think the quiz is important for learning? |
What contribution can a computer game offer within the context of a blended learning course? | Do you think the game should be blended with classroom discussion or do you think it can stand on its own as a learning tool? |
Focus Group Semi-Structured Question Sheet | |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jagger, S., Siala, H. & Sloan, D. It's All in the Game: A 3D Learning Model for Business Ethics. J Bus Ethics 137, 383–403 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2557-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2557-9