Meta-communication Between Designers and Players of Interactive Digital Narratives

  • Colette DaiuteEmail author
  • Robert O. Duncan
  • Fedor Marchenko
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11318)


This study addresses a typically silent dimension of Interactive Digital Narrative (IDN) theory and practice – meta-communication between designer and player. Meta-communication involves directly sharing thoughts and feelings the designer and player have during the development process. We refer to this interaction as “meta-communication” to distinguish it from comments about behavior, such as mentioning options chosen and evaluations of the IDN product. To address foundational questions about meta-communication in the IDN process, we conducted a research workshop with undergraduate novice IDN designers. Participants worked through a series of Twine IDN design-play sessions and made their meta-communication explicit using a think-aloud protocol. Transcriptions of the think-aloud sessions and notes made by designers and players during the IDN design process were analyzed for expressive functions, such as stating confusion or emotion. Analyses of the IDN designs identified structural features such as nodes and connections. Results of quantitative and qualitative analyses revealed that the frequency and type of meta-communications relate to the complexity of the final product (connection density). This study contributes a practice-based research approach accounting for inter-subjective dimensions of the IDN experience, thereby adding measurable psychological constructs to IDN theory.


Interactive digital narrative theory IDN pedagogy Interactive digital narrative research methods Designer & player interaction 


  1. 1.
    Dubbelman, T.: Narrative game mechanics. In: Nack, F., Gordon, A.S. (eds.) ICIDS 2016. LNCS, vol. 10045, pp. 39–50. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  2. 2.
    Koenitz, H., Dubbelman, T., Knoller, N., Roth, C.: An integrated and iterative research direction for interactive digital narrative. In: Nack, F., Gordon, A.S. (eds.) ICIDS 2016. LNCS, vol. 10045, pp. 51–60. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Daiute, C., Duncan, Robert O.: Interactive imagining in interactive digital narrative. In: Nunes, N., Oakley, I., Nisi, V. (eds.) ICIDS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10690, pp. 282–285. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  4. 4.
    Knoll, T.: The think-aloud protocol. In: Drachen, A., Mirza-Babaei, P., Nacke, L. (eds.) Games User Research. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2018)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Murray, J.H.: The tale of two boyfriends: a literary abstraction strategy for creating meaningful character variation. In: Koenitz, H., Ferri, G., Haahr, M., Sezen, D., Sezen, T.I. (eds.) Interactive Digital Narrative, pp. 121–135. Routledge, New York(2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Koenitz, H.: Towards a specific theory of interactive digital narrative. In: Koenitz, H., Ferri, G., Haahr, M., Sezen, D., Sezen, T.I. (eds.) Interactive digital narrative, pp. 91–105. Routledge, New York (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Granic, I., Lobel, A., Engels, R.C.M.E.: The benefits of playing video games. Am. Psychol. 69(1), 66–78 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Friedhoff, J.: Twine: a platform study. In: Proceedings of DiGRA (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tran, K.M.: Her story was complex: a twine workshop for ten- to twelve-year-old girls. E-Learn. Digit. Media 13(5–6), 212–226 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Klimas, C.: Twinery: Twine Homepage (2009).
  11. 11.
    Daiute, C.: Narrative Inquiry: A Dynamic Approach. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rubinov, M., Sporns, O.: Complex network measures of brain connectivity: uses and interpretations. NeuroImage 52, 1059–1069 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aarseth, E.: A narrative theory of games. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games, FDG 2012, pp. 129–133. ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Daiute, C.: A relational theory of human development in the 21st century crisis of violence and displacement. Hum. Dev. 59(2–3), 128–151 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lundstrom, K., Baker, W.: To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. J. Second Lang. Writ. 18, 30–43 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Diab, N.M.A.: A comparison of peer, teacher and self-feedback on the reduction of language errors in student essays. System 57, 55–65 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The City University of New YorkNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations