Social Resiliency in Digital Games

  • Kevin FeenanEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 840)


This paper offers an insight of social resiliency in digital games based on ten years of observations from conference presentations on various digital games and virtual reality simulations. The paper articulates the issue of disruptive innovation and its relationship to the driving need for future college and university graduates to be prepared to face challenges associated with complex problems. The paper outlines five key success factors associated with digital game-based learning and their relationship to social resilience. Finally, the paper concludes by discussing several key implications on how future game-based learning designers may be better able to tackle the problem of managing disruptive innovation. Researchers may draw upon this paper’s observations to help frame ways in which future digital games may be better suited for instructional purposes when trying to address challenges of disruptive technology.


Digital games Disruptive innovation Social resilience 


  1. 1.
    Kegan, R., Lahey, L.L.: Immunity to Change: How to Overcome It and Unlock the Potential in Yourself and Your Organization. Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Luo, Y., et al.: Chemical engineering academia-industry alignment: expectations about new graduates. In: American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)-National Science Foundation (NSF) (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Statistics Canada: Co-operative education. Accessed 01 Mar 2018
  4. 4.
    Kuhn, T.S.: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 3rd edn. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Conklin, J.: Dialogue Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. Wiley, Hoboken (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liebman, J.: Serious quantum computers are finally here. what are we going to do with them? MIT Technology Review. Accessed 01 Mar 2018
  7. 7.
    D-Wave quantum computing applications. Accessed 01 Mar 2018
  8. 8.
    Google Quantum Playground. Accessed 01 Mar 2018
  9. 9.
    Welcome to the IBM Q Experience. Accessed 01 Mar 2018
  10. 10.
    Vogel, J.J., et al.: Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: a meta-analysis. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 34(3), 229–243 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Woo, J.-C.: Digital game-based learning supports student motivation, cognitive success, and performance outcomes. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 17(3), 291–307 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Clark, D.B., Tanner-Smith, E.E., Killingsworth, S.S.: Digital games, design, and learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 86(1), 79–122 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weitze, C.L.: Learning and motivational processes when students design curriculum-based digital learning games. In: European Conference on Games Based Learning, p. 579 (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cropanzano, R., Mitchell, M.S.: Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review. J. Manag. 31(6), 874–900 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aarrestad, M., Brøndbo, M.T., Carlsen, A.: When stakes are high and guards are low: high-quality connections in knowledge creation. Knowl. Process Manag. 22, 88–98 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    De Leon, L., Feenan, K.: Editor’s ediface. J. Virtual Stud. 7(2), 3 (2017)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chiappe, A., Ricardo, A.P., Arias, V.: Open assessment of learning: a meta-synthesis. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 17(6), 44–61 (2016) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fullan, M.: The new pedagogy: students and teachers as learning partners. Learn. Landscapes 6(2), 23–29 (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bronkhorst, L.H., et al.: Deliberate practice in teacher education. Eur. J. Teacher Educ. 37(1), 18–34 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Watson, S.L., et al.: Instructor’s use of social presence, teaching presence, and attitudinal dissonance: a case study of an attitudinal change MOOC. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 17(3), 54–74 (2016) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Health Happens Here. California Museum. Accessed 08 Mar 2018
  22. 22.
    Scott, W.R.: Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hruska, J.: Nvidia’s CEO Declares Moore’s Law Dead. Accessed 08 Mar 2018
  24. 24.
    Reimer, C.J.: Big Data-Fueled Design: Rapid Iteration and Constructing Compelling Systems. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Czarnota, J.: Do EVE online players dream of Icelandic spaceships? The role and mechanisms of cocreation in CCP’s success. In: Carter, M., Bergström, K., Woolford, D. (eds.) Internet Spaceships Are Serious Business: An EVE Online Reader, pp. 167–188. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis (2016)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nonaka, I., Toyama, R.: The theory of the knowledge-creating firm: subjectivity, objectivity and synthesis. Ind. Corp. Change 14(3), 419–436 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Krahulik, M.: 10 years ago today, Leeroy Jenkins fumbled into memetic super-stardom. Digital Trends. Accessed 08 Mar 2018
  28. 28.
    Moore, B.: Inside the epic online space battle that cost gamers $300,000. Wired Magazine Online (2014). Accessed 08 Mar 2018
  29. 29.
    Alford, J., Edgar, T.F.: Preparing chemical engineering students for industry. Chem. Eng. Prog. 113(11), 25–28 (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rockcliffe University ConsortiumSacramentoUSA

Personalised recommendations