Mitigating Cognitive Bias through the Use of Serious Games: Effects of Feedback

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8462)


A serious video game was created to teach players about cognitive bias and encourage mitigation of both confirmation bias and the fundamental attribution error. Multiplayer and single-player versions of the game were created to test the effect of different feedback sources on bias mitigation performance. A total of 626 participants were randomly assigned to play the single player/multiplayer game once or repeatedly. The results indicate the single player game was superior at reducing confirmation bias and that repeated plays and plays of longer duration were more effective at mitigating both biases than a control condition where participants watched a training video.


Cognitive bias Confirmation bias Feedback Fundamental Attribution error Serious Games 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Chaiken, S.: Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39(5), 752–766 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Todorov, A., Chaiken, S., Henderson, M.D.: The heuristic-systematic model of social information processing. In: The Persuasion Handbook: Developments in Theory and Practice, pp. 195–211 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, S., Chaiken, S.: Dual-process theories in social psychology. In: Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology, pp. 73–96 (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nickerson, R.S.: Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology 2(2), 175 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harvey, J.H., Town, J.P., Yarkin, K.L.: How fundamental is" the fundamental attribution error"? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40(2), 346 (1981)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Frank, M.G., Feeley, T.H.: To catch a liar: Challenges for research in lie detection training. Journal of Applied Communication Research 31(1), 58–75 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vrij, A.: The impact of information and setting on detection of deception by police detectives. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 18(2), 117–136 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mayer, R.E.: Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist 59(1), 14 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Delacruz, G.C.: Impact of Incentives On the Use Of Feedback in Educational Videogames: CRESST report 813. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, 1–18 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hays, R.T.: The effectiveness of instructional games: A literature review and discussion. In: Book The Effectiveness of Instructional Games: A Literature Review and Discussion (DTIC Document) (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mayer, R.E., Johnson, C.I.: Adding instructional features that promote learning in a game-like environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research 42(3), 241–265 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moreno, R.: Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: Effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instructional Science 32(1-2), 99–113 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bangert-Drowns, R.L., Kulik, C.-L.C., Kulik, J.A., Morgan, M.: The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research 61(2), 213–238 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hattie, J., Timperley, H.: The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research 77(1), 81–112 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kluger, A.N., DeNisi, A.: The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin 119(2), 254–284 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Serge, S.R., Priest, H.A., Durlach, P.J., Johnson, C.I.: The effects of static and adaptive performance feedback in game-based training. Computers in Human Behavior 29(3), 1150–1158 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Billings, D.R.: Adaptive feedback in simulation-based training. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shute, V.J.: Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research 78(1), 153–189 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kerschreiter, R., Schulz-Hardt, S., Mojzisch, A., Frey, D.: Biased Information Search in Homogeneous Groups: Confidence as a Moderator for the Effect of Anticipated Task Requirements. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34(5), 679–691 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Silverman, B.G.: Modeling and critiquing the confirmation bias in human reasoning. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 22(5), 972–982 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Michael, D.R., Chen, S.L.: Serious games: Games that educate, train, and inform. Thomson Course Technology (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dickey, M.D.: World of Warcraft and the impact of game culture and play in an undergraduate game design course. Computers & Education 56(1), 200–209 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., Smith, K.A.: Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom (1998)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rey, G.D., Buchwald, F.: The expertise reversal effect: Cognitive load and motivational explanations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 17(1), 33–48 (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sweller, J.: Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction 4(4), 295–312 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gonzalez, C., Best, B., Healy, A.F., Kole, J.A., Bourne, L.E.: A cognitive modeling account of simultaneous learning and fatigue effects. Cognitive Systems Research 12(1), 19–32 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Riggio, H.R., Garcia, A.L.: The Power of Situations: Jonestown and the Fundamental Attribution Error. Teaching of Psychology 36(2), 108–112 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lave, J., Wenger, E.: Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press (1991)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Communication and Center for Applied Social ResearchUniversity of OklahomaNormanUSA
  2. 2.Price College of Business and Center for Applied Social ResearchUniversity of OklahomaUSA
  3. 3.K20 CenterUniversity of Oklahoma.NormanUSA
  4. 4.Center for the Management of InformationUniversity of Arizona, McClelland HallTucsonUSA
  5. 5.Hugh Downs School of CommunicationArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  6. 6.Department of CommunicationSalem State UniversitySalemUSA

Personalised recommendations