Current Research Trends in Games for Public Participation in Planning

Viktorija Prilenska 1
  • 1 Tallinn University of Technology, , Tallinn, Estonia

Abstract

The research, outlined in the paper, explores games as methods for better public participation in planning. Drawing on the thematic analysis of scientific publications, prominent authors and research centres, as well as key research themes, are identified. The themes include motivational aspects of gamified participation, online and pervasive games for massive civic engagement, deliberative and educational games for collective problem-solving, game co-design for questioning and reframing planning concepts. The paper concludes with the benefits of gamification for participatory planning practice.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Lerner, J. Playing with power: Participatory planning games in Rosario’s villas. Latin American Perspectives, 2013, Vol. 20, Issue 189, pp. 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0094582X12467760

  • 2. Shipley, R., Shipley, S. UTZ. Making it Count: A Review of the Value and Techniques for Public Consultation. Journal of Planning Literature, 2012, Vol. 27, Issue 1, pp. 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412211413133

  • 3. Horelli, L. A Methodology of Participatory Planning. In Robert B. Bechtel, Robert & Arza Churchman, ed., Handbook of Environmental Psychology. S.l.: John Wiley & Sons, 2002, pp. 607–628. ISBN 0-471-40594-9.

  • 4. Aravena, A. My architectural philosophy? Bring the community into the process. TEDGlobal 2014 [online]. TED Ideas worth spreading [cited 13.01.2020]. https://www.ted.com/talks/alejandro_aravena_my_architectural_philosophy_bring_the_community_into_the_process/discussion?referrer=playlist-11_must_see_ted_talks

  • 5. BLOCK BY BLOCK. Our work. Project selection [online]. Block by Block [cited 13.01.2020]. https://www.blockbyblock.org/our-work

  • 6. Connelly, S. Looking inside public involvement: How is it made so ineffective and can we change this? Community Development Journal. 2006, Vol. 41, Issue 1, pp. 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsi046

  • 7. Nienhuis, I., Van Dijk, T., De Roo, G. Let’s Collaborate! But Who’s Really Collaborating? Individual Interests as a Leitmotiv for Urban Renewal and Regeneration Strategies. Planning Theory & Practice, 2011, Vol. 12, Issue 1, pp. 95–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2011.546671

  • 8. Donders, M., Hartmann, T., Kokx, A. E-Participation in Urban Planning: Getting and Keeping Citizens Involved. International Journal of E-Planning Research, 2014, Vol. 3, Issue 2, pp. 54–69. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijepr.2014040104

  • 9. Rowe, G., Frewer, L.J. Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 2000, Vol. 25, Issue 1, pp. 2–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224390002500101

  • 10. Johnson, I.G., Macdonald, A., Briggs, J., Manuel, J., Salt, K., Flynn, E., Vines, J. Community Conversational. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ’17. S.l.: Association for Computing Machinery, 2017, pp. 2320–2333. ISBN 978-1-4503-4655-9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025559

  • 11. Wilson, A., Tewdwr-Jones, M., Comber, R. Urban planning, public participation and digital technology: App development as a method of generating citizen involvement in local planning process. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2019, Vol. 46, Issue 2, pp. 286–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808317712515

  • 12. Schneider, S.H., Busse, S. Participatory Budgeting in Germany–A Review of Empirical Findings. International Journal of Public Administration, 2019, Vol. 43, Issue 3, pp. 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2018.1426601

  • 13. Kleinhans, R., Van Ham, M., Evans-Cowley, J. Using Social Media and Mobile Technologies to Foster Engagement and Self-Organization in Participatory Urban Planning and Neighbourhood Governance. Planning Practice & Research, 2015, Vol. 30, Issue 3, pp. 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2015.1051320

  • 14. Klamert, K., Münster, S. Child’s play - A literature-based survey on gamified tools and methods for fostering public participation in urban planning. In: Electronic Participation, 9th IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference, ePart 2017, St. Petersburg, Russia, September 4-7, 2017, Proceedings, S.l.: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 24–33. ISBN 978-3-319-64321-2. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64322-9_3

  • 15. Ampatzidou, C., Gugerell, K., Constantinescu, T., Devisch, O., Jauschneg, M., Berger, M. All Work and No Play? Facilitating Serious Games and Gamified Applications in Participatory Urban Planning and Governance. Urban Planning, 2018, Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 34–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/up.v3i1.1261

  • 16. Minnery, J., Searle, G. Toying with the City? Using the Computer Game SimCityTM4 in Planning Education. Planning Practice and Research, 2013, Vol. 29, Issue 1, pp. 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2013.829335

  • 17. Potts, R., Jacka, L., Yee, L.H. Can we ‘Catch ‘em All’? An exploration of the nexus between augmented reality games, urban planning and urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 2017, Vol. 22, Issue 6, pp. 866–880. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2017.1369873

  • 18. Gordon, E., Baldwin-Philippi, J. Playful civic learning: Enabling reflection and lateral trust in game-based public participation. International Journal of Communication, 2014, Vol. 8, Issue 1, pp. 759–786.

  • 19. Tan, E. Negotiation and Design for the Self-Organizing City. Gaming as a method for Urban Design. S.l.: TU Delft, 2014. A+BE | Architecture and the Built Environment. ISBN 978-94-6186-356-0. https://doi.org/10.7480/abe.2014.11

  • 20. Thiel, S.K., Ertiö, T.P., Baldauf, M. Why so serious? The Role of Gamification on Motivation and Engagement in e-Participation. Interaction Design and Architectures, 2017, Vol. 35, pp. 158–181.

  • 21. Winn, B. M. The Design, Play, and Experience Framework. In: Handbook of Research on Effective Electronic Gaming in Education. Hershey, PA, USA: Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global), 2009, pp. 1010–1024. ISBN 978-1-59904-808-6. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-808-6.ch058

  • 22. Duke, R. D. Origin and Evolution of Policy Simulation: A Personal Journey. Simulation & Gaming, 2011, Vol. 42, Issue 3, pp. 342–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878110367570

  • 23. Feldt, A.G. Experience with Simulation / Gaming: 1960–2010. Simulation & Gaming, 2014, Vol. 45, Issue 3, pp. 283–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878114543983

  • 24. Sanoff, H. Community participation methods in design and planning. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2000. 320 p. ISBN 0-471-35545-3.

  • 25. Sanoff, H. Democratic Design: Participation Case Studies in Urban and Small Town Environments. S.l.: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, 2010. 168 p. ISBN 978-3-639-28830-8.

  • 26. Devisch, O., Poplin, A., Sofronie, S. The Gamification of Civic Participation: Two Experiments in Improving the Skills of Citizens to Reflect Collectively on Spatial Issues. Journal of Urban Technology, 2016, Vol. 23, Issue 2, pp. 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2015.1102419

  • 27. Thiel, S.-K., Lehner, U., Sturmer, T., Gospodarek, J. Insights from a m-participation prototype in the wild. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communication Workshops (PerCom Workshops 2015). S.l.: IEEE, 2015, pp. 166–171. ISBN 978-1-4799-8425-1. https://doi.org/10.1109/PERCOMW.2015.7134013

  • 28. Thiel, S.-K., Frohlich, P. Gamification as Motivation to Engage in Location-Based Public Participation. In: Georg GARTNER and Haosheng HUANG, ed., Progress in Location-Based Services 2016. S.l.: Springer International Publishing AG, 2017, Lecture notes in Geoinformation and cartography, pp. 399–421. ISBN 978-3-319-47289-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47289-8_20

  • 29. Gordon, E., Haas, J., Michelson, B. Civic creativity: Role-playing games in deliberative process. International Journal of Communication, 2017, Vol. 11, pp. 3789–3807.

  • 30. Devisch, O. Should Planners Start Playing Computer Games? Arguments from SimCity and Second Life. Planning Theory & Practice, 2008, Vol. 9, Issue 2, pp. 209–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649350802042231

  • 31. Devisch, O., Gugerell, K., Diephuis, J., Constantinescu, T., Ampatzidou, C., Jauschneg, M. Mini is beautiful. Playing serious mini-games to facilitate collective learning on complex urban processes. Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal, 2017, Vol. 35, pp. 141–157.

  • 32. Poplin, A. Games and serious games in urban planning: study cases. In: Computational Science and Its Applications - ICCSA 2011. S.l.: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 1–14. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. ISBN 978-3-642-21887-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21887-3_1

  • 33. Poplin, A. Playful public participation in urban planning: A case study for online serious games. Computers Environment and Urban Systems, 2012, Vol. 36, Issue 3, pp. 195–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2011.10.003

  • 34. Poplin, A. Digital serious game for urban planning: „B3-Design your Marketplace!” Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2014, Vol. 41, pp. 493–511. https://doi.org/10.1068/b39032

  • 35. Poplin, A., Shenk, L., Passe, U. Transforming Pervasive into Collaborative: Engaging Youth as Leaders with GIS through a Framework that Integrates Technologies, Storytelling, and Action. Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal, 2017, Vol. 35, pp. 182–204.

  • 36. The A-Z of social research: a dictionary of key social science research concepts (Eds.: R. L. Miller, J.D. Brewer). London; Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE, 2003. 362 p. ISBN 978-0-7619-7132-0.

  • 37. Taylor, D. The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting It. University of Toronto. Writing Advice [online, cited 13.01.2020]. https://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/types-of-writing/literature-review/

  • 38. Creswell, J. W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches. 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, California, USA: SAGE Publications, 2009. 296 p. ISBN 978-1-4129-6557-6.

  • 39. Saunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A. Research methods for business students. 7th edition. Edinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex, England: Pearson Education Ltd., 2016. 768 p. ISBN 978-1-292-01662-7.

  • 40. Cord, A. F., Roessiger, F., Schwarz, N. Geocaching data as an indicator for recreational ecosystem services in urban areas: Exploring spatial gradients, preferences and motivations. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2015, Vol. 144, pp. 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.08.015

  • 41. Eklund, A. Gaming the Real World [online]. Plethora-project [cited 13.01.2020]. https://www.plethora-project.com/gaming-the-real-world

  • 42. Stark, E. Playful places: Uncovering hidden heritage with Ingress. In: Social, Casual and Mobile Games: The changing gaming landscape. New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2016. ISBN 978-1-5013-1060-7.

  • 43. Charmaz, K. Constructing grounded theory. London, UK: Sage Publications, 2006. 416 p. ISBN 978-0-7619-7352-2.

  • 44. IAP2 International Association for Public Participation. Core Values, Ethics, Spectrum – The 3 Pillars of Public Participation. IAP2 International Association for Public Participation. Resources, 2018 [online]. IAP2 [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.iap2.org/page/pillars

  • 45. Rowe, G., Frewer, L. J. A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Science Technology and Human Values, 2005, Vol. 30, Issue 2, pp. 251–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243904271724

  • 46. Hamdi, N., Goethert, R. Action planning for cities: a guide to community practice. Chichester; New York: John Wiley, 1997. 264 p. ISBN 978-0-471-96928-0.

  • 47. Wates, N. The community planning handbook: how people can shape their cities, towns and villages in any part of the world. London: Earthscan, 2000. 240 p. ISBN 978-1-85383-654-1.

  • 48. ENGAGEMENT LAB. What’s @stake? [online]. atstakegame [cited 14.01.2020]. https://atstakegame.org

  • 49. Hummel, K. @Stake: A Role-Playing Card Game. 18. September 2015 [online]. NCDD. Resource Center [cited 14.01.2020]. http://ncdd.org/rc/item/10150/

  • 50. Cameron, K. Using a B.U.G. to Promote Urban Design. 1. March 2004 [online]. Metropolis [cited 14.01.2020]. http://www.metropolismag.com/cities/using-a-b-u-g-to-promote-urban-design/

  • 51. Ferri, G., Coppock, P. Serious Urban Games. From play in the city to play for the city. In: Media and the City: Urbanism, Technology and Communication [Eds.: Simone Tosoni, Matteo Tarantino and Chiara Giaccardi]. S.l.: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2013, pp. 120–134. ISBN 978-1-4438-4943-2.

  • 52. Salen, K. Big Urban Game [online]. Katie Salen. Selekted Work [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.katiesalen.me/projects#/big-urban-game/

  • 53. STEVENMN01. B.U.G. Blue Day 1, 3. June 2011 [online]. YouTube Video [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2opyxELpaHM

  • 54. Constantinescu, T. I., Devisch, O., Kostov, G. City Makers: Insights on the Development of a Serious Game to Support Collective Reflection and Knowledge Transfer in Participatory Processes. International Journal of E-Planning Research, 2017, Vol. 6, Issue 4. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEPR.2017100103

  • 55. INSHENGXIA. What is „Community PlanIt”, 9 February 2013 [online]. YouTube Video [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcJ09qtkOpw

  • 56. Gugerell, K., Zuidema, C. Gaming for the energy transition. Experimenting and learning in co-designing a serious game prototype. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, Vol. 169, pp. 105–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.142

  • 57. Prilenska, V. Serious game for modelling neighbourhood energy supply scenarios. In: SBE19 Thessaloniki − Sustainability in the built environment for climate change mitigation. 23−25 October 2019, Conference Proceedings. S.l.: IOP Science.

  • 58. PLAY!UC. Floating City [online]. Play!UC Playing with Urban Complexity [cited 14.01.2020]. http://play-uc.net/?page_id=529

  • 59. Prandi, C., Roccetti, M., Salomoni, P. Valentina NISI and Nuno Jardim NUNES. Fighting exclusion: a multimedia mobile app with zombies and maps as a medium for civic engagement and design. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 2017, Vol. 76, pp. 4951–4979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-016-3780-9

  • 60. Prilenska, V. Participation Game. Reflections on the iterative design process. PlaNext. In print.

  • 61. Valdez Young, A. Play Before Plan: Games for the Public and Planners to Value the Street. Journal of Urban Technology, 2015, Vol. 22, Issue 3, pp. 97–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2015.1040299

  • 62. Valdez Young, A. Shopomama. 25 August 2012 [online]. ISSUU [cited 23.08.2019]. https://issuu.com/betterthanliving/docs/shopomama

  • 63. Valdez Young, A. Arrivalocity. 25 August 2012 [online]. ISSUU [cited 23.08.2019]. https://issuu.com/betterthanliving/docs/arrivalocity

  • 64. Valdez Young, A. Pech City, 25 August 2012 [online]. ISSUU [cited 23.08.2019]. https://issuu.com/betterthanliving/docs/pechcity

  • 65. KULTÚRAKTÍV. Games: Pop-up Pest [online]. KULTÚRAKTÍV [cited 23.08.2019]. https://kulturaktiv.hu/en/projects/pop-up-pest/

  • 66. Toth, E., Poplin, A. Pop-up Pest: An Educational Game for Active Participation of Children and Youth in Urban Planning. In: REAL CORP 2013. Planning Times You better keep planning or you get in deep water, for the cities they are a-changin’. Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Urban Planning, Regional Development and Information Society. Schwechat-Rannersdorf, Austria: CORP – Competence Center of Urban and Regional Planning, 2013, pp. 731–741. ISBN 978-3-9503110-4-4.

  • 67. Toth, E., Poplin, A. ParticiPécs − a cooperative game fostering learning about the built environment and urban planning. In: 17th AGILE Conference on Geographic Information Science (AGILE 2014), Workshop Geogames and Geoplay, June 03–06, 2014, Castellón, Spain. 2014.

  • 68. Olszewski, R., Turek, A., Laczynski, M. Urban Gamification as a Source of Information for Spatial Data Analysis and Predictive Participatory Modelling of a City’s Development. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Data Management Technologies and Applications - Vol. 1: DATA. 2016, pp. 176–181. https://doi.org/10.5220/0006005201760181

  • 69. LOGIVILLE. Urbax 21. Simulation pédagogique de l’aménagement urbain [online]. Urbax 21. [cited 23.08.2019]. https://www.urbax.eu/en/presentation-2/

  • 70. Gomes, S. L., Hermans, L. M., Islam, K. F., Huda, S. N., Hossain, Z., Thissen, W.A.H. Capacity Building for Water Management in Peri-Urban Communities, Bangladesh: A Simulation-Gaming Approach. Water, 2018, Vol. 10, pp. 1704–1723. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10111704

  • 71. ILAB.O. ZWERM [online]. Player Vimeo [cited 23.08.2019]. https://player.vimeo.com/video/65648085

  • 72. Laureyssens, T., Coenen, T., Claeys, L., Mechant, P., Criel, J., Van De Moere, A. ZWERM: A modular component network approach for an urban participation game. In: CHI ’14: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2014, pp. 3259–3268. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557053

  • 73. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., Nacke, L. From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining gamification. In: MindTrek ’11: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, 2011, pp. 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040

  • 74. Leao, S., Izadpahani, P. Factors Motivating Citizen Engagement in Mobile Sensing: Insights from a Survey of Non-Participants. Journal of Urban Technology, 2016, Vol. 23, Issue 4, pp. 85–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2016.1175824

  • 75. Bowser, A. E., Hansen, D. L., Raphael, J., Reid, M., Gamett, R. J., He, Y. R., Rotman, D., Preece, J. J. Prototyping in PLACE: A Scalable Approach to Developing Location-Based Apps and Games. In: CHI ’13: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2013, pp. 1519–1528. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466202

  • 76. Bowser, A., Hansen, D., Preece, J., He, Y., Boston, C., Hammock, J. Gamifying citizen science: A study of two user groups. In: CSCW Companion ’14: Proceedings of the companion publication of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing, 2014, pp. 137–140. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556420.2556502

  • 77. Raczkowsky, F. Making Points the Point - Towards a History of Ideas of Gamification. In: Mathias Fuchs, Sonia Fizek, Paolo Ruffino and Niklas Schape, ed., Rethinking Gamification. Lüneburg, Germany: Meson Press, Hybrid Publishing Lab, Leuphana University of Lüneburg, n.d., pp.141–160. ISBN 978-3-95796-000-9.

  • 78. Bogost, I. Persuasive Games: Exploitationware, 3 May 2011 [online]. Gamasutra [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/134735/persuasive_games_exploitationware.php

  • 79. Yannakakis, G. N., Paiva, A. Emotion in Games. In: The Oxford Handbook of Affective Computing [Eds.: Rafael Calvo, Sidney D’Mello, Jonathan Gratch and Arvid Kappas]. S.l.: Oxford University Press, 2014. ISBN 978-0-19-994223-7.

  • 80. Geher, G. Video Games and Emotional States. why your kid is addicted to Fortnite, 3 September 2018 [online]. Psychology Today [cited 14.01.2020]. https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/darwins-subterranean-world/201809/video-games-and-emotional-states

  • 81. Nicholson, S. A User-Centered Theoretical Framework for Meaningful Gamification. In: Games+Learning+Society 8.0. June 13–15, 2012, 2013, 658 p.

  • 82. Brown, G., Kyttä, M. Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): A synthesis based on empirical research. Applied Geography, 2014, Vol. 46, pp. 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.11.004

  • 83. Wiggins, A. Free as in puppies. In: Proc. CSCW 2013, 2013, pp. 1469–1480. https://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.2441942

  • 84. Ertiö, T.-P. Participatory Apps for Urban Planning—Space for Improvement. Planning Practice & Research, 2015, Vol. 30, Issue 3, pp. 303–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2015.1052942

  • 85. Kahila-Tani, M., Broberg, A., Kyttä, M., Tyger, T. Let the Citizens Map—Public Participation GIS as a Planning Support System in the Helsinki Master Plan Process. Planning Practice and Research, 2016, Vol. 31 Issue 2, pp. 195–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2015.1104203

  • 86. Eräranta, S., Kahila-Tani, M., Nummi-Sund, P. Web-based Public Participation in Urban Planning Competitions: International Journal of E-Planning Research, 2015, Vol. 4, Issue 1, pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijepr.2015010101

  • 87. EESTI ARHITEKTUURIKESKUS. Main Street: giving public spaces back to people [online]. Peatänav [cited 14.01.2020]. http://www.peatanav.ee/en

  • 88. Oser, J., Hooghe, M., Marien, S. Is Online Participation Distinct from Offline Participation? A Latent Class Analysis of Participation Types and Their Stratification. Political Research Quarterly, 2013, Vol. 66, Issue 1, pp. 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912912436695

  • 89. Krek, A. Rational Ignorance of the Citizens in Public Participatory Planning Alenka Krek. In: Manfred SCHRENK, ed., CORP 2005 GEO MULTIMEDIAProceedings 10 th International Conference on Information & Communication Technologies (ICT) in Urban Planning and Spatial Development and Impacts of ICT on Physical Space. S.l.: Department of computer aided planning and architecture, Vienna University of Technology, 2005, pp. 165–169. ISBN 3-901673-12-1.

  • 90. Graells-Garrido, E., Ferres, L., Caro, D., Bravo, L. The effect of Pokémon Go on the pulse of the city: a natural experiment. EPJ Data Science, 2017, Vol. 6, Issue 1, p. 23. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-017-0119-3

  • 91. Thakuriah, P., Tilahun, N. Y., Zellner, M. Big Data and Urban Informatics: Innovations and Challenges to Urban Planning and Knowledge Discovery. In: Seeing Cities Through Big Data [Eds.: Piyushimita Thakuriah, Nebiyou Tilahun and Moira Zellner]. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 11–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40902-3_2

  • 92. Goodspeed, R. Digital knowledge technologies in planning practice: from black boxes to media for collaborative inquiry. Planning Theory & Practice, 2016, Vol. 17, Issue 4, pp. 577–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2016.1212996

  • 93. Rodriguez, H. The playful and the serious: An approximation to Huizinga’s Homo Ludens, 2006 [online]. Game Studies [cited 14.01.2020]. http://gamestudies.org/0601/articles/rodriges

  • 94. Van Dijk, T., Ubels, H. How Dutch professionals conduct interactive design sessions to foster ‘shared understanding’. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2015, Vol. 43, Issue 3, pp. 464–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265813515617658

  • 95. Innes, J. E., Booher, D.E. Consensus Building as Role Playing and Bricolage. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1999, Vol. 65, Issue 1, pp. 9–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369908976031

  • 96. Sotamaa, O., Ermi, L., Laukkanen, T., Mäyrä, F., Nummela, J. The Role of Players in Game Design: A Methodological Perspective. In: Proceedings of Digital Experience: Design, Aesthetics, Practice. DAC 2005. 2005, pp. 35–42.

  • 97. Isbister, K., Flanagan, M., Hash, C. Designing games for learning: insights from conversations with designers. In: the 28th international conference: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI ’10. Atlanta, Georgia, USA: ACM Press, 2010, p. 204. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753637

  • 98. Khaled, R., Vasalou, A. Bridging serious games and participatory design. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 2014, Vol. 2, Issue 2, pp. 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2014.03.001

  • 99. Adams, E. Fundamentals of game design. Third edition. Berkeley, CA: New Riders, 2014. 576 p. ISBN 978-0-321-92967-9.

  • 100. Luck, R. What is it that makes participation in design participatory design? Design Studies, 2018, Vol. 59, pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2018.10.002

  • 101. Gee, J. P. Good Video Games and Good Learning: Collected Essays on Video Games, Learning and Literacy. 2nd edition. S.l.: Peter Lang Inc., International Academic Publishers, 2013. 194 p. ISBN 978-1-4331-2393-1.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search