Openness to experience (OTE) is one of the Big Five traits that describe the personality of the individual. Player satisfaction (Satisfaction) is composed of the factors of excitement, challenge, learning experience, team victory and self-discovery in a simulation game. OTE and Satisfaction appear to have a symbiotic relationship that feeds on their characteristics and outcomes. This study is undertaken to understand the relationship between OTE and Satisfaction in a simulation game.
Objectives of the Study
The objectives are to develop a scale of OTE in the context of a simulation game, to identify the factors of OTE and to study the interactive effects of OTE and Satisfaction and their factors.
Methods
An instrument of 40 statements was administered to 190 post-graduate management students at the end of a brand-related simulation game. It had 12 statements that represented OTE and 28 statements of the Satisfaction scale. The data was purified and processed for factor analysis; the variables and their factors were subjected to correlation and regression.
Results
Two OTE factors, each of eigenvalue greater than one, were extracted and named search for novelty and passion to know.
Discussion
The conclusions of this study may be generalisable only to sample profiles that are most similar to the study sample, but not to other contexts due to the ambiguous effect of personality, contexts and cultures on the study variables. The strong positive correlations between OTE, Satisfaction and their factors show their bases in a common platform, i.e. the experience of the simulation game. The search for novelty predicts Satisfaction more powerfully than OTE predicts Satisfaction. Self-discovery, learning experience and excitement affect OTE positively and more powerfully than challenge, team victory or Satisfaction. Further studies of passion, intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy may enhance our understanding of their impact on Satisfaction.
AgansaH. P.SubS.EttekalA.V. (2018). Peer motivational climate and character development: Testing a practitioner-developed youth sport model. Journal of Adolescence, 62(1), 108–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2017.11.008
2.
ArnandizO. M.MolinerM.AlegreF. (2022). When CLIL is for all: Improving learner motivation through peer-tutoring in mathematics. System, 106, 102773, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102773
BatemanC. (2014). Empirical game aesthetics. In AngelidesM. C.AgiusH. (Eds.), Handbook of digital games (pp. 411–443). Wiley-IEEE Press, Hoboken, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41316-7_1
5.
BatemanC. (2016). The aesthetic motives of play. In KarpouzisK.YannakakisG.N. (eds.), Emotion in games, Socio-Affective Computing (pp. 3–20), Vol. 4. Springer Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41316-7_1
6.
BerlyneD. E. (1970). Novelty, complexity, and hedonic value. Perception & Psychophysics, 8(5-A), 279–286. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212593
7.
BloodgoodJ. M.ChiltonM. A. (2012). Performance implications of matching adaption and innovation cognitive style with explicit and tacit knowledge resources. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 10, 106–117. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2012.3
8.
ButlerY. G. (2016). Motivational elements of digital instructional games: A study of young L2 learners' game designs. Language Teaching Research, 21(6), 735–750. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816683560
9.
CantR. P.CooperS. J. (2017). Use of simulation-based learning in undergraduate nurse education: An umbrella systematic review. Nurse Education Today, 49, 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.11.015
10.
DeYoungC. G.QuiltyL. C.PetersonJ. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 880–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2011.12.003
11.
DukeR. D.GeurtsJ. L. A. (2004). Policy games for strategic management. Amsterdam: Dutch University Press. ISBN: 9036193419.
12.
DumblekarV.DharU. (2021). Learning from a business simulation game: A factor-analytic study. In WardaszkoM.MeijerS.LukoschH.KanegaeH.KrizW. C.Grzybowska-BrzezińskaM. (Eds.), Simulation gaming through times and disciplines. ISAGA 2019. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 11988. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72132-9_28
13.
DumblekarV.DubeyJ.DharU. (2022). Development of the player satisfaction scale - a factor analytic study. In DharU.DubeyJ.DumblekarV.MeijerS.LukoschH. (Eds.), Gaming, Simulation and innovations: Challenges and opportunities. ISAGA 2021. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 13219. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09959-5_13
ErwinD. H. (2020). A conceptual framework of evolutionary novelty and innovation. Biological Reviews,1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12643
16.
GeaninaCucu-CiuhanaRăban-MotounuN. (2012). The openness to experience questionnaire: Construction and validation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 33, 717–721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.215
17.
GeorgeJ. M.ZhouJ. (2001). When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.86.3.513
18.
GieseJ. L.CoteJ. A. (2000). Defining Consumer Satisfaction. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 4, 1–24.
19.
GocłowskaM. A.RitterS. M.ElliotA. J.BaasM. (2019). Novelty seeking is linked to openness and extraversion, and can lead to greater creative performance. Journal of Personality, 87(2), 252–266. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12387
HofstedeG. (1983). National cultures in four dimensions: A research based theory of cultural differences among nations. International Studies of Management & Organization, 13(1-2), 46–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.1983.11656358
24.
HofstedeG.NeuijenB.OhayvD. D.SandersG. (1990). Measuring organizational cultures: A qualitative and quantitative study across twenty cases. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(2), 286–316. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393392
25.
HofstedeG. J.de CaluwéL.PetersV. (2010). Why simulation games work - in search of the active substance: A synthesis. Simulation & Gaming, 41(6), 824–843. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878110375596
26.
HomanA. C.HollenbeckJ. R.HumphreyS. E.Van KnippenbergD.IlgenD. R.Van KleefG. A. (2008). Facing differences with an open mind: Openness to experience, salience of intragroup differences, and performance of diverse work groups. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6), 1204–1222. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2008.35732995
27.
HongR. (2015). Finding passion in work: Media, passion and career guides. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(2), 190–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549414563295
28.
JayalathJ.EsichaikulV. (2020). Gamification to enhance motivation and engagement in blended elearning for technical and vocational education and training. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09466-2
29.
KahnA. S.ShenC.LucL.RatanR. A.CoaryS.HouJ.MengJ.OsbornJ.WilliamsD. (2015). The Trojan player typology: A cross-genre, cross-cultural, behaviorally validated scale of video game play motivations. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 354–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.018
30.
KarmakarB.LiuP.MukherjeeG.CheH.DuttaS. (2022). Improved retention analysis in freemium role-playing games by jointly modelling players’ motivation, progression and churn. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, 185, 102–133. https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12730
31.
KellerJ. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2–10. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30221294
32.
KlabbersJ. H. G. (2014). Social problem solving: Beyond method. In DukeR. D.KrizW. C. (Eds.), Back to the future of gaming (pp. 12–29). Bielefeld: W. Bertelsmann Verlag. SBN: E-Book: 978-3-7639-5426-1.
33.
KolbD. A. (1984). Experiential Learning. England: Prentice Hall. ISBN: 0132952610.
34.
KrizW. C.HenseJ. U. (2006). Theory-oriented evaluation for the design of and research in gaming and simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 37(2), 268–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878106287950
35.
LiC.MuradM.ShahzadF.KhanM. A. S.AshrafS. F.DogbeC. S. K. (2020). Entrepreneurial passion to entrepreneurial behaviour: Role of entrepreneurial alertness, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and proactive personality. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01611
36.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T.Jr. (1985). Updating Norman's “adequate taxonomy”: Intelligence and personality dimensions in natural language and in questionnaires. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), 710–721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.710
37.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T.Jr. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81
MesaA. M.LlopisO.GraneroA. G.PeñuelaJ. O. (2020). Enhancing organisational commitment through task significance: The moderating role of openness to experience. European Management Journal, 38(4), 602–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.12.010
40.
MurnieksC. Y.MosakowskiE.CardonM. S. (2014). Pathways of passion: Identity centrality, passion, and behavior among entrepreneurs. Journal of Management, 40(6), 1583–1606. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920
41.
Pérez‐SanagustínM.Sapunar‐OpazoD.Pérez‐ÁlvarezR.HilligerI.BeyA.Maldonado‐MahauadJ.BaierJ. (2020). A MOOC‐based flipped experience: Scaffolding SRL strategies improves learners’ time management and engagement. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22337
42.
PerryR.SibleyC. G. (2013). Seize and freeze: Openness to experience shapes judgments of societal threat. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(6), 677–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.06.006
43.
PetersV. A. M.VissersG. A. N. (2004). A simple classification model for debriefing simulation games. Simulation & Gaming, 35(1), 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878103253719
44.
PhillipsR. S.HorstmanT.VyeN.BransfordJ. (2014). Engagement and games for learning: Expanding definitions and methodologies. Simulation & Gaming, 45(4-5), 548–568. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878114553576
45.
PróchniakP. (2014). The wilderness novelty seeking scale. Perceptual & Motor Skills: Physical Development & Measurement, 119(2), 577–590. https://doi.org/10.2466/03.PMS.119c20z7
46.
RaufelderD.LazaridesR.LätschA. (2018). How classmates' stress affects student's quality of motivation. Stress and Health, 34, 649–662. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2832
47.
RobsonK.PlanggerK.KietzmannJ. H.McCarthyI.PittL. (2015). Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification. Business Horizons, 58, 411–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.03.006
48.
SchellenbergB. J. I.Verner-FilionJ.GaudreauP.BailisD. S.LafrenièreM. K.VallerandR. J. (2019). Testing the dualistic model of passion using a novel quadripartite approach: A look at physical and psychological well-being. Journal of Personality, 87(2), 163–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12378
49.
SilviaP. J.ChristensenA. P. (2020). Looking at the curious personality: Individual differences in curiosity and openness to experience. Current opinion in behavioral sciences, 35, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.05.013
50.
SilviaP. J.NusbaumE. C.BergC.MartinC.O’ConnorA. (2009). Openness to experience, plasticity, and creativity: Exploring lower-order, high-order, and interactive effects. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 1087–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.05.013
TanC.-S.LauX.-S.KungY.-T.KailsanR. A/L. (2016). Openness to experience enhances creativity: The mediating role of intrinsic motivation and the creative process engagement. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 53(1), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.170
53.
ThavikulwatP. (2004). The architecture of computerized business gaming simulations. Simulation & Gaming, 35(2), 242–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878104263545
54.
VallerandR. J.BlanchardC. M.MageauG. A.KoestnerR.RatelleC.LéonardM.GagnéM.MarsolaiJ. (2003). Les passions de l'ame: On obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 756–767. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.756
55.
WooS. E.ChernyshenkoO. S.LongleyA.ZhangZ.-X.ChiuC.-Y.StarkS. E. (2014). Openness to experience: Its lower level structure, measurement, and cross-cultural equivalence. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2013.806328
