PAXsims is devoted to peace, conflict, humanitarian, and development simulations and serious games for education, training, and policy analysis.
If you wish to be notified when new material is posted here, use the “subscribe by email” option below.
Relevant comments are welcomed.
PAXsims operates on a non-profit basis. You can donate to support our activities via Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/PAXsims
Join 3,540 other subscribers
Recent Posts
- Simulation & Gaming (June 2024)
- Fight Club International: The Readiness Micro-Game
- Scholarship opportunity for women interested in wargaming
- Using digital outbreak simulations in academic settings
- GPPI: Gaming the Political Economy of Conflict
- Wargamer Job at NDU
- Registration for Connections US 2024 now open
- Connections UK 2024
- All that’s left is the grading…
- Wargaming the effects of a Trump presidency on NATO
Top Posts
- The wargaming Wrens of the Western Approaches Tactical Unit
- Wargaming the effects of a Trump presidency on NATO
- Ace of Aces: or, why you should Do Maths as a game designer
- Derby House Principles
- Fight Club International: The Readiness Micro-Game
- AFTERSHOCK: A Humanitarian Crisis Game is now available for order!
- Engle: A short history of matrix games
- The National Security Decision Making Game
- Rivera et al: AI chatbots and nuclear escalation
- North of the Ibar River: A Kosovo matrix game
Categories
- call for papers
- conferences
- courses
- crowd-sourcing
- forthcoming games and simulations
- gaming vignettes
- job opportunities/positions vacant
- latest links
- methodology
- not-so-serious
- playtesters needed
- reader survey
- request for proposals
- scholarships and fellowships
- simulation and game reports
- simulation and game reviews
- simulation and gaming debacles
- simulation and gaming history
- simulation and gaming ideas
- simulation and gaming journals
- simulation and gaming materials
- simulation and gaming miscellany
- simulation and gaming news
- simulation and gaming publications
- simulation and gaming software
Archives
Associations
- Australian Defence Force Wargaming Group
- Connections Netherlands
- Connections North (Canada)
- Connections Oz (Australiasia)
- Connections UK
- Connections US
- Georgetown University Wargaming Society
- International Game Developers Association
- International Simulation and Gaming Association
- MORS Wargaming Community of Practice
- North American Simulation and Gaming Association
- SAGSET
- Serious Games Network – France
- Simulations Interoperability Standards Organization
- UK Fight Club
- USA Fight Club Wargaming Group
- Women's Wargaming Network
- Zenobia Award
Institutions (public and commercial)
- Advanced Disaster, Emergency and Rapid Response Simulation
- Booz Allen Hamilton—experiential analytics
- BreakAway—serious games
- Brian Train-game designs
- Civic Mirror
- CNAS Gaming Lab
- ConSimWorld
- Decisive Point
- Fabulsi—online roleplay simulations
- Fiery Dragon Productions
- Fletcher School/Tufts University—SIMULEX
- Fort Circle Games
- GamePolitics
- History of Wargaming Project
- Imaginetic
- Kings College London—Kings Wargaming Network
- LBS – Professional Wargaming
- LECMgt
- McGill Model UN
- MCS Group
- MegaGame Makers
- MODSIM World conference
- Naval Postgraduate School—MOVES Institute
- NDU—Center for Applied Strategic Learning
- Nusbacher & Associates
- Nuts! Publishing
- Peacemaker Game
- Persuasive Games
- PlanPolitik
- RAND Center for Gaming
- Serious Games Interactive
- Slitherine Software
- Statecraft
- Stone Paper Scissors
- Strategy and Tactics Press
- Track4
- Utrecht Institute for Crisis and Conflict Simulation
- Valens Global
- Wargaming Connection
- Wikistrat blog
- World Peace Game Foundation
Journals and Publications
- Battles Magazine
- C3i Magazine
- Eludamos: Journal of Computer Game Culture
- GAME: The Italian Journal of Game Studies
- International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations
- International Journal of Role-Playing
- Military Training & Simulation
- Sciences du jeu
- Simulation & Gaming
- The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation
- Training & Simulation Journal
- Virtual Training & Simulation News
Simulations and Games
- Active Learning in Political Science
- Barnard College—Reacting to the Past
- Best Delegate
- Beyond Intractability—Exercises and Simulations
- BoardGameGeek
- Class Wargames
- Columbia American History Online—classroom simulations
- Community Organizing Toolkit—game
- ConSimWorld
- CRISP: Crisis Simulation for Peace
- CUNY Games Network
- Darfur is Dying—game
- Economics Network—classroom experiments and games
- Emergency Capacity Building project — simulation resources
- EuroWarGames
- Game Design Concepts
- Game Theory .net
- Gameful
- Games & Social Networks in Education
- Games for Change
- GeoGame
- Giant Battling Robots
- Global Justice Game
- Grog News
- Guns, Dice, Butter
- Ian Bogost
- ICT for Peacebuilding
- Journal of Virtual Worlds Research
- Little Wars
- Ludic Futurism
- Ludology
- Mike Cosgrove—wargame design class
- MIT-Harvard Public Disputes Program—simulation materials
- MSSV
- National Center for Simulation
- National Security Decision-Making game
- No Game Survives…
- North American Simulation and Gaming Association
- Oil Shockwave Simulation
- Pax Warrior
- Pervasive Games: Theory and Design
- Play the Past
- Play Think Learn
- Purple Pawn
- Serious Games at Work
- Serious Games Network France
- Strategikon (French)
- Technoculture, Art, and Games
- Terra Nova (Simulation + Society + Play)
- The Cove: Wargaming
- The Forge Wargaming Series
- The Ludologist
- The Open-Ended Machine
- Tiltfactor
- Tom Mouat's wargames page
- Trans-Atlantic Consortium for European Union Studies & Simulations
- United States Institute for Peace—Simulations
- University of Maryland—ICONS Project
- US Army—Modelling and Simulation
- USC—Institute for Creative Technologies
- Wargame_[space]
- Web Grognards
- Zones of Influence
In our culture games we make players make emotions explicit. See below.
We believe that emotions are the key to the understanding of conflict; yet, in the study of conflict these are also critically understudied. Indeed, a real understanding of what it means to be in conflict pertains recognition of the underlying emotions of the engaged parties. Emotions are forceful drivers of conflict; Studies on radicalisation (e.g. Veldhuis & Staun, 2009; Segman 2016) found that the perception of relative deprivation, the subjective perception of being unfairly disadvantaged, is found to be a major cause of disengagement and radicalisation. In ‘Why men rebel’, Gurrs (1970) states that the ‘inability to obtain what is felt to be justified triggers feelings of frustration that ultimately facilitates the emergence of collective violence’. Endeavours to chart a psychological profile of men and women involved in acts of terrorism found that strongly perceived oppression and feeling of being humiliated are amongst the strongest drivers for people to revert to violence (Victoroff, 2005).
Emotions are causes as well as escalators and de-escalators of conflict. Culture has a profound impact on the way in which people experience and express emotions, and also how they perceive emotions of others. Scholars have recently found that culture played a key role in the emotion regulation, in the reappraisal and suppression of emotions (Tasi and Lu, 2018; Matsumoto, Nakagawa and Yoo ,2008) and in the emotional response to world-experience such as ostracism (Kimel, Mischkowski, Dominik, Shinobu, Uchida 2017).
One of the domains we are applying gaming to is the Comfort women case, aiming at understanding the residual tensions between South Korea and Japan due to Japans WWII system of forced prostitution of amongst others South Korean women. The fact that it took the former comfort women more than half a century to publicly reveal their dreadful experiences may only be understood if one actually feels the shame that these women must have felt. The denial by the Japanese of the existence of forced prostitution may have triggered many repressed emotions and made the first South Korean women to make a public testimonial.
Finally, emotions may make people act against their strategic interests. From the psychological literature on emotions (e.g. Ekman) we understand that in states of strong emotions people are urged to respond in an emotional manner. E.g. a state of rage urges people to ‘lash out’ which may be totally against their own or (geo)political interests. Hence, as claimed, to actually understand the dynamics of conflicts and possible forecast, we have to get more rational about emotions.
Al in all, emotions are strong drivers in conflict and culture affects those profoundly. In our culture games, we explicitly address emotions as driver in conflict. During the identity building phase, players have to express their identity in terms of emotions as well as beliefs and personality traits. During play, their emotions will change and sometime their beliefs and they have to be explicit about this. When our players play certain actions during conflict, their underlying motives have to be explained in terms of the underlying emotions and beliefs.
As an example, characters in the Israel Palestine version of our culture game may initially live in relative peace with their Palestine neighbors, but after a number of increasingly violent encounters between groups, we see anger risings to rage, beliefs are seen to change, we see Jews turn to Zionism and we see Palestine fight for a Pan Arabic state. We see actors segregate and blame and shame the other party.
We are currently experimenting with this format, and trying to validate what players do in our games against psychological theory. Will report later on the outcomes.
Three major methods were discussed, as I remember. The least effective was to describe the psychology of the player in the briefing, and expect the player to then represent it in the game—which can result in some very artificial performances. Second, you can socially engineer roles, so that you match players to roles based on personality, game play style, etc. This can work well, but of course you don’t always know the participants well enough to do this. We also discussed designing the briefing materials in such a way as to generate a sense of grievance, etc. in the player (for example, by modifying or spinning each presentation). I also noted that occupational subcultures can be powerful things: diplomats (regardless of national origin) often game in convergent ways, as do military officers, etc.
Rex, in Anja’s portion of your write up, you mentioned there was considerable discussion on how to best encourage players to internalize game narratives and respond in ways that resemble either the psychology of particular actors, or their value systems, fears, and concerns. Do you have any suggestions or recommendations brought up by the group addressing this topic that you could share? Thank you.