Developing Virtual Gaming Simulations to Promote Interdisciplinary Learning in Addressing Intimate Partner and Gender-Based Violence

Figures & data

Table 1. Measurement tools used to support the IPV/GBV VGS.

Measurement Tool	Authors	Purpose	Instrument Length	Item Format
READIness to Encounter Partner Abuse (PA) Patients Scale (The READI Scale)	Sawyer et al. (2020)	To measure the readiness of healthcare practitioners and students to encounter patients experiencing partner abuse	27 items	7-point scale (1 = “strongly disagree,” 7 = “strongly agree”)
The W(e)-Learn Interprofessional (IP) Program Assessment Scale	Archibald et al. (2014)	To provide learner feedback regarding student IPE learning experience	30 items (used 18 items)	7-point scale (1 = “strongly disagree,” 7 = “strongly agree”)
SPICE-R2 Instrument	Dominquez et al. (2015)	To measure health profession students’ IPE and interprofessional collaborative practice	10 items (used 8 items)	5-point scale (1 = “strongly disagree,” 5 = “strongly agree”)
Player Experience Inventory (PXI) Scale	Vanden Abeele et al. (2020)	To measure player experience with the VGS	30 items	Two domains, each consisting of five constructs, measured by three items

Note. IPE = interprofessional education; IPV/GBV VGS = intimate partner and gender-based violence virtual gaming simulations; SPICE-R2 = Students Perceptions of Interprofessional Clinical Education Revised 2.

Table 2. Player’s inventory experience constructs and item scores.

Survey Items (Constructs)
Psychological Consequences	M	(SD)	N
I wanted to find out how the game progressed (Curiosity)	5.82	(1.32)	60
The game felt relevant to me (Meaning)	5.78	(1.47)	60
I felt capable while playing the game (Mastery)	5.43	(1.23)	60
I felt free to play the game in my own way (Autonomy)	4.97	(1.65)	60
I was no longer aware of my surroundings while I was playing (Immersion)	4.00	(1.63)	60
Functional Consequences
The actions to control the game were clear to me (Ease of Control)	6.53	(0.64)	60
I grasped the overall goal of the game (Clarity of Goals)	6.45	(0.64)	60
I liked the look and feel of the game (Audiovisual Appeal)	6.13	(1.04)	60
The game gave clear feedback on my progress toward the goals (Progress Feedback)	5.77	(0.99)	60
The challenges in the game were at the right level of difficulty for me (Challenge)	5.58	(1.05)	60

Note. M = Mean; N = Number of participants; SD = Standard deviation.

Table 3. Player’s inventory experience open-ended item.

Item: Please let us know if you have any suggestions to improve the VGS in the future?
Themes (N)	Subthemes
Increasing learning opportunities (23)	Access the VGS in different aspects of the curriculum Increasing challenging scenarios Increasing the opportunity of learning through in-game feedback
Content-related improvement (10)	Developing of VGS with more diversity Greater emotional depth in the game Realism issues
Technical and accessibility issue (7)	Addition of audio to response options and subtitles Bandwidth and browser compatibility

Note. VGS = virtual gaming simulations.

Sawyer, S., Melvin, G., Williams, A., & Williams, B. (2020). A new scale of readiness for health care students to encounter partner abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(15–16). https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520981131

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Archibald, D., Trumpower, D., & MacDonald, C. J. (2014). Validation of the interprofessional collaborative competency attainment survey (ICCAS). Journal of Interprofessional Care, 28(6), 553–558. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2014.917407

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dominquez, D. G., Fike, D. S., MacLaughlin, E. J., & Zorek, J. A. (2015). A comparison of the validity of two instruments assessing health professional student perceptions of interprofessional education and practice. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 29(2), 144–149. http://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2014.947360

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Vanden Abeele, V., Spiel, K., Nacke, L., Johnson, D., & Gerling, K. (2020). Development and validation of the player experience inventory: A scale to measure player experiences at the level of functional and psychosocial consequences. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 135, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2019.102370

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar