References
- Amory, A. (2007). Game object model version II: A theoretical framework for educational game development. Education Technology and Research Development, 55 (1), 51–77.
- Amory, A., Naicker, K., Vincent, J., & Adams, C. (1999). The use of computer games as an educational tool: Identification of appropriate game types and game elements. British Journal of Educational Technology, 30 (4), 311–321.
- Bergman, M.M. (2008). The straw men of the qualitative-quantitative divide and their influence on mixed methods research. In M.M. Bergman (Ed.), Advances in mixed methods research: Theories and applications (pp. 11–21). Los Angeles & London: SAGE.
- Bhana, D., Morrell, R., Hearn, J., & Moletsane, R. (2007). Power and identity: An introduction to sexualities in Southern Africa. Sexualities, 10 (2), 131.
- Bonanno, P., & Kommers, P.A. (2005). Gender differences and styles in the use of digital games. Educational Psychology, 25 (1), 13–41.
- Bonanno, P., & Kommers, P.A.M. (2008). Exploring the influence of gender and gaming competence on attitudes towards using instructional games. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39 (1), 97–109.
- Butler, J. (1988). Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory. Theatre Journal, 40 (4), 519–531.
- Can, D. (2005). Contexts, gaming pleasures, and gendered preferences. Simulation & Gaming, 36 (4), 464.
- Cherney, I.D. (2008). Mom, let me play more computer games: They improve my mental rotation skills. Sex Roles, 59 (11), 776–786.
- Cherney, I.D., & London, K. (2006). Gender-linked differences in the toys, television shows, computer games, and outdoor activities of 5- to 13-year-old children. Sex Roles, 54 (9), 717–726.
- Connell, R.W. (1995). Masculinities (2nd ed.). Cambridge: University of California.
- Dietz, Tracy L. (1998). An examination of violence and gender role portrayals in video games: Implications for gender socialization and aggressive behavior. Sex Roles, 38(5/6), 425–442.
- Donaldson, M. (1993). What is hegemonic masculinity? Theory and Society, 22 (5), 643–657.
- Downs, E., & Smith, S.L. (2010). Keeping abreast of hypersexuality: A video game character content analysis. Sex Roles, 62(11-12), 721–733.
- Felluga, D. (2011). Terms used by theorists of gender and sex. Introductory guide to critical theory. Purdue University. Retrieved September 12,2011, from http://www.purdue.edu/guidetotheory/narratology/terms/
- Ferguson, C.J., Cruz, A.M., & Rueda, S.M. (2008). Gender, video game playing habits and visual memory tasks. Sex Roles, 58 (3), 279–286.
- Gee, J.P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
- Gneezy, U., Niederle, M., & Rustichini, A. (2003). Performance in competitive environments: Gender differences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118 (3), 1049–1074.
- Heeter, C., Egidio, R., Mishra, P., Winn, B., & Winn, J. (2009). Alien games: Do girls prefer games designed by girls? Games and Culture, 4 (1), 74–100.
- Jenson, J., & de Castell, S. (2008). Theorizing gender and digital gameplay: Oversights, accidents and surprises. Eludamos, Journal for Computer Game Culture, 2 (1), 15–25.
- Karakus, T., Inal, Y., & Cagiltay, K. (2008). A descriptive study of Turkish high school students’ game-playing characteristics and their considerations concerning the effects of games. Computers in Human Behavior, 24 (6), 2520–2529.
- Kiesler, Sara, Sproull, Lee, & Eccles, Jacquelynne S. (1985). Pool halls, chips, and war games: Woman in the culture of computing. Psychology of Woman Quarterly, 9 (4), 451–462.
- Leech, N.L., & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality and Quantity, 43 (2), 265–275.
- Lucas, K., & Sherry, J.L. (2004). Sex differences in video game play: A communication-based explanation. Communication Research, 31 (5), 499–523.
- Mael, F.A. (1998). Single-sex and coeducational schooling: Relationships to socioemotional and academic development. Review of Educational Research, 68 (2), 101–129.
- McFadden, P. (2003). Sexual pleasure as feminist choice. Feminist Africa, 2(8). Retrieved January 5, 2011, from http://www.feministafrica.org/index.php/sexual-pleasure-as-feminist-choice
- Messner, M.A. (1998). The limits of “the male sex role”: An analysis of the men’s liberation and men’s rights movements’ discourse. Gender and Society, 12 (3), 255–276.
- Morrell, R. (1998). Of boys and men: Masculinity and gender in Southern African studies. Journal of Southern African Studies, 24 (4), 605–630.
- Ogletree, S.M., & Drake, R. (2007). College students’ video game participation and perceptions: Gender differences and implications. Sex Roles, 56 (7), 537–542.
- Piatt, B. (2008). Gender segregation in the public schools; opportunity, inequality, or both. Scholar,11(4), 561–576.
- Quaiser-Pohl, C., Geiser, C. Christian, & Lehmann, W. (2006). The relationship between computer-game preference, gender, and mental-rotation ability. Personality and Individual Differences, 40 (3), 609–619.
- Ratele, K. (2008). Masculinities, maleness and (illusive) pleasure. Retrieved April 30,2009, from http://www.arsrc.org/downloads/features/ratele.pdf
- Ridgeway, C.L., & Correll, S.J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system. A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society, 18 (4), 510–531.
- Seagram, R. (2005). Use of constructivism in the development and evaluation of an educational game environment. PhD thesis, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
- Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: SAGE (p. 197).
- Vekiri, I., & Chronaki, A. (2008). Gender issues in technology use: Perceived social support, computer self-efficacy and value beliefs, and computer use beyond school. Computers & Education, 5/(3), 1392–1402.
- Vernon-Gerstenfeld, S. (1989). Serendipity? Are there gender differences in the adoption of computers? A case study. Sex Roles, 21 (3), 161–173.
- Wertsch, J.V. (2007). Mediation. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J.V. Wertsch (Eds), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 178–192). New York: Cambridge University Press.