Game User Research is an emerging field that ties together Human Computer Interaction, Game Development, and Experimental Psychology, specifically investigating the interaction between players and games. The community of Game User Research has been rapidly evolving for the past few years, extending and modifying existing methodologies used by the HCI community to the environment of digital games. In this workshop, we plan to investigate the different methodologies currently in practice within the field as well as their utilities and drawbacks in measuring game design issues or gaining insight about the players' experience. The outcome of the workshop will be a collection of lessons from the trenches and commonly used techniques published in a public online forum. This will extend the discussion of topics beyond the workshop, and serve as a platform for future work. The workshop will be the first of its kind at CHI, tying together HCI research and Game User Research.
Background: The shift in healthcare to extramural leads to more patients with complex health problems receiving nursing care at home. However, the interest of baccalaureate nursing students for community nursing is moderate, which contributes to widespread labour-market shortages. This study investigates the effect of a more ‘communitycare-oriented’ curriculum on nursing students’ perceptions of community care. Methods: A quasi-experimental quantitative survey study with a historic control group (n = 477; study cohorts graduating in 2015, 2016, and 2017; response rate 90%) and an intervention group (n = 170; graduating in 2018; response rate 93%) was performed in nursing students of a University of Applied Sciences in a large city in the Netherlands. The intervention group underwent a new curriculum containing extended elements of community care. The primary outcome was assessed with the Scale on Community Care Perceptions (SCOPE). The control and intervention group were compared on demographics, placement preferences and perceptions with a chi-square or T-test. Multiple regression was used to investigate the effect of the curriculum-redesign on nursing students’ perceptions of community care.Results: The comparison between the control and intervention group on students’ perceptions of community care shows no significant differences (mean 6.18 vs 6.21 [range 1–10], respectively), nor does the curriculum-redesign have a positive effect on students’ perceptions F (1,635) = .021, p = .884, R2 = < .001. The comparison on placement preferences also shows no significant differences and confirms the hospital’s popularity (72.7% vs 76.5%, respectively) while community care is less often preferred (9.2% vs 8.2%, respectively). The demographics ‘working in community care’ and ‘belonging to a church/religious group’ appear to be significant predictors of more positive perceptions of community care. Conclusions: Graduating students who experienced a more ‘community-care-oriented’ curriculum did not more often prefer community care placement, nor did their perceptions of community care change. Apparently, four years of education and placement experiences have only little impact and students’ perceptions are relatively static. It would be worth a try to conduct a large-scale approach in combination with a carefully thought out strategy, based on and tying in with the language and culture of younger people. Keywords: Community care, Nurse education, Curriculum design, Perceptions, Career choice
Individuals with mild intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning are at increased risk to develop a substance use disorder—however, effective treatment programs adapted to this target group are scarce. This study evaluated the effectiveness of Take it Personal!+ in individuals with mild intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning and substance use disorder. Take it Personal!+ is a personalized treatment based on motivational interviewing and cognitive-behavioral therapy supported by an mHealth application. Data were collected in a nonconcurrent multiple baseline single-case experimental design across individuals with four phases (i.e., baseline, treatment, posttreatment, and follow-up). Twelve participants were randomly allocated to baseline lengths varying between 7 and 11 days. Substance use quantity was assessed during baseline, treatment, and posttreatment with a daily survey using a mobile application. Visual analysis was supported with statistical analysis of the daily surveys by calculating three effect size measures in 10 participants (two participants were excluded from this analysis due to a compliance rate below 50%). Secondary, substance use severity was assessed with standardized questionnaires at baseline, posttreatment, and follow-up and analyzed by calculating the Reliable Change Index. Based on visual analysis of the daily surveys, 10 out of 12 participants showed a decrease in mean substance use quantity from baseline to treatment and, if posttreatment data were available, to posttreatment. Statistical analysis showed an effect of Take it Personal!+ in terms of a decrease in daily substance use in 8 of 10 participants from baseline to treatment and if posttreatment data were available, also to posttreatment. In addition, data of the standardized questionnaires showed a decrease in substance use severity in 8 of 12 participants. These results support the effectiveness of Take it Personal!+ in decreasing substance use in individuals with mild intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning.
