Putting Research into Play: Designing a Digital Game on Places of Resilience in Rural Japan

This collaborative project uses game design as a method of knowledge production. Researchers from various disciplines such as anthropology, pedagogy, or STS have discussed how the medium we choose for creating academic output shapes how we think about our research topics (Richardson 2002; O’Dell/Willim 2013; Eisner 1997). Most publications translate research (e. g. empirical observations, systematic thinking as well theoretical arguing) into specific forms of text – usually an article, a book or another form of language-based medium. This standardized form of communication constitutes a frame in which we are able to think and talk about our research. It is therefore crucial to ask ourselves: How will our perspectives change if we choose another form of “publication” for our results?

We decided to use a digital game as a form of academic production to test its potential strengths and weaknesses for the research process. The objective of this project is to create a digital game about places of resilience in rural Japan that reflects on the core aspects of qualitative research in social sciences (such as systematic reasoning, formulating research objectives, transparent research process, empirical analysis). The topics featured in the game are based on the anthropological research of one of the team members. The in-game characters are based on the roles certain actors play in rural communities in Japan. Playing the game involves interacting with these characters as well as the game world to find an answer to the research question of “how social exchange helps building up structures of resilience in rural areas”. In other words, the player virtually conducts a fieldwork trip to a rural settlement.

In doing so, game design enables us to explain the research process of anthropological research rather than readymade results as in written text. We believe that this approach sheds light on aspects of research that are frequently overlooked in academic writing. Designing the game according to scientific norms as well as common game design patterns triggers moments of reflection for the researchers themselves. More specifically, translating research into games requires specific decisions to be made in order to get a game running (such as the rules of a game) that might not matter to the same degree when writing a text. For example, we need to think thoroughly about aspects of qualitative research such as failure. At the same time, players will make crucial decisions about which paths to take during the game, which may eventually also lead to the experience of failure as a part of the research process. Designing as well as playing the game will thus make specific aspects of qualitative research more transparent.

We understand this research endeavour as a two-fold process: First, it provides a digital game as a research product (similar to an article) that may be used as a tool to experience and understand structures of resilience in rural Japan. Second, in creating this product, we reflect on the topic of the research itself and get new ideas regarding which parts of our research are essential for understanding resilience in Japan’s regions.

References

Eisner, Elliot W. 1997. “The promise and perils of alternative forms of data representation.” Educational Researcher 26(6): 4–10.

O’Dell, Tom and Robert Willim. 2013. “Transcription and the Senses. Cultural Analysis When it Entails More than Words.” The Senses and Society 8(3): 314-334.

Richardson, Laurel. 2002. “Writing Sociology.” Cultural Studies, Critical Methodologies 2(3): 414–422.