Feasibility of RPG for Learning about Empathy, Creativity, and Self-efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field of psychology has a growing interest in role-playing games (RPGs) and is committed to exploring the processes of learning and development involved in RPG gaming. However, there is currently limited research on RPGs in the discipline of psychological science, as RPG was once considered a form of leisure that did not consider the potential learning and development involved. Therefore, the topic of the present review is the relationship between RPG gaming and the development of personal competencies involving empathy, creativity, and self-efficacy. The paper reviews various past related studies, all of which used a self-report format in a laboratory setting to collect data from RPG and non-RPG players on scales related to empathy, creativity, and self-efficacy to measure their levels of these competencies. The results show that RPG players demonstrate higher levels of empathy and creativity than non-RPG players, and that there is no correlation between RPG gaming experience and self-efficacy. Creativity and self-efficacy are positively correlated for both RPG and non-RPG players. Behaviorism, constructivism, and sociocultural learning explain the mechanisms underlying the improved competencies. Future research could establish more accurate procedures for measuring the abilities discussed in this review and test whether current results can be replicated. Also, future research could explore what in-game mechanisms or settings are more conducive to stimulating the acquisition and cultivation of various competencies in RPG players.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".