Game modding: A design cognitive perspective in entrepreneurship education
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This design-based research investigates how game modding—intentional alterations to a game’s original content—can foster a cognitive approach to design thinking among business students, grounded in constructionist theory. A two-stage game-based activity was created and implemented in a Business Game class at a specialized entrepreneurship college in São Paulo, Brazil. Data collection included video recordings, interviews, and student reports. The analysis focused on a representative group of four students, examining the design cognitive processes employed during their redesign journey. Our analysis reveals that due to the absence of a repertoire of previous design solutions, the students grounded their analogies in their own sociocultural context, reflecting their social norms, and through interdisciplinary thought processes. To address the research question, ‘How can game modding support the development of business students’ cognitive perspective in design?’ we propose that game modding serves as a useful pedagogical tool to foster essential cognitive processes in design thinking, particularly within a business education context. Game modding helps develop business students’ cognitive perspective by creating an experiential learning environment emulating the entrepreneurial journey.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it