MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411171120 · doi:10.2196/67550

Game-Based Social-Emotional Learning for Youth: School-Based Qualitative Analysis of Brain Agents

2025· article· en· W4411171120 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elizabeth Liverman, David Antognoli, Cordelia Elaiho, Madison McGuire, Abbey Stoltenburg, Angel Navarrete, Garrett Bates, Thomas Chelius, Constance Gundacker, Paula Lumelsky, Brandon Currie, John Meurer

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisPsychologyClinical psychologyFocus groupMental healthDevelopmental psychologyFeelingDisadvantagedApplied psychologyQualitative researchMedical educationSocial psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Adverse childhood experiences such as violence, substance use, and family disruption disproportionately affect youth in urban communities, increasing the risk of emotional and behavioral challenges. Social-emotional learning (SEL) and trauma-informed programming are effective strategies for mitigating these effects, fostering resilience, and promoting mental well-being. Game-based learning is a promising, engaging method for delivering SEL content. STRYV365 developed Brain Agents, a trauma-informed, game-based SEL intervention aimed at improving emotional regulation, coping strategies, and interpersonal skills among students in grades 5 through 9. Objective: This study explored students' experiences with and perceptions of Brain Agents, evaluating its effectiveness in fostering SEL skills and resilience across 4 diverse urban schools in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Methods: A cluster-randomized, incomplete block factorial crossover design was implemented from 2022-2024. Of 1626 eligible students, 329 (20%) had caregiver consent and student assent. Among these, 180 students in grades 5-9 played Brain Agents at school over 4-5 weeks, for an average of 10 sessions and 23 minutes per session. SEL-related outcomes were assessed using surveys, focus groups, and interviews. Qualitative data were analyzed using Dedoose software, with thematic coding conducted by multiple coders to ensure reliability. Results: Student demographics included 189/321 (58.9%) Black, 112/321 (34.9%) White, and 221/321 (68.8%) from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Baseline surveys of 277 children revealed that 202 (72.9%) of students had experienced the death of someone close, 147 (53.1%) had a close contact incarcerated, and 39 (14.1%) reported feeling nervous or anxious daily. Strengths included 230 (83.0%) students reporting life satisfaction and 183 (66.1%) able to calm down when upset. Game performance data from 328 students indicated varying levels of achievement, with a median of 3 (IQR 1.5-4) missions completed, 4 (IQR 2-6) stars earned, 8 positive energies collected, and 2 (IQR 1-2.5) crew members rescued. Grades 7-8 had the highest engagement, while grade 9 students had the lowest participation. Qualitative analysis from 62 participants identified 8 core themes: qualities of most pride, neighborhood relationships, challenges in life, emotions associated with loss of control, coping strategies, future goals, experiences with Brain Agents, and suggestions to improve the game. Students most frequently cited anger as a cause of emotional dysregulation and named coping strategies such as self-calming, asking for help, and perseverance. Feedback on Brain Agents highlighted improved focus, emotional control, and critical thinking, with younger students more positively engaged. Suggested improvements included better graphics, more customization, and cooperative play. Conclusions: Brain Agents was positively received by students, particularly those in earlier grades, and demonstrated potential as an effective trauma-informed SEL tool. The findings support the role of game-based interventions in enhancing resilience and emotional intelligence among youth exposed to adversity. Broader implementation may extend benefits to diverse student populations and settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.199
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionFrench-language works237,207