Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

Current attitudes on digital interactive fiction and text adventure games within learning contexts: A systematic literature review

Tyler B Wright 1 * ,
Jennifer L Weible 1
1 Central Michigan University* Corresponding Author
Download PDF
Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Volume 7, Issue 1, January 2024, pp. 23-51
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 427 DOWNLOADS: 273 Publication date: 27 Feb 2024
ABSTRACT
Interactive fiction (IF) is a type of textual work that allows an exchange between the user and computer, providing some meaningful human input to progress the story. There is substantial evidence to suggest that text adventure game development and readership yields rich learning potential across disciplines, however exhaustive research into this phenomenon is sorely lacking at present.  This systematic literature review investigates 10 years of scholarly literature (2012-2022) referencing “interactive fiction” and “text adventure” within educational or learning contexts.  A systematic review protocol containing the following steps was adopted: a) database search with parameters; b) full-text article screening; c) data extraction; and d) thematic analysis.  Seven unique themes emerged from a thematic analysis of 63 high-quality scholarly articles: a) the immersive potential of IF; b) IF as a creative writing medium; c) improving reading literacy through IF; d) history instruction facilitated through IF; e) learning technology through IF; f) introducing complex topics and issues through IF; and g) building a community around IF.  Results of this study suggest that reading and writing in the nonlinear tradition results in rich, multidisciplinary learning outcomes.  Educators across disciplines are encouraged to consider ways in which they might integrate IF into their curricula to take advantage of the unique and broad benefits of practice.
KEYWORDS
interactive fiction, text adventures, digital storytelling, game development, multidisciplinary learning
CITATION (APA)
Wright, T. B., & Weible, J. L. (2024). Current attitudes on digital interactive fiction and text adventure games within learning contexts: A systematic literature review. Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 7(1), 23-51. https://doi.org/10.31756/jrsmte.713
REFERENCES
  1. Acosta, M. M., & Denham, A. R. (2018). Simulating oppression: Digital gaming, race and the education of African American children. The Urban Review, 50(3), 345–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-017-0436-7
  2. Ahern, K. F. (2013). Seeking texts in all available forms: Invisible writing and a new reading rhetoric of sight and sound. Journal of Basic Writing, 32(2). https://doi.org/10.37514/jbw-j.2013.32.2.05
  3. Allington, D. (2015). Linguistic capital and development capital in a network of cultural producers: Mutually valuing peer groups in the ‘interactive fiction’ retrogaming scene. Cultural Sociology, 10(2), 267–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/1749975515598333
  4. Antonsen, P. F. (2020). Self-location in interactive fiction. The British Journal of Aesthetics, 61(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesthj/ayaa037
  5. Antonsen, P. F. (2021). Fictional reports. Synthese, 198(6), 5675–5688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02427-y
  6. Barber, J. F. (2016). Digital storytelling: New opportunities for humanities scholarship and pedagogy. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2016.1181037
  7. Brereton, P., Kitchenham, B. A., Budgen, D., Turner, M., & Khalil, M. (2007). Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(4), 571–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2006.07.009
  8. Consalvo, M., & Phelps, A. (2020). Getting through a tough day (again): What Possum Springs says about mental health and social class. American Journal of Play, 12(3), 338–362.
  9. Cook, E. (2021). Rearing children of the market in the “you” decade: Choose your own adventure books and the ascent of free choice in 1980s America. Journal of American Studies, 55(2), 418–445. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0021875819001476
  10. Cornillie, F., Buendgens-Kosten, J., Sauro, S., & van der Veken, J. (2021). ‘There’s always an option’: Collaborative writing of multilingual interactive fanfiction in a foreign language class. CALICO Journal, 38(1), 17–42. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.41119
  11. Cova, F., & Garcia, A. (2015). The puzzle of multiple endings. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 73(2), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/jaac.12163
  12. Crutcher, P. (2017). Magic: The Gathering, a literary text. Americana: The Journal of American Popular Culture (1900-Present), 16(1), 1–10.
  13. Csikar, E., & Stefaniak, J. (2021). The use of heuristics in adaptive narratives to inform decision-making practices. TechTrends, 65(1), 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00558-5
  14. Denner, J., Campe, S., & Werner, L. (2019). Does computer game design and programming benefit children? A meta-synthesis of research. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 19(3), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3277565
  15. Diez-Sanmartín, C., Gayoso-Cabada, J., & Sarasa-Cabezuelo, A. (2020). Use of critical annotation and interactive fiction for the creation of digital educational content. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 15(9), 231–244. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i09.12377
  16. Donikian, S., & Portugal, J.-N. (2004). Writing interactive fiction scenarii with DraMachina. Technologies for Interactive Digital Storytelling and Entertainment, 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-27797-2_14
  17. Ensslin, A., & Bell, A. (2012). “Click = kill”: Textual you in ludic digital fiction. Storyworlds: A Journal of Narrative Studies, 4, 49–73. https://doi.org/10.5250/storyworlds.4.2012.0049
  18. Felnhofer, A., Wittmann, L., Reichmann, A., König-Teshnizi, D., & Kothgassner, O. D. (2022). Character identification is predicted by narrative transportation, immersive tendencies, and interactivity. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03048-4
  19. Fiadotau, M. (2015). Paratext and meaning-making in indie games. Journal of Comparative Research in Anthropology and Sociology, 6(1), 85–97.
  20. Fiadotau, M. (2016). Game engine conventions and games that challenge them: Subverting conventions as metacommentary. Replay. The Polish Journal of Game Studies, 3(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.18778/2391-8551.03.03
  21. Flynn, S., & Hardman, M. (2019). The use of interactive fiction to promote conceptual change in science. Science & Education, 28(1-2), 127–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00032-6
  22. Franco Vega, I., Eleftheriou, A., & Graham, C. (2022). Using video games to improve the sexual health of young people aged 15 to 25 years: Rapid review. JMIR Serious Games, 10(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.2196/preprints.33207
  23. Gainza, C. (2017). Networks of collaboration and creation in Latin American digital literature. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture, 19(1), 1481–4374. https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.2918
  24. Gomez, L. (2019). Mapping Spanish e-lit: Networks, readings, and communities. Journal of Comparative Literature and Aesthetics, 42(4), 72–83.
  25. Gómez-Albarrán, M., Sarasa-Cabezuelo, A., Sierra-Rodríguez, J.-L., & Temprado-Battad, B. (2021). Authoring and playing interactive fiction with conventional web technologies. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 81(11), 14705–14747. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-021-11316-x
  26. Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, Pubmed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378
  27. Hall, L. A. (2019). “I didn’t enjoy reading until now”: How youth and adults engage with interactive digital texts. Research in the Teaching of English, 54(2), 109–130.
  28. Hall, L. A. (2020). How youth and adults with negative reading histories found a way to enjoy reading. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 63(6), 675–682. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1046
  29. Heron, M. (2013). “Likely to be eaten by a grue” — the relevance of text games in the modern era. The Computer Games Journal, 2(1), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03392336
  30. Holdstock, S. (2021). The dialogic possibilities for interactive fiction in the secondary academy English classroom. Changing English, 28(4), 395–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684x.2021.1915747
  31. Hua, M., & Raley, R. (2020). Playing with unicorns: AI dungeon and citizen NLP. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 14(4), 1–27.
  32. Iacovides, I., Cox, A., Furniss, D., Stawarz, K., Jennett, C., & Adams, A. (2019). Supporting engagement in research through a game design competition. Research for All, 3(1), 25–41. https://doi.org/10.18546/rfa.03.1.04
  33. Jagoda, P., Gilliam, M., McDonald, P., & Russell, C. (2015). Worlding through play: Alternate reality games, large-scale learning, and "The Source". American Journal of Play, 8(1), 74–100.
  34. JSTOR Support. (n.d.). Searching: Are JSTOR articles peer-reviewed? JSTOR. https://support.jstor.org/hc/en-us/articles/115011338628-Searching-Are-JSTOR-articles-peer-reviewed-
  35. Kiles, T. M., Hall, E. A., Scott, D., & Cernasev, A. (2021). Enhancing student knowledge of diabetes through virtual choose your own adventure patient case format. Pharmacy, 9(2), 87. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy9020087
  36. Kitchenham, B., & Charters, S. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Technical Report EBSE 2007-001, Keele University and Durham University Joint Report.
  37. Kozdras, D., Haunstetter, D. M., & King, J. R. (2006). Interactive fiction: ‘New literacy’ learning opportunities for children. E-Learning and Digital Media, 3(4), 519–533. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2006.3.4.519
  38. Ladd, B. (2006). The Curse of Monkey Island: Holding the attention of students weaned on computer games. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 21(6), 162–174.
  39. Ladd, B. (2007). XYZZY: Finding new magic in text adventure games. Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Microsoft Academic Days on Game Development in Computer Science Education, Aboard Disney Cruise Ship Wonder, 64–69.
  40. Lagrange, V., Hiskes, B., Woodward, C., Li, B., & Breithaupt, F. (2019). Choosing and enjoying violence in narratives. PLOS ONE, 14(12), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226503
  41. Lamé, G. (2019). Systematic literature reviews: An introduction. Proceedings of the Design Society International Conference on Engineering Design, 1(1), 1633–1642. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.169
  42. Lester, G. B. (2018). What IF? Building interactive fiction for teaching and learning religious studies. Teaching Theology & Religion, 21(4), 260–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/teth.12454
  43. Liao, C. (2017). Interactive fictional dialogue games as arts-based research. Visual Arts Research, 43(1), 36–42. https://doi.org/10.5406/visuartsrese.43.1.0036
  44. Maier, V., & Budke, A. (2020). Developing geographical narratives: Pupils create digital text adventures with Twine. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 10(4), 1106–1131. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe10040078
  45. Martin, C. (2018). Role playing in children’s literature: Zilpha Keatley Snyder and The Egypt Game. American Journal of Play, 10(2), 208–228.
  46. Martínez-Cano, F., Cifuentes-Albeza, R., & Ivars Nicolás, B. (2019). Prosocial video games as a transitional space for peace: The case of Reconstrucción. RLCS, Revista Latina De Comunicación Social, 74, 1470–1487. https://doi.org/10.4185/rlcs-2019-1394en
  47. Mehta, M., Corradini, A., Ontañón, S., & Henrichsen, P. J. (2010). Textual vs. graphical interaction in an interactive fiction game. Interactive Storytelling, 228–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16638-9_29
  48. Mitsuhara, H., Iguchi, K., & Shishibori, M. (2017). Using digital game, augmented reality, and head mounted displays for immediate-action commander training. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 12(2), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v12i02.6303
  49. Mochocki, M. (2016). Gamedec. UKW in IGDA curriculum framework. Replay. The Polish Journal of Game Studies, 3(1), 121–139. https://doi.org/10.18778/2391-8551.03.07
  50. Montfort, N. (2005). Twisty little passages: An approach to interactive fiction. MIT Press.
  51. Montfort, N. (2013). Riddle machines: The history and nature of interactive fiction. A Companion to Digital Literary Studies, 267–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405177504.ch14
  52. Morningstar-Kywi, N., & Kim, R. E. (2021). Using interactive fiction to teach clinical decision-making in a PharmD curriculum. Medical Science Educator, 31(2), 687–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01245-7
  53. Nordby, A., Øygardslia, K., Sverdrup, U., & Sverdrup, H. (2016). The art of gamification; Teaching sustainability and system thinking by pervasive game development. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14(3), 152–168.
  54. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
  55. Okoli, C., & Schabram, K. (2010). A guide to conducting a systematic literature review of information systems research. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems, 10(26). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1954824
  56. Ostenson, J. (2013). Exploring the boundaries of narrative: Video games in the English classroom. English Journal, 102(6), 71–78.
  57. Phillips, N. C., & Lund, V. K. (2021). Leveling up: Connected mentor learning in a digital media production after-school space. Journal of Youth Development, 16(1), 29–54. https://doi.org/10.5195/jyd.2021.932
  58. Proctor, C., & Blikstein, P. (2019). Unfold studio: Supporting critical literacies of text and code. Information and Learning Sciences, 120(5/6), 285–307. https://doi.org/10.1108/ils-05-2018-0039
  59. Ramey, L., Neville, D., Amer, S., deHaan, J., Durand, M., Essary, B., Howland, R., Kapadia, M., Kronenberg, F., Shelton, B., & Vance, B. (2019). Revisioning the global Middle Ages: Immersive environments for teaching medieval languages and culture. Digital Philology A Journal of Medieval Cultures, 8(1), 86–104. https://doi.org/10.1353/dph.2019.0016
  60. Risi, S., & Togelius, J. (2020). Increasing generality in machine learning through procedural content generation. Nature Machine Intelligence, 2(8), 428–436. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-020-0208-z
  61. Robson, J., & Meskin, A. (2016). Video games as self-involving interactive fictions. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 74(2), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1111/jaac.12269
  62. Roederer, C., & Filser, M. (2018). Revisiting the museum experience. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 21(4), 567–587. https://doi.org/10.1108/qmr-01-2017-0002
  63. Salter, A. M. (2009). "Once more a kingly quest": Fan games and the classic adventure genre. Transformative Works and Cultures, 2. https://doi.org/10.3983/twc.2009.033
  64. Sani-Bozkurt, S., Vuran, S., & Akbulut, Y. (2017). Design and use of interactive social stories for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Contemporary Educational Technology, 8(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6184
  65. Santos, D. R. (2020). Domain errors within interactive speculative space(s). Art Journal, 79(2), 58–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043249.2020.1765555
  66. Sarasa-Cabezuelo, A. (2020). A model for creating interactive ebooks for elearning. Future Internet, 12(12), 223. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi12120223
  67. Sargsyan, M., & Madyarov, I. (2020). 6 English language learners reading interactive fiction: A case study. The European Journal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, 9(1), 109–130.
  68. Sauro, S., Buendgens‐Kosten, J., & Cornillie, F. (2020). Storytelling for the foreign language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 53(2), 329–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12467
  69. Schatten, M., Đurić, B. O., & Peharda, T. (2021). An agent-based game engine layer for interactive fiction. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 385–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85739-4_38
  70. Serban, I. V., Sankar, C., Pieper, M., Pineau, J., & Bengio, Y. (2020). The Bottleneck Simulator: A model-based deep reinforcement learning approach. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 69, 571–612. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.12463
  71. Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019). How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-syntheses. Annual Review of Psychology, 70(1), 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803
  72. Snyder Broussard, M. J. (2012). Digital games in academic libraries: A review of games and suggested best practices. Reference Services Review, 40(1), 75–89. https://doi.org/10.1108/00907321211203649
  73. Soto-Sanfiel, M., Aymerich-Franch, L., & Romero, E. (2014). Personality in interaction: How the big five relate to the reception of interactive narratives. Communication & Society, 27(3), 151–186.
  74. Spivey, M. (2020). Engaging the paradoxical: Zeno's paradoxes in three works of interactive fiction. Journal of Humanistic Mathematics, 10(1), 39–65. https://doi.org/10.5642/jhummath.202001.05
  75. Stocks, C. (2019). Stories from the frontier: Bridging past and present at Hadrian’s Wall. Trends in Classics, 11(1), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1515/tc-2019-0008
  76. Sumner, J. (2016). Making computers boring: Thoughts on historical exhibition of computing technology from the mass-market era. Information & Culture, 51(1), 29–53. https://doi.org/10.7560/ic51102
  77. Tanjung, M. A., & Sitompul, O. S. (2020). “Kian Santang” game as historical educational media using digital storytelling concept. Education and Information Technologies, 25(6), 5379–5388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10209-0
  78. Terry, R., & Dusenberry, L. (2018). Serious interactive fiction: Constraints, interfaces, and creative writing pedagogy. Journal of Creative Writing Studies, 3(1), 1–25.
  79. Trivelli-Bowen, B., Moore, J., Niemeyer, S., & Holmes, K. (2014). Ways to use technology to motivate students’ writing. International Journal of Arts and Commerce, 3(7), 1–11.
  80. van Dijk, Y. (2014). Amateurs online: Creativity in a community. Poetics, 43, 86–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2014.02.001
  81. Wake, P. (2016). Life and death in the second person: Identification, empathy, and antipathy in the adventure gamebook. Narrative, 24(2), 190–210. https://doi.org/10.1353/nar.2016.0009
  82. Wells, M. J., & Boyd, J. (2019). Generating gameworlds with computers: The case for procedural creativity. Information and Learning Sciences, 120(5/6), 266–284. https://doi.org/10.1108/ils-05-2018-0042
  83. Williams, M., & Moser, T. (2019). The art of coding and thematic exploration in qualitative research. International Management Review, 15(1), 45–55.
  84. Willis, M. D. (2019). Choose your own adventure: Examining the fictional content of video games as interactive fictions. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 77(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/jaac.12605
  85. Xu, Y., Park, H., & Baek, Y. (2011). A new approach toward digital storytelling: An activity focused on writing self-efficacy in a virtual learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 14(4), 181–191.
  86. Yacono, C. (2021). Video game design as a multimodal heuristic: Turning the tide of composition studies. CEA Critic, 83(1), 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1353/cea.2021.0010
  87. York, J., Poole, F. J., & deHaan, J. W. (2021). Playing a new game—an argument for a teacher‐focused field around games and play in language education. Foreign Language Annals, 54(4), 1164–1188. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12585
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.