I don’t know who first drew a comparison between video games and a “Skinner box.” I heard the term “Virtual Skinner Box” several years ago and have since seen the occasional reference to this term on various games design discussion forums. The term has been heavily used in recent years in relation to links between violence and video games, and in relation to video game addiction.
This will be the first entry on my thoughts regarding interactive design. To kick it off I am linking to an article that I consider a strong tool for conceptualizing interactivity. It informs us on interactivity via operant conditioning. I’m hoping class members will take an interest, read the article and participate in a discussion.
The article formalizes an approach that, I feel, should be fundamental for both interpreting and designing the rules that govern interactivity. In the most simple terms we can look at interactivity as a relationship between stimuli and action:
Motivational Stimuli -> Subject Participation -> Consequential Stimuli
A number of issues are brought up by the article, including primary and secondary reinforcements systems, reinforcement schedules over periods of time, and examples of conventional reward types.
