Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3383668.3419927acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pageschi-playConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper
Open access

Persuasion Invasion: Reducing Bias with Value-Adaptive Instruction

Published: 03 November 2020 Publication History

Abstract

As civil discourse in America is becoming less substantive and respectful (Doherty, 2019), some educators have turned to educational games as a potential solution. However, providing effective instruction on key civic skills (e.g., perspective taking) requires a level of individualization that is unscalable in traditional classroom environments. Here we present Persuasion Invasion, an educational game that uses Value-Adaptive Instruction to help students learn to engage in productive civil discourse (i.e., discourse that fosters democratic goals (Papacharissi, 2004)). Throughout the game, players learn about the values that underpin our beliefs and barriers to productive discourse (e.g., tribalism and bias). We tested a scalable, value-adaptive intervention, and found that we were able to estimate and, in some cases, reduce the impact of bias when reasoning about political arguments.

Supplementary Material

SRT File (cpsd1021vfc.srt)
Preview video
TXT File (cpsd1021aux.txt)
This file includes instructions on how to play Persuasion Invasion.
MP4 File (cpsd1021vf.mp4)
Supplemental video

References

[1]
Carrol Doherty, Jocelyn Kiley, and Nida Asheer. 2019 a. Partisan Antipathy: More Intense, More Personal. Pew Research Center (2019).
[2]
Carrol Doherty, Jocelyn Kiley, Alec Tyson, and Bridget Johnson. 2019 b. Public Highly Critical of State of Political Discourse in the U.S. Pew Research Center (2019).
[3]
Maeve Duggan and Aaron Smith. 2016. The Political Environment on Social Media. Pew Research Center (2016).
[4]
Justin Garten, Joe Hoover, Kate M Johnson, Reihane Boghrati, Carol Iskiwitch, and Morteza Dehghani. 2018. Dictionaries and distributions: Combining expert knowledge and large scale textual data content analysis. Behavior research methods, Vol. 50, 1 (2018), 344--361.
[5]
Jonathan Haidt. 2012. The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Vintage.
[6]
David W Johnson, Roger T Johnson, and Dean Tjosvold. 2000. Constructive controversy: The value of intellectual opposition. (2000).
[7]
Jonas T Kaplan, Sarah I Gimbel, and Sam Harris. 2016. Neural correlates of maintaining one's political beliefs in the face of counterevidence. Scientific reports, Vol. 6 (2016), 39589.
[8]
Paul A Klaczynski and Billi Robinson. 2000. Personal theories, intellectual ability, and epistemological beliefs: Adult age differences in everyday reasoning biases. Psychology and Aging, Vol. 15, 3 (2000), 400.
[9]
Zizi Papacharissi. 2004. Democracy online: Civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion groups. New media & society, Vol. 6, 2 (2004), 259--283.
[10]
Keith E Stanovich, Richard F West, and Maggie E Toplak. 2013. Myside bias, rational thinking, and intelligence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol. 22, 4 (2013), 259--264.

Index Terms

  1. Persuasion Invasion: Reducing Bias with Value-Adaptive Instruction

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI PLAY '20: Extended Abstracts of the 2020 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play
      November 2020
      435 pages
      ISBN:9781450375870
      DOI:10.1145/3383668
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 03 November 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. adaptivity
      2. bias
      3. civics
      4. education
      5. games
      6. rhetoric

      Qualifiers

      • Short-paper

      Funding Sources

      Conference

      CHI PLAY '20
      Sponsor:

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 421 of 1,386 submissions, 30%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • 0
        Total Citations
      • 415
        Total Downloads
      • Downloads (Last 12 months)138
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)52
      Reflects downloads up to 12 Nov 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      View Options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Get Access

      Login options

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media