Player Engagement Analysis of a Business Simulation Game from Physiological, Psychological and Behavioral Perspectives: A Case Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The declared objective of this work was “to analyze the possible benefits of using a Business Simulation Game (BSG) as a resource to stimulate learning, from the measurement of engagement in its different dimensions, using the hemoencephalogram (HEG) device to monitor cortical activation, and the eye tracking (ET), for measuring pupillary dilation”.
However, the McDonalds game selected for this case study is not a quite an educational BSG as it is more like “is a satirical parody of the business practices of the corporate quick-service restaurant giant McDonald's” (Wikipedia), so its use as a learning tool is questionable.
On the other hand, it seems that the authors assume that the players’ engagement in the game is determinant for the learning process, but the measures use for engagement (cortical micro-circulation and pupilary dilation) may also be influenced by ethical dilemmas, various emotional reactions, and other factors.
Nevertheless, the proposed method to simultaneously monitor (using non-invasive devices) the cortical micro-circulation and the pupilary dilation is interesting and may be applicable in many other experimental studies, not necessarily related to (serious) games. Therefore, I believe that this work is worth publishing.
One minor suggestion regarding the presentation: the phrase in lines 71-75 is a bit too long and may be confusing.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Please see the attachment.
Thanks,
Cleiton Pons Ferreira
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The Manuscript entitled "Player Engagement analysis of a Business Simulation Game from Physiological, Psychological and Behavioral perspectives: a case study" is very interesting paper.
The Authors have paid lots of attention to properly prepare this paper, however still some remarks should be taken into consideration:
- there is lack of some information about investigated people. such as: experience in the business, industry, how they feel about such types of companies,
- the beneficial would be presenting the questions from the questionaires to understand the results,
- the presentation of the results is poor in some charts there is hard to see what are the results (fig. 5)
- have authors evaluate the eye diseases of the people involved while it may affect the eyetracking investigation,
- the authors stated that if game finishes earlier, it was repeated. it may affects the results while the person who was playing new what may have happened. have authors observed differences in time between first and second attempt ?
- set of references as [[1-3] should be expand to tell what was the influence of reffered paper to the study. if all of them all about the same therefore there is not need to refer to all of them,.
- in some references they are not according to the tamplate
Overall merit of the Manuscript is positive however it benefits from the revision
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Please see the attachment.
Thanks,
Cleiton Pons Ferreira
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
I Accept the presented explanation. However the Reviewer is not convinced with the answer about the vision problems, while the ET will not notice all of them.
