Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:30:13 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
06 SES 03 B: Digital Games as Educational and Epistemic Spaces
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
06. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Paper Navigating the Double-Edged Sword: A Meta-analysis of the Effect of Digital Games on 21st Century Skills East china normal university Presenting Author:Introduction In the 21st century, individuals must navigate rapid technological change, and social transformation. This demands not only knowledge but also adaptable competencies (Geisinger, 2016; van Laar et al., 2017). Among these, the 4C skills—critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity—have emerged as core competencies for success in education and work (Crockett et al., 2011; Battelle for Kids, 2019). Digital games have been increasingly recognized as promising tools to support the development of 4C skills. Research indicates that games can enhance problem-solving, communication, and teamwork while promoting engagement and real-world skill transfer (Squire, 2006; Dickey, 2006; Sourmelis et al., 2017). However, concerns persist regarding their negative effects, including aggression, depression, and hyperactivity (Allaire et al., 2013; Vitytė & Monkevičienė, 2024; Wols et al., 2024), emphasizing the need for evidence-based design and implementation. This meta-analysis aims to synthesize current evidence on the effects of digital games on 4C skills. Despite the educational potential of digital games (Qian & Clark, 2016), existing studies differ in focus, game design, participant characteristics, and research methods (Ke, 2009; Connolly et al., 2012), limiting generalizability and application. The present study addresses these gaps by systematically analyzing the overall impact of digital games on 4C skills, comparing effects across the individual competencies, and identifying key moderators such as game type, game mode, participant age group, region, and experimental design. The following research questions guide this inquiry: RQ1: How do digital games affect overall 4C skills? RQ2: What are the specific effects on each 4C skill? RQ3: What factors moderate the effects of digital games on 21st century skills? Conceptual Framework Digital games: The double-edged sword Digital games are interactive entertainment utilizing digital technology, often involving virtual environments (Fromme & Unger, 2012). While public debate often highlights their negative effects, such as aggression or emotional instability (e.g. Allaire et al., 2013), research also shows that digital games foster cognitive and developmental benefits, especially in education (Wu et al., 2012; Eow & Baki, 2010). 4C skills: a framework of 21st century skills The 4C skills—critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, and communication—are essential in today’s knowledge-driven society (Ananiadou & Claro, 2009; OECD, 2019). Among the 4C skills, communication raises the most concern regarding digital games (Wallenius & Punamäki, 2008). While games can support interaction, they may also lead to social withdrawal in individuals with weaker social skills (Erdogan, 2023) and reduce sensitivity to social cues when replacing real-life interaction (Charlton & Danforth, 2010). Consequently, the impact on communication varies based on factors like game type, play duration, and whether collaborative interaction is encouraged (Reinders & Wattana, 2015). Moderators of 21st century skills This meta-analysis also identifies key moderators. Variables such as game type (e.g., adventure, simulation), game mode (independent vs. collaborative), online status, and discipline (e.g., natural sciences, STEAM) may influence outcomes (Zou et al., 2021; Sourmelis et al., 2017). Methodological features—including sample size, participant age, intervention length, and gender—also moderate effects (Ross & Begeny, 2015). These factors are critical in understanding the varied impacts of digital games on 21st century skills. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Methodology Selection criteria The selected literatures should met the inclusion criteria which is reported in Table 1. Literature search and selection As shown in Figure 1, the literature search followed the PRISMA guidelines (Page et al., 2021; Moher et al., 2009). We conducted a literature search in the electronic databases including Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), and Google Scholar using the following search syntax: [(“digital game” OR “video game” OR “online game” OR “Internet game” OR “electronic game”) AND (“critical thinking” OR “creativity” OR “communication” OR “collaboration” OR “21st century skills” OR “4C skills”)]. Consequently, a total of 37 publications were included in this review at the end. Literature coding Before initiating the coding process, the authors held detailed discussions to establish and agree on coding criteria. To ensure consistency, we independently coded a random sample of 19 references (around 50% of the articles), resolving discrepancies through discussion. The remaining 18 references were then coded based on the finalized scheme. Inter-coder reliability, assessed using Cohen’s kappa, was 0.83 (p < 0.001), indicating strong agreement. Following Wilson and Lipsey’s (2001) guidelines, five coding schemes (see Table 2) were applied, focusing on effect sizes and study-level variables. Effect size coding targeted four domains: critical thinking, creativity, communication, and collaboration; sixteen variables were coded at the study level. Data analysis We applied the Stata 17.0 and Comprehensive Meta-analysis (CMA) 4.0 software for effect size synthesis, moderator analyses, and publication bias tests. In calculating the overall effect size, we applied a random-effects model rather than a fixed-effects model due to substantial variability among the selected studies, such as differences in game types, intervention durations, and participant characteristics. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Discussion Overall Effect of Digital Games on 21st Century Skills (RQ1) Despite concerns over potential harms of digital games (Allaire et al., 2013; Vitytė & Monkevičienė, 2024), the meta-analysis found a medium, significant overall effect (g = 0.55, p < 0.001) of digital games on 21st century skills—critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, and communication. This supports the view that digital game interventions can meaningfully enhance these core competencies. Three explanations may account for this effect. First, digital games have reshaped learning by offering diverse, engaging pathways that increase learner motivation (Hwang et al., 2017; Kafai & Burke, 2015). Second, they function as interactive tools that aid knowledge transfer to real-world contexts and help players grasp abstract ideas (Higgins et al., 2019; Koong & Wu, 2011). Third, games support authentic, personalized learning environments that deepen learner-knowledge interaction (Ruhalahti et al., 2018; Steinkuehler et al., 2012). Differences in the Effect on 4C Skills (RQ2) Digital games had the strongest effects on critical thinking (g = 0.85) and communication (g = 0.77). Their problem-solving nature promotes analysis, reasoning, and decision-making (Chen & Wu, 2021), while real-time feedback sharpens logical thinking (Kiili, 2005). Communication benefits from multiplayer tasks requiring coordination and dialogue (Fox et al., 2018; Lisk et al., 2012). However, effects were smaller for collaboration (g = 0.41) and creativity (g = 0.37). Game designs often emphasize independence or competition, limiting collaborative skill development (Buchinger & Hounsell, 2018). Similarly, structured game formats can restrict creative exploration (van der Graaf et al., 2016), whereas open-ended games show greater potential (Fan et al., 2022). References Allaire, J. C., McLaughlin, A. C., Trujillo, A., Whitlock, L. A., LaPorte, L., & Gandy, M. (2013). Successful aging through digital games: Socioemotional differences between older adult gamers and non-gamers. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1302–1306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.01.014 Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. OECD education working papers, No. 41. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/218525261154 Battelle for Kids. (2019). Framework for 21st century learning. http://static.battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/P21_Framework_Brief.pdf Buchinger, D., & da Silva Hounsell, M. (2018). Guidelines for designing and using collaborative-competitive serious games. Computers & Education, 118, 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.007 Charlton, J. P., & Danforth, I. D. (2010). Validating the distinction between computer addiction and engagement: Online game playing and personality. Behaviour & Information Technology, 29(6), 601-613. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290903401978 *Chen, H. L., & Wu, C. T. (2021). A digital role-playing game for learning: Effects on critical thinking and motivation. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(5), 3018-3030. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1916765 Connolly, T. M., Boyle, E. A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., & Boyle, J. M. (2012). A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Computers & Education, 59(2), 661-686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.004 Crockett, L., Jukes, I., & Churches, A. (2011). Literacy is not enough: 21st-century fluencies for the Digital age. 21st Century Fluency Project ; Corwin. Dickey, M. D. (2006). Game design and learning: A conjectural analysis of how massively multiple online role-playing games (mmorpgs) foster intrinsic motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 253–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9004-7 Eow, Y. L., & Baki, R. (2010). Computer games development and appreciative learning approach in enhancing students’ creative perception. Computers & Education, 54(1), 146-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.019 Erdogan O. (2023). The mediator's role of communication skills in the effect of social skills on digital game addiction. Acta psychologica, 237, 103948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.103948 Fan, Y., Lane, H. C., & Delialioğlu, Ö. (2022). Open-ended tasks promote creativity in Minecraft. Educational Technology & Society, 25(2), 105-116. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48660127 Fox, J., Gilbert, M., & Tang, W. Y. (2018). Player experiences in a massively multiplayer online game: A diary study of performance, motivation, and social interaction. New Media & Society, 20(11), 4056-4073. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818767102 06. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Paper Beyond the Split Screen: Cooperative Gaming as Intra-active Educational Space 1: Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Germany; 2: University of Rostock, Germany Presenting Author:Traditional educational spaces often seem to operate with clear boundaries: learners are here, learning materials are there, and technology mediates between them. But contemporary digital environments – from online classrooms to video games – increasingly challenge us to rethink where (educational) digital spaces begin and end. Video games are especially rich educational spaces that transform boundaries of digital environments and enable new contexts for (informal) learning and education (Jörissen & Marotzki 2009, Fromme & Könitz 2014). What happens when these boundaries change? When two players in different cities collaborate in real-time in a video game? When a controller is not just a tool but shapes what players can do and who they become in the game? The planned presentation examines the cooperative video game “Split Fiction” (Hazelight Studios, 2025) to explore how digital play can help us reimagine other educational spaces. In this game, two players must work together within the game's system to progress – neither can succeed alone. The game splits the screen in unusual ways, showing a multitude of changing perspectives simultaneously. Players might be on different platforms (PC, PlayStation, Xbox, Switch), in different physical locations, using different input devices, yet they share one game world and must coordinate constantly. We argue that cooperative gaming like this reveals something fundamental about contemporary digital (learning) environments: boundaries between humans, materials, and technologies are not fixed but emerge through practice. This is what new materialist scholars call "intra-activity" (Barad 2007). Unlike interaction, where separate entities act on each other, intra-activity describes how entities come into being through their mutual relations. Janik (2021) extends this to video games through the concept of "intra-acting bio-objects". In intra-active play, you don't have two pre-existing players who then use technology to interact. Instead, "being a player" emerges through the doing – through pressing buttons, coordinating with your partner, responding to a games system (Fizek 2022, Janik 2019, Mckeown 2018). The boundaries separating "you" from "your avatar," "your screen" from "their screen," even "player" and "game" are constantly negotiated. Players and games exist in productive tension – they shape each other's boundaries rather than remaining separate. We extend Janik's single-player focus to cross-platform cooperative play, where these relations multiply: players intra-act with the game, controllers, networks and with each other through technological mediation. Split Fiction makes these intra-active relations visible through what we call "splits" – game elements where boundaries are simultaneously drawn and dissolved. The split-screen shows multiple perspectives at once in a transformative fashion, making players both separate (through different worlds and perspectives) and unified (through a shared ludic game space). With cross-platform play, players might be in the same room or across continents, but they take part in the same game space. Furthermore, players engage with asymmetric mechanics, meaning players have different capabilities and must coordinate their differences. These splits are not just features to analyze – they're moments where educational space becomes visible as performed rather than given. They show how agency is distributed across bodies, buttons, and bytes. Our research asks how cooperative gameplay in Split Fiction enacts educational space through intra-active relations. How do the game's "splits" function as moments that temporarily stabilize boundaries? What can this teach us about designing and researching contemporary learning environments? This analysis especially contributes to the call's perspectives on technology integration (perspective 3) and theoretical approaches (perspective 5), while also touching on the themes of roles and participation (perspective 4). By examining cooperative gaming through a media educational and new materialist framework, we offer conceptual resources for understanding educational spaces as emergent, more-than-human assemblages. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Our methodological approach combines educational video game analysis (Fromme & Könitz 2014, Fromme 2006) with new materialist sensitivity to how boundaries emerge through practice. Within their framework, Fromme and Könitz distinguish aesthetic, narrative, ludic, and technological dimensions of games. However, we depart from treating these as separate analytical layers. Rather than asking "how can we use games for learning?”, we ask "what does gaming teach us about how and what kind of educational spaces come to be?" Following Barad's material-discursive approach, we examine how these dimensions co-constitute each other: how do visuals shape what's playable, how does technology enable narrative, how do mechanics produce meaning? Our primary data consists of gameplay footage from Split Fiction, focusing on moments where cooperative mechanics foreground player interdependence. In the presentation, we will show and discuss video sequences that make the splits graspable for the audience. The sequences we examine make these splits visible across multiple dimensions of the game, from the ludic level of mechanics and player coordination to the narrative level where the game's story itself thematizes division and unity. From the split screen radically different perspectives and abilities emerge.The sequences visualize how asymmetry becomes a resource rather than a problem: what looks like an obstacle to one player becomes a pathway to the other. We will also examine sequences where rapidly transforming split screens merge, separate, rotate, and reconfigure. Here the visual boundary between player avatars becomes part of the gameplay itself. For each sequence, we examine three interconnected dimensions. First, we trace boundaries by asking where they become apparent. When does the split-screen clarify or confuse? When do players experience themselves as separate versus unified? Second, we investigate distributed agency by examining who or what is acting. When the game switches your character's abilities without warning, when lag delays your partner's action, when a puzzle requires simultaneous button presses, agency is not located in individual players but in the assemblage. Third, we attend to educational moments by identifying where learning happens – not just learning "how to play" but learning to coordinate, to respond, to trust, to adapt to differences and resistant game states, to negotiate shared goals with distributed capabilities. Throughout this analysis, we remain attentive to moments of productive friction, where the technological materiality "acts back" and shapes what players can do and become. These are the moments where intra-activity becomes experienceable and educationally relevant, not just theoretically. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings This analysis of Split Fiction through the framework of intra-active play offers contributions to reconceptualizing educational spaces. First, it demonstrates that educational spaces need not be defined by physical co-presence. The cross-platform capabilities and distributed collaboration of video games challenge traditional assumptions that meaningful learning environments require shared physical locations. Digital technologies can enable cohesive spaces where agency, knowledge, and identity emerge through mediated relations. This matters for hybrid learning, global collaboration, and accessible education. Second, our analysis reveals the productive potential of asymmetry. Rather than treating varied competencies or asymmetric roles as problems to be overcome, Split Fiction demonstrates how differences can become rich resources for collaborative learning. The game requires players to have different capabilities. Despite the differences, players strive to achieve a cooperative flow to progress in the game. This reframes how we might approach diverse learners and varied technological access in educational contexts. Third, this research offers a theoretical reframing of the relationship between learners, learning materials, and (educational) technologies. By demonstrating how players, controllers, game mechanics, and collaborative practices intra-actively constitute each other, we challenge instrumental understandings of educational technology. Technologies are not neutral tools that mediate pre-existing learning processes but are co-constitutive participants in educational assemblages, actively shaping what counts as learning, who counts as a learner, and where the boundaries of educational spaces are drawn. This has practical implications for designing innovative learning environments. Rather than asking how to integrate technology into education, we might ask what kinds of intra-active relations particular technological arrangements afford, what boundaries they make visible or invisible, and how they distribute agency across human and non-human participants. We do not argue for abandoning traditional educational research methods but rather invite diffractive readings through new materialist perspectives to explore methodologies adequate to complex phenomena like cooperative cross-platform gaming. References Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Fizek, S. (2022). Playing at a Distance: Borderlands of Video Game Aesthetic. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/13605.001.0001 Fromme, J. (2006). Zwischen Immersion und Distanz: Lern- und Bildungspotenziale von Computerspielen. In W. Kaminski & M. Lorber (Eds.), Clash of Realities: Computerspiele und soziale Wirklichkeit. Munich: kopaed. Fromme, J., & Könitz, C. (2014). Bildungspotenziale von Computerspielen – Überlegungen zur Analyse und bildungstheoretischen Einschätzung eines hybriden Medienphänomens. In W. Marotzki & N. Meder (Eds.), Perspektiven der Medienbildung (pp. 235–286). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Jörissen / Marotzki (2009): Medienbildung - Eine Einführung. Mckeown, C. (2018). Interaction after Representation: Intra-acting with Videogames. https://doi.org/10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.6104669 Hazelight Studios (2025). Split Fiction [Video game]. Electronic Arts. Janik, J. (2019). Meaningful transformation: Intra-activity and video games. In Proceedings of DiGRA 2019. Retrieved from http://www.digra.org/digital-library/ Janik, J. (2021). Intra-acting bio-object: A posthuman approach to the player-game relation. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds, 13(1), 21–39. https://doi.org/10.1386/jgvw_00026_1 06. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Paper Digital Games as Vehicles of Extremist Propaganda: A Structure-Based Analytical Model University of Vechta, Germany Presenting Author:In light of the sustained societal relevance of digital games as cultural, political, and affective meaning-making environments, a broad interdisciplinary consensus has emerged in Game Studies and media research that digital games cannot be understood merely as entertainment media. Rather, they function as complex systems of ideological articulation in which meaning is produced procedurally through the interplay of narration, aesthetics, and rule-based interaction (Bogost, 2007; Eichner, 2017; Pfister & Görgen, 2020). Digital games thus organize political worldviews not only representationally, but experientially, by stabilizing normative assumptions through player action. Against this backdrop, recent research has increasingly addressed the strategic instrumentalization of digital games by extremist actors, particularly in the context of far-right and jihadist movements (Rauscher, 2020; Robinson & Whittaker, 2021; Kowert & Schlegel, 2024). While this literature has convincingly demonstrated that extremist actors engage with gaming cultures, platforms, and communities, the development of digital games explicitly designed for propagandistic purposes remains a comparatively under-theorized analytical object. Existing approaches frequently identify extremist games via isolated content markers, symbolic references, or presumed intentions, rather than reconstructing propaganda as a media-immanent structural performance of the game itself. This paper addresses this research gap by proposing a propaganda-sensitive, structure-based analytical model for the systematic reconstruction of propagandistic functional logics in digital games. The contribution builds on the premise that propaganda in digital games cannot be adequately captured through content analysis alone. Instead, propaganda is conceptualized as a coherent structural performance that emerges from the systematic alignment of narrative framing, aesthetic codification, and rule-based action systems, coupled with extraludic references and modes of player address (Bogost, 2007; Paul, 2010; Jowett & O’Donnell, 2012). As a paradigmatic case, the paper draws on Heimat Defender: Rebellion (2020), a digital game that has been widely classified in prior research as a deliberately developed far-right propaganda game linked to the Identitarian Movement (Möbus, 2023; Möbus, 2024; Lippert, 2024). Rather than reiterating case-specific ideological findings, the paper uses this example to demonstrate how extremist ideology is stabilized through structurally coherent gameplay arrangements that integrate heroization of the playable subject, systematic enemy construction, and the normative legitimation of violence across multiple structural layers of the game. The guiding research interest therefore shifts from the question of what ideological content is represented in extremist games to how propaganda is structurally organized and rendered experientially plausible within the medium of digital play. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Methodologically, the paper develops and explicates the Model for the Analysis of Digital Propaganda Games (MAPs), a structure-oriented analytical framework that was developed through a theory-informed, iterative model-building process. MAPs combines deductive theoretical assumptions from Game Studies and propaganda research with inductive insights derived from empirical analyses of extremist digital games, most notably Heimat Defender: Rebellion (Bogost, 2007; Eichner, 2017; Jowett & O’Donnell, 2012; Möbus, 2023). The conceptual starting point of MAPs is the assumption that propaganda in digital games should not be inferred from presumed developer intentions or hypothesized player effects. Instead, propaganda is treated as a reconstructable structural performance that emerges from the systematic alignment of intraludic structures and extraludic reference and framing logics. Drawing on Eichner’s (2017) structure model of digital games, MAPs adopts the intraludic differentiation between narration, aesthetics, and rule systems as its analytical foundation, while extending this framework through a propaganda-theoretical lens. Model development proceeded stepwise. First, recurring structural patterns identified in prior analyses of far-right digital games were systematically reconstructed and related to central concepts from propaganda theory, such as ideological coherence, affective mobilization, and the normalization of violence (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2012; Möbus, 2023). On this basis, three propagandistic functional logics were derived inductively and refined deductively: heroization of the playable subject, construction of enemy images, and the normative legitimation of violence. These dimensions are not treated as isolated content features, but as functional logics that must manifest coherently across multiple structural layers of the game. Analytically, MAPs operates on two interconnected levels. On the intraludic level, it reconstructs how these propagandistic functional logics are stabilized through narration, visual and auditory aesthetics, and rule-based interaction, including goals, reward systems, and constraints on player agency. On the extraludic level, the model systematically integrates references to real-world persons, institutions, and political discourses, as well as explicit or implicit forms of player address that connect intraludic meaning-making to extraludic ideological and mobilization contexts (Paul, 2010; RAN, 2020). To ensure analytical transparency, intersubjective traceability, and comparability across cases, MAPs is operationalized through a low-inference codebook that specifies guiding questions, indicators, and coding rules for each analytical dimension and level. This allows for a methodologically controlled reconstruction of propagandistic structures without relying on speculative assumptions about reception or impact. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The paper is expected to contribute to current research on digital games and extremism in three central ways. First, it offers a theoretically grounded and methodologically explicit definition of digital propaganda games that avoids both moralizing classifications and purely content-driven approaches. Second, it demonstrates how propaganda can be reconstructed as a media-immanent structural performance, stabilized through the coherent alignment of narrative, aesthetic, and procedural elements, rather than through isolated extremist symbols or messages (Bogost, 2007; Eichner, 2017). Third, the paper provides an analytically robust model that enables the systematic differentiation between politically coded games, ideologically framed serious games, and strategically designed propaganda games. By foregrounding structural coherence and extraludic coupling as defining criteria, MAPs reduces the risk of overgeneralization and supports cumulative, comparative research (Möbus, 2023; Kowert & Schlegel, 2024). Beyond its analytical contribution, the model also offers a conceptual foundation for future research and media-pedagogical applications. By shifting attention from isolated extremist content to the structural conditions of ideological meaning-making in digital games, the paper argues for a reframing of propaganda analysis in Game Studies: away from attribution and towards reconstruction, away from surface features and towards structural coherence, and away from speculative impact assumptions and towards analytically controlled, model-based inquiry. References Bogost, I. (2007). Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5334.001.0001 Eichner, S. (2017). Videospielanalyse. In L. Mikos & C. Wegener (Hrsg.), Qualitative Medienforschung. Ein Handbuch (S. 524–533). Konstanz: UVK. Jowett, G. S., & O’Donnell, V. (2012). Propaganda & persuasion (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kowert, R., & Schlegel, L. (2024). Gaming and extremism: The radicalization of digital playgrounds. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003388371 Lippert, S. (2024). Right-wing images of space and völkisch identity constructions in Heimat Defender: Rebellion. In M. Morawski & S. Wolff-Seidel (Hrsg.), Gaming and geography. Key challenges in geography (S. 159–180). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42260-7_8 Möbus, B. (2023). „Würden wir die Rolle von Computerspielen nicht für wichtig erachten, würden wir nicht tun, was wir tun“ – Die Identitäre Bewegung und das propagandistische Potential von Computerspielen am Beispiel von Heimat Defender: Rebellion. ZepRa – Zeitschrift für praxisorientierte Radikalisierungsforschung, 2(1), 4–35. Möbus, B. (2024). Spielend spalten?! Rechtsextreme Feindbilder im Computerspiel Heimat Defender: Rebellion im Spiegel der Ideologie der Identitären Bewegung. MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung, 59 (Desinformation von Rechts), 23–53. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/59/2024.04.09.X Paul, C. A. (2010). Process, paratexts, and texts: Rhetorical analysis and virtual worlds. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research, 3(1), 1–19. Pfister, E., & Görgen, A. (2020). Politische Transferprozesse in digitalen Spielen: Eine Begriffsgeschichte. In A. Görgen & S. H. Simond (Hrsg.), Krankheit in digitalen Spielen. Interdisziplinäre Betrachtungen (S. 51–74). Bielefeld: transcript. https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/14974 Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN). (2020). Extremists’ use of video gaming – Strategies and narratives. European Commission. https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2020-11/ran_cn_conclusion_paper_videogames_15-17092020_en.pdf Rauscher, A. (2020). Playing propaganda: Die Games-Appropriationen des IS. In B. Zywietz (Hrsg.), Propaganda des „Islamischen Staats“ (S. 161–179). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28751-1_6 Robinson, N., & Whittaker, J. (2021). Playing for hate? Extremism, terrorism, and videogames. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, Online First, 1–25. | ||