Cited by 21Digital Games and MediaUsability and User Interface DesignEducational Games and Gamification

Investigating the Impact of Annotation Interfaces on Player Performance in Distributed Multiplayer Games

Open access
Alharthi, Sultan A., Torres, Ruth C., Khalaf, Ahmed S., Toups Dugas, Phoebe O., Dolgov, Igor, Nacke, Lennart E.·2018·Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Abstract

In distributed multiplayer games, it can be difficult to communicate strategic information for planning game moves and player interactions. Often, players spend extra time communicating, reducing their engagement in the game. Visual annotations in game maps and in the gameworld can address this problem and result in more efficient player communication. We studied the impact of real-time feedback on planning annotations, specifically two different annotation types, in a custom-built, third-person, multiplayer game and analyzed their effects on player performance, experience, workload, and annotation use. We found that annotations helped engage players in collaborative planning, which reduced frustration, and shortened goal completion times. Based on these findings, we discuss how annotating in virtual game spaces enables collaborative planning and improves team performance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3173574.3173888

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Annotation interfaces such as markers and waypoints help ground information in physical space and support the development of reconnaissance and sensemaking skills.

    “Providing annotation interfaces (e.g., markers and waypoints (Figure 4)), help ground information in physical space [2], and support development of reconnaissance and sensemaking skills.”

    From Mapping in the Wild: Toward Designing to Train Search & Rescue Planning (2018) · cites this paper as [2]

    The Waypoint Support and Value of Annotating the Gameworld sections describe annotations that mark locations and turn plans into situated actions in a virtual gameworld, supporting the spatial-grounding point. They do not establish grounding in physical space. The Future Work section proposes studying whether annotations improve sensemaking skills; it does not report demonstrated development of those skills or address reconnaissance skills. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Herbert H. Clark. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alharthi, S. A., Torres, R. C., Khalaf, A. S., Toups Dugas, P. O., Dolgov, I., & Nacke, L. E.
Affiliations
  • New Mexico State University (US)
  • New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, USA
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2018-04-21
Pages
1-13
OpenAlex
W2795493509
Cited by
21
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4
FWCI
11.43
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (IIS-1651532, IIS-1619273)
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN-418622-2012)
  • Canada Foundation for Innovation (35819)
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (895-2011-1014)
  • Mitacs (IT07255)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
Keywords
collaborative planning, player communication, real-time feedback, player performance, player engagement, team performance, frustration, workload, game maps

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review