Cited by 100Technology Use by Older AdultsEducational Games and GamificationIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving

Benefits and Factors Influencing the Design of Intergenerational Digital Games: A Systematic Literature Review

Open access
De la Hera, Teresa, Loos, Eugène, Simons, Monique, Blom, Joleen·2017·Societies

Abstract

The main purpose of this paper is to review the benefits and factors to be taken into consideration for the design of intergenerational digital games. We conducted a systematic in Scopus, Web of Science, PsicInfo, Pubmed and Science Direct, finally including 16 empirical studies written in English. The identified benefits were found to fall into four main categories, i.e., (1) reinforcing family bond, (2) enhancing reciprocal learning (3) increasing understanding of the other generation and (4) reducing social anxiety. According to the literature, two types of factors are important to take into consideration: player-centric and game-centric factors. We identified the nature of the interactions between older (55–81 year-olds) and younger players (4–22 year-olds), their motivations to play digital games and the difference in abilities as the main player-centric factors to take into account when designing intergenerational games. The most relevant game-centric factors were found to be goal-related and space-related forms of interaction. To gain more insight into how specific benefits of playing digital games are related to a type of game, gender or age of the participant, additional empirical studies (comparative analyses), that take these factors into account are needed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/soc7030018

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 100

Authors
De la Hera, T., Loos, E., Simons, M., & Blom, J.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University, 3512 EV Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Utrecht University (NL)
Venue
Societies
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2017-07-10
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
18
ISSN
2075-4698 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2735441301
Cited by
100
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2
FWCI
3.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Societies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Universiteit Utrecht
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Keywords
video games, game design, family bonding, mutual learning, intergenerational understanding, social anxiety, older adults, play motivation, intergenerational interaction

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