Developing Public Opinions on Science Using Information Technologies (POSIT)

Dates

January – December 2006

Principal Investigator

Eric Klopfer (Teacher Education Program & Department of Urban Studies and Planning)
John Durant (MIT museum & Science, Technology and Society Program)

Problem

As an increasing number of critical issues of public concern center on science and technology, there is a need to provide people with the intellectual tools needed to discuss these issues that involve social, scientific and ethical components. New technologies in informal learning settings can support a shift from the deficit model (in which ideas and information are passed in one direction) to a dialogue model that encourages sharing of ideas, drawing information from many sources, and forming opinions through reflective discussion.

Goal

We envision groups of museum visitors participating in a simulation game that engages them in current science and technology controversies though investigation, collaboration and debate.

We hope to help museum visitors:

• Explore complex scientific ideas
• Examine current science and technology controversies
• Engage in rich discussions using scientific evidence
• Understand alternative viewpoints through role-playing
• Reflect on the dynamics of opinion change in themselves and in a group
• Gain a deeper sense of the relevancy of science, particularly among underserved audiences

Overview

POSIT builds on existing Augmented Reality (AR) and opinion dynamics games developed by the Teacher Education Program (TEP), and on prior research into policy discussion games.

AR games allow players equipped with handheld computers to move through a physical space augmented by context-sensitive virtual characters and items, gathering information about a simulation of an authentic problem. One set of these games takes place across large outdoor spaces and use GPS data to track the player’s position on a satellite map. Games developed with this technology have addressed issues in public health, forensics, and history. A complementary set of indoor AR games uses wireless positioning to identify the room a player is in, and employs a client-server architecture to allow the players to interact with a dynamic virtual world. This platform has been used to develop a disease outbreak simulation in which players and virtual characters can infect each other according to a disease transmission model. The players gather information and work to contain the outbreak using tools such as preventative measures, medications and quarantine.

Another related technology, the Discussion game developed by TEP, poses a single controversial opinion question, and asks students to express their opinion rating on a slider (from strongly against to strongly in favor). Students meet in pairs to discuss their rationales for their ratings, exchange ratings by beaming them between handhelds, and then adjust their ratings if their opinion has shifted. They then have the opportunity to reflect on how their ideas have changed over time by viewing their opinion and rationale and studying how and why their opinion has changed (or didn’t change).

The POSIT game combines features of the indoor AR game and Discussion game to support scenarios around current controversies in science and technology. Players move between locations gathering information from virtual characters on a single controversial policy question. Each player is assigned a character to role-play, with a back story suggesting some stake in the controversy. They express a numerical opinion rating based on their character, and update it as they discover evidence and share it with each other. They can view a histogram showing every player’s opinion at that time. Players attempt to persuade each other toward their own viewpoint, with the goal of swaying a vote at the end of the game on the policy question using the data and information that they collect throughout the space.

The “Biosafety / Biohazard” POSIT scenario asks players to consider a (fictional) controversy around whether MIT should construct a biohazard level-4 laboratory. Players might for example role-play a biotech researcher, student activist, university official, or EMT. The players move around the MIT campus gathering evidence from virtual characters such as biology professors, city council officials, local citizens, and construction consultants. From these characters the player might for example learn scientific details about a virus to be studied at the proposed lab, a history of accidents at biohazard facilities, and the academic and business benefits the lab might bring. The virtual characters move around and reveal new information at different times, and respond differentially to players depending on their roles. The players can also collect data from the virtual environment such as samples from the air. In a meeting at the end of the game, the players engage in a debate and then vote on whether the lab should be built, with a facilitator playing the role of city mayor. Finally, the facilitator leads a meta-game discussion in which players are asked to reflect on how and why their opinions changed during the game. This discussion is supported by visualizations of each player’s opinion changing over time during the game, and the distribution of opinions in the whole group over time.

Project Output

• Experiences for high school, college and general public museum visitors
• Formal and informal science education publications and presentations
• Seeking further funding through collaboration with other institutions

Publications

Links

MIT handheld augmented reality simulations