skip to main content
10.1145/3491101.3519723acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Menstrual Monster: A Tangible Interactive Co-educational Game Designed for Teenagers

Published:28 April 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Learning menstruation in early adolescence could reduce teenagers’ misunderstanding of it and help them treat menstruation in a proper way. This paper explored a tangible game for teenagers of different genders learning menstruation through collaborative playing. The game included five levels where users play together and learn the cause, products, symptoms of menstruation as well as try to judge some scenarios and listen to audios about menstruation. In our user study, we invited three groups of teenagers ages 11 to 16. Each group contained at least one male and one female, and we let them play the game freely. Teenagers were successfully able to play the game collaboratively, learn menstruation-related knowledge. The results revealed motivation differences related to gender, and after the game, teenagers demonstrated the observable change of the attitude towards menstruation.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

3491101.3519723-talk-video.mp4

mp4

130.2 MB

References

  1. Nadia Campo Woytuk, Marie Louise Juul Søndergaard, Marianela Ciolfi Felice, and Madeline Balaam. 2020. Touching and Being in Touch with the Menstruating Body. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–14. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376471Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Sarah Ng, Shaowen Bardzell, and Jeffrey Bardzell. 2020. The Menstruating Entrepreneur Kickstarting a New Politics of Women's Health. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 27, 4, Article 21 (August 2020), 25 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3397158Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Minal Jain and Pradeep Yammiyavar. 2015. Game based learning tool seeking peer support for empowering adolescent girls in rural Assam. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 275–278. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2771839.2771895Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. McPherson, M. E., & Korfine, L. 2004. Menstruation across time: menarche, menstrual attitudes, experiences, and behaviors. Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health, 14(6), 193–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2004.08.006Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. T. H. Laine and R. S. N. Lindberg, 2020. "Designing Engaging Games for Education: A Systematic Literature Review on Game Motivators and Design Principles," in IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 804-821, 1 Oct.-Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1109/TLT.2020.3018503.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Anand, P. G., & Ross, S. M. 1987. Using computer-assisted instruction to personalize arithmetic materials for elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 72-78.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Marie Louise Juul Søndergaard, Ozgun Kilic Afsar, Marianela Ciolfi Felice, Nadia Campo Woytuk, and Madeline Balaam. 2020. Designing with Intimate Materials and Movements: Making "Menarche Bits". Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 587–600. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3357236.3395592Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Anupriya Tuli, Shruti Dalvi, Neha Kumar, and Pushpendra Singh. 2019. “It's a girl thing”: Examining Challenges and Opportunities around Menstrual Health Education in India. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 26, 5, Article 29 (October 2019), 24 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3325282Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Madeline Balaam, Lone Koefoed Hansen, Catherine D'Ignazio, Emma Simpson, Teresa Almeida, Stacey Kuznetsov, Mike Catt, and Marie L. J. Søndergaard. 2017. Hacking Women's Health. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 476–483. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3027063.3027085Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Kalman, Melanie. 2003. Adolescent Girls, Single-Parent Fathers, and Menarche. Holistic nursing practice. 17. 36-40. 10.1097/00004650-200301000-00008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Jerry Alan Fails, Allison Druin, Mona Leigh Guha, Gene Chipman, Sante Simms, and Wayne Churaman. 2005. Child's play: a comparison of desktop and physical interactive environments. In Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Interaction design and children (IDC '05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 48–55. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1109540.1109547Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Michael S. Horn, Erin Treacy Solovey, R. Jordan Crouser, and Robert J.K. Jacob. 2009. Comparing the use of tangible and graphical programming languages for informal science education. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 975–984. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518851Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Paul Marshall, Sara Price, and Yvonne Rogers. 2003. Conceptualising tangibles to support learning. In Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Interaction design and children (IDC '03). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 101–109. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/953536.953551Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Almukadi W., Boy G.A. 2016. Enhancing Collaboration and Facilitating Children's Learning Using TUIs: A Human-Centered Design Approach. In: Zaphiris P., Ioannou A. (eds) Learning and Collaboration Technologies. LCT 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 9753. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39483-1_10Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Scott R. Klemmer, Björn Hartmann, and Leila Takayama. 2006. How bodies matter: five themes for interaction design. In Proceedings of the 6th conference on Designing Interactive systems (DIS '06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 140–149. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1142405.1142429Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Eva Hornecker and Jacob Buur. 2006. Getting a grip on tangible interaction: a framework on physical space and social interaction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 437–446. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124838Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Michael S. Horn, R. Jordan Crouser, and Marina U. Bers. 2012. Tangible interaction and learning: the case for a hybrid approach. Personal Ubiquitous Comput. 16, 4 (April 2012), 379–389. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-011-0404-2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Saad Jamal, Meher Fatima Zaidi, Suleman Shahid, and Mehr-un-Nisa Arif Kitchlew. 2018. Eliciting social biases in children using tangible games. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 632–637. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3202185.3210789Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Diana Xu. 2007. Design and evaluation of tangible interfaces for primary school children. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Interaction design and children (IDC '07). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 209–212. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1297277.1297331Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Acey Boyce, Katelyn Doran, Antoine Campbell, Shaun Pickford, Dustin Culler, and Tiffany Barnes. 2011. BeadLoom Game: adding competitive, user generated, and social features to increase motivation. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Foundations of Digital Games (FDG '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 139–146. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2159365.2159384Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. R. Ibrahim and A. Jaafar. 2009. "Educational games (EG) design framework: Combination of game design, pedagogy and content modeling," 2009 International Conference on Electrical Engineering and Informatics, 2009, pp. 293-298, doi: 10.1109/ICEEI.2009.5254771.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Annetta, Leonard. 2010. The "I's" Have It: A Framework for Serious Educational Game Design. Review of General Psychology. 14. 105-112. 10.1037/a0018985.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Bonnie Tran and Lee Na Choi. 2018. Menstrual Maze: A Toy Exploring Public Engagement in Menstrual Health Education. In Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Paper SDC10, 1–6. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3180649Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Cordova, Diana & Lepper, Mark. 1996. Intrinsic Motivation and the Process of Learning: Beneficial Effects of Contextualization, Personalization, and Choice. Journal of Educational Psychology. 88. 715-730. 10.1037/0022-0663.88.4.715.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Pierre Dillenbourg, Patrick Mendelsohn, and Daniel Schneider. 1993. The distribution of pedagogical roles in a Multi-agent Learning Environment. In Proceedings of the IFIP TC3/WG3.3 Working Conference on Lessons from Learning. North-Holland Publishing Co., NLD, 199–216.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Saskia Bakker, Debby Vorstenbosch, Elise van den Hoven, Gerard Hollemans, and Tom Bergman. 2007. Tangible interaction in tabletop games: studying iconic and symbolic play pieces. In Proceedings of the international conference on Advances in computer entertainment technology (ACE '07). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 163–170. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1255047.1255081Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Alexander Wiethoff, Hanna Schneider, Michael Rohs, Andreas Butz, and Saul Greenberg. 2012. Sketch-a-TUI: low cost prototyping of tangible interactions using cardboard and conductive ink. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction (TEI '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 309–312. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2148131.2148196Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Guanyun Wang, Ye Tao, Enmao Liu, Yunfan Wang, Cheng Yao, and Fangtian Ying. 2015. Constructive Play: Designing for Role Play Stories with Interactive Play Objects. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 575–580. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2677199.2687907Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Yijun Zhao, Changchao Yu, Jintao Nie, Mengmeng Dong, Yingying Sang, Fangtian Ying, and Guanyun Wang. 2021. FunEat: An Interactive Tableware for Improving Eating Habits in Children. Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 287, 1–5. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3411763.3451682Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    CHI EA '22: Extended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    April 2022
    3066 pages
    ISBN:9781450391566
    DOI:10.1145/3491101

    Copyright © 2022 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 28 April 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • poster
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format