ABSEL RESEARCH -- ONE ADDITIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON WHERE WE ARE AND WHERE WE HAVE COME FROM Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 34, 2007 69 ABSEL RESEARCH -- ONE ADDITIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON WHERE WE ARE AND WHERE WE HAVE COME FROM Daniel R. Strang SUNY Geneseo Strang@Geneseo.edu ABSTRACT This study uses citation analysis to build on the work that has been done in the past by researchers who were attempting to assess the quality of research published in the venues most commonly used by ABSEL members. This paper reviews and categorizes the work that other researchers have done in their efforts to assess the quality of ABSEL research. In this study, an extensive citation analysis is performed on the articles that appear in the ABSEL Proceedings from 1984 to 2006. A citation analysis is also performed on the articles appearing in Simulation & Gaming from 1996 to 2005. A profile of the “typical” paper in the ABSEL Proceedings and the “typical” paper in Simulation & Gaming, in terms of citations, is provided. INTRODUCTION Over the years, a number of scholarly works have looked the research conducted in several of the research venues utilized by ABSEL researchers. One principal purpose was to get some reading on the quality of research being fostered by the association. After an extensive review of all the literature, it seemed that one aspect, citation analysis, although it was not absent in previous works, might shed additional light on the question. This article reports the results of a very extensive review of not only the research works published in the ABSEL Proceedings, but additionally, reports of the results of citation analysis performed on the journal most closely associated with ABSEL, Simulation & Gaming. LITERATURE REVIEW Earlier works can be categorized by their mode of emphasis. The works can be grouped based upon: 1. research design utilized in the works 2. measurement (and analysis) of learning outcomes 3. use of content analysis 4. classification of past research efforts RESEARCH DESIGN As early as 1977 Bernie Keys, conducted some preliminary analysis that focused on the basic research methodology underlying the works of papers published in the ABSEL Proceedings. Keys’ work was the first of a long list of ABSEL efforts designed to provide insights into the quality of ABSEL research. Incidentally, the name ABSEL Proceedings is being used at this point for convenience. A fuller discussion of a number of issues relating to the use of this name is included later in this paper. Faria and Wolfe in 1999, and Faria in 2000, provided additional insights into key elements of the quality of research. Faria (2000) delineates three key factors: 1) Post-hoc analysis of factors associated with high game performance or correlates of simulation performance, 2) effectiveness of games in strategic management courses, and 3) focus on what business games teach for the ABSEL history as dimensions of research efforts. In 2001, Faria broadens the focus to a scholarly group that includes not only ABSEL contributors, but researchers contributing to Simulation & Gaming, as well. In 2004, Gosen and Washbush categorize dimensions of research differently than Faria. Two of Gosen and Washburn’s measures are substantially the same as the first and second as proposed by Faria, while the third focuses on the instruments used to measure the effectiveness of simulations and experiential exercises as teaching/learning systems. Several researchers have been more critical of ABSEL research than Faria, Gosen, and Washburn. Wolfe (1981) and Wolfe and Crookall (1998) are perhaps the most critical and indicate that simulation/gaming literature has progressed relatively slowly in regard to the validity of its various research practices. As early as 1981, Wolfe set the standard of Campbell and Stanley (1963) to push for more rigorous research designs in ABSEL scholarship. While Wolfe stressed the need for carefully constructed research designs, Patz et al. (1999) felt the need for a more results- oriented approach was more important. Patz dismissively states that “pedagogical research is aimed at producing results—not at advancing the current fashionable and almost fleeting notions of an elite at a local university or editorial staff of a widely distributed journal.” Butler et al. (1985) took a more analytical approach and performed an audit of the papers published in the annual proceedings of ABSEL, recorded the incidence of some of the elements of a “rigorous research design” and defined three key elements of a “rigorous research design” as randomization, control, and treatment. In 2006, Howard et al. revisited the issue and performed an updated audit of mailto:Strang@Geneseo.edu Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 34, 2007 70 ABSEL articles using the key elements of design as defined in the Butler (1985) paper. LEARNING OUTCOMES In their study in 1985, Butler et al. also performed an audit of the papers published in the annual proceedings of ABSEL recording and measuring outcomes based upon Bloom’s (1956) Taxonomy. In 2006, Howard et al. revisited the issue and performed an updated audit of ABSEL articles based upon educational outcomes again using Bloom’s criteria as operationalized in the Butler (1985) paper. Anderson and Lawton (1997) make a compelling argument for papers addressing learning to specify learning objectives and they resourcefully provide their own classification scheme. CONTENT/TAXONOMIC APPROACH In a seminal, article Krippendorf (1980) advances the concept of content analysis and describes it as “a research technique of making replicable and valid inferences from data to their context.” Krippendorf indicates, “One form of content analysis that is utilized by researchers is classified as semantical content analysis.” Several ABSEL researchers have looked at published ABSEL works and subjected them to a form of semantical content analysis. In 1986, Goosen advances the taxonomy and suggests categories of simulation and experiential research such as design & construction, simulation administration, innovative uses, descriptive uses, and a general category. In 2001, Howard and Strang (2001) conduct a content analysis using incidence of key words in titles of papers in the ABSEL Proceedings. Again in 2003, Howard and Strang (2003) perform a content analysis. In the second paper, they used the key words that had emerged as significant in the earlier study. In the second study, all occurrences of keys words, both in the titles and the text of the papers, were used as the key indicator. PROFILES OF AWARD-WINNING PAPERS As a measure of quality with a far narrower scope, Markulis et al. (1991) studied procedures and protocols of the papers that had been selected by ABSEL as award winners. In their work, the authors considered elements of research design, and learning outcomes that have been used by other ABSEL researchers, as well a several other dimensions. FOCUS ON SUB-DISCIPLINES Several evaluative studies have used the specific sub- discipline as the key metric for purposes of analysis. These studies performed research on simulations and experiential exercises categorized by the sub-discipline within the broad umbrella of business such as international business, accounting, marketing, finance, OB, production, policy (Butler, 1999, Graf, 1999). In 1999, Kelley focused on experiential exercises and recorded the articles in each of several sub-disciplines and also recorded the specific activity type such as role-playing, case, etc. CITATION INDEXING/CITATION ANALYSIS The manner by which researchers perform literature reviews has changed significantly in the past several decades. We have all learned that a well-framed “google search” can provide an incredible volume of information about virtually any topic in a matter of seconds. Prior to the availability of search engines such as google, researchers had to employ many other techniques as they performed literature reviews. Citation indexing emerged as a significant aid to researchers in the 1950’s. Eugene Garfield (1979) is credited with being a key figure in the development of citation indexing with his creation of the Science Citation Index in 1963. Robert Merton, in the preface of Garfield’s book, advances the notion that, “Only by publishing their work can scientists make their contribution (as the telling word has it) and only when it thus becomes part of the public domain of science can they truly lay claim to it as theirs.” Merton further suggests the existence of a “composite communications-intellectual- property-and-reward system” which is the fundamental concept of the citation index. Several researchers have applied the idea of a citation analysis in its simplest form to assess research by members of ABSEL. In 1989, Markulis et al. considered the references per article as one measure by which to assess ABSEL scholarship. In 2002, Peach and Platt presented their work in which they reported the number of articles published in the Bernie Keys Library categorized by whether references were included or not included. Although Markulis et al. and Peach and Platt can be credited with some preliminary work in citation analysis specifically as it applies to ABSEL research, the current study delves into these issues far more extensively and extends into several areas not covered heretofore. METHODOLOGY The author reviewed each printed article in Developments in Business and Simulation Exercises, (hereafter simply referred to as ABSEL Proceedings), listed in Bernie Keys Library from 1984 to 2006. A tally was recorded for each article. (It should be noted that some articles were excluded from the tally for reasons, which are explained below.) The tally recorded total citations for the article and the number of citations published by each of several scholarly associations that one would assume that ABSEL scholars would likely consult as they formulate their research. The specific journals and proceedings for which a tally was kept for the period from 1984 to 2006, in addition to the ABSEL Proceedings, include: Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Proceedings, Academy of Management Review, Administrative Science Quarterly, Decision Sciences, Harvard Business Review, Journal of Business, Journal of Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 34, 2007 71 Experiential Learning and Simulation, Management Science, and Strategic Management Journal. In 1991 a collection of articles focusing on simulations and experiential exercises was written in the Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning. Beginning in 1992, citations began to appear in the ABSEL Proceedings from the Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning, so the incidence of citations in the Guide was recorded for the years 1992 to 2006. In addition to the publication of annual proceedings of conferences, ABSEL has had an official journal throughout its history. In the early years of ABSEL, the official journal’s name was Simulation & Games: An International Journal of Theory, Practice and Research, from March 1989 to December 1999 the name of the official journal was changed to Simulation & Gaming: An International Journal of Theory, Practice and Research and beginning in 2000 the name of the official journal was again changed to Simulation & Gaming: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Theory, Practice and Research. For the sake of simplicity, the specifics of the minor name changes will be ignored and the journal will be referred as Simulation & Gaming for the remainder of this paper. The author reviewed each printed article in Simulation & Gaming from 1996 to 2005 and a tally of total citations for selected scholarly outlets was recorded for all articles that were not excluded for reasons detailed below. EXCLUDED ARTICLES: A judgment was made to initiate the citation analysis for papers in ABSEL Proceedings beginning in 1984. It seemed reasonable to allow the ABSEL organization a ten-year start-up time to amass a body of knowledge before scrutinizing the citation proclivities of the organization. Since the purpose of the citation analysis of the papers appearing in Simulation & Gaming was to develop a basis for comparing and benchmarking papers in the ABSEL Proceedings, only the papers appearing during the last ten years of Simulation & Gaming were analyzed. CLARIFICATIONS, DEFINITIONS AND ADJUSTMENTS PROCEEDINGS NAMES: The names of the ABSEL Proceedings have also undergone some evolutionary changes from 1974 until 2006. For the first six years of ABSEL, each of the annual proceedings was given a unique name as follows: 1974 Simulation games and experiential learning techniques: On the road to a new frontier 1975 Simulation games and experiential exercises in action 1976 Computer simulation and learning theory 1977 New Horizons in simulation games and experiential learning 1978 Exploring experiential learning: Simulations and experiential exercises 1979 Insights into experiential pedagogy. Beginning in 1980 ABSEL standardized the name of the annual proceedings to Developments in Business and Simulation Exercises. In this work the label, ABSEL Proceedings, will be used to denote works published as proceedings from 1974 to 2006. CONDENSED PAPERS IN PROCEEDINGS: Beginning in 1990, ABSEL began designating papers accepted for publication in the ABSEL Proceedings as either full papers or as condensed papers. Since in many instances the authors of condensed papers elected to provide minimal references, condensed papers were excluded from the analysis. Condensed papers are not labeled as condensed, so it was not possible in all cases to draw a clear-cut distinction between condensed papers and full papers. To operationalize the analysis in this study it was decided that papers of four or less pages would be defined as condensed papers. REFERENCES ON REQUEST OR FULL LIST OF REFERENCES ON REQUEST: In their work in 2002, Peach and Platt noted the incidence of statements by authors of published papers in the ABSEL Proceedings that references would be provided on request. This happening first appeared in 1987, and in the years since 1990, there have been variable numbers with a low of 1 and a high of 18 published papers that have indicated that references would be provided on request. In addition, the authors of several of the papers during the period of time provided abbreviated sets of references and indicated additional references would be provided on request. For the analysis for this study those papers that indicated references (full or partial) would be provided on request were earmarked and treated differently than those papers that may have in fact utilized no references. Thus, some papers had no references because the author indicated that references would be provided on request and some papers simply had no references. When determinations were made in terms of citations per paper--in order not to bias the results--a judgment was made that the denominator for this calculation would exclude those papers that explicitly indicated that references would be provided on request. SILVER ANNIVERSARY PAPERS: In 1999 ABSEL celebrated its 25 anniversary. A collection of “Silver Anniversary Papers” was included in the ABSEL Proceedings that year. Since these special papers were outside the typical scholarly papers, and as a result did have references, they were excluded from the citation analysis. EXCLUSIONS FROM ANALYSIS OF SIMULATION & GAMING ARTICLES: A number of “specialty items” that appeared in Simulation & Gaming were excluded from analysis. The list of excluded items includes—editorials, notes, reviews, ready-to-use-simulation, symposium papers (examples can be found in June 2002 and December 2002), Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 34, 2007 72 reports, responses, communications, “in conversations”, and short topics (examples are found in Sept. 1998 in the works by Ken Jones). In the tallying process, the ludography that appeared in at least one Simulation & Gaming paper was excluded. These were excluded because they were not full- blown scholarly articles focusing on gaming research. RESULTS Table 1 presents the results of the citation analysis for ABSEL Proceedings from 1984 to 2006 and Table 2 presents the results of the citation analysis for Simulation and Games from 1996 to 2005. Table 1. Results of Citation Analysis for ABSEL Proceedings for 1984 to 2006 Y ea r To ta l P ap er s To ta l C ita tio ns A B SE L Pr oc ee di ng s A ca de m y of M an ag em en t Jo ur na l A ca de m y of M an ag em en t Pr oc ee di ng s A ca de m y of M an ag em en t R ev ie w A dm in is tra tiv e Sc ie nc e Q ua rte rly D ec is io n Sc ie nc es G ui de to B us in es s G am in g an d Ex pe rie nt ia l L ea rn in g H ar va rd B us in es s R ev ie w Jo ur na l o f B us in es s Jo ur na l o f E xp er ie nt ia l Le ar ni ng a nd S im ul at io n M an ag em en t S ci en ce Si m ul at io n & G am es St ra te gi c M an ag em en t Jo ur na l C ita tio ns o n re qu es t C ita tio ns p er p ap er * 1984 67 591 71 14 5 30 4 8 NA 7 2 8 12 19 4 0 8.8 1985 50 443 59 3 7 8 0 0 NA 4 5 6 3 11 0 0 8.9 1986 67 610 107 7 3 10 0 7 NA 5 8 1 5 25 2 0 9.1 1987 64 672 71 10 3 11 4 10 NA 12 0 1 7 15 5 0 10.5 1988 62 720 66 9 2 6 3 11 NA 11 0 0 8 19 4 0 11.6 1989 45 470 90 10 0 6 0 11 NA 1 2 1 3 41 2 1 10.7 1990 38 556 75 6 3 12 6 12 NA 4 0 2 11 39 4 0 14.6 1991 28 324 73 3 0 0 2 2 NA 5 0 1 2 30 1 0 11.6 1992 45 622 101 7 4 4 4 5 8 1 0 1 3 53 0 0 13.8 1993 29 306 33 0 0 3 1 0 6 3 0 1 3 24 2 1 10.9 1994 34 523 52 3 3 7 2 3 14 3 0 0 4 55 1 1 15.8 1995 20 374 89 2 2 2 2 1 13 4 2 0 1 62 1 0 18.7 1996 31 417 66 1 0 10 2 1 4 2 0 0 4 22 7 4 15.4 1997 56 295 54 1 0 0 0 0 6 2 0 1 0 21 0 11 6.6 1998 37 283 41 0 0 1 0 1 3 3 0 0 2 28 0 11 10.9 1999 41 365 57 2 0 4 3 2 7 3 0 0 1 40 1 4 9.9 2000 38 286 26 6 0 3 1 2 2 5 0 0 5 20 0 10 10.2 2001 37 531 114 2 0 7 4 2 9 2 0 0 2 77 2 1 14.8 2002 41 725 176 1 0 0 4 0 5 5 0 0 0 67 3 0 17.7 2003 35 630 184 3 0 2 0 0 11 0 0 0 3 44 2 0 18.0 2004 53 791 166 4 2 2 4 5 7 4 4 0 6 81 5 0 14.9 2005 53 1018 244 2 1 16 2 1 5 7 3 2 0 97 4 0 19.2 2006 45 1076 239 4 1 9 7 1 8 9 2 3 9 58 10 0 23.9 Means 44.2 549 98 41 12.4 Totals 1016 12628 2254 100 36 153 55 85 108 102 28 28 94 989 60 Legend: NA -- Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning published in 1991 * Citations per paper that does not explicitly state "Citations on Request" Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 34, 2007 73 A number of noteworthy observations and generalizations can be gleaned from the tables. For example, it is informative to consider the profile of a “typical” ABSEL paper in terms of a pattern of citations— the typical ABSEL paper has about 12 to 13 citations. It is interesting to note a growth over time of the citations per paper with a very significant upturn in recent years with the most recent citations per paper at about 24. Figure 1 shows the changes in citations per paper over time. The typical ABSEL paper has roughly two citations from ABSEL Proceedings and one citation from Simulation & Gaming. The other journals or sources that are cited have a much lower incidence. On average, the Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Management Science, and the Harvard Business Review are cited roughly once for every 10 ABSEL papers. The number of citations for the other journal and sources has been substantially less with two exceptions. Since its publication in 1991, the Table 2. Results of Citation Analysis for Simulation & Games for 1996 to 2005 Y ea r To ta l P ap er s To ta l C ita tio ns Si m ul at io n & G am es A B SE L Pr oc ee di ng s A ca de m y of M an ag em en t Jo ur na l A ca de m y of M an ag em en t Pr oc ee di ng s A ca de m y of M an ag em en t R ev ie w A dm in is tra tiv e Sc ie nc e Q ua rte rly D ec is io n Sc ie nc es G ui de to B us in es s G am in g an d Ex pe rie nt ia l L ea rn in g H ar va rd B us in es s R ev ie w Jo ur na l o f B us in es s Jo ur na l o f E xp er ie nt ia l Le ar ni ng a nd S im ul at io n M an ag em en t S ci en ce St ra te gi c M an ag em en t Jo ur na l C ita tio ns o n re qu es t C ita tio ns p er p ap er 1996 16 585 32 31 2 1 3 1 3 1 7 0 1 1 4 0 36.6 1997 16 516 61 35 3 0 10 0 5 5 1 0 3 3 2 0 32.3 1998 16 263 15 7 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16.4 1999 32 654 67 13 0 0 0 0 3 8 1 1 0 3 1 0 20.4 2000 21 666 38 1 1 0 6 1 1 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 31.7 2001 34 1194 90 316 1 1 0 0 2 8 1 3 0 1 0 0 35.1 2002 22 599 73 37 2 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 27.2 2003 29 851 68 16 5 1 1 6 3 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 29.3 2004 21 747 108 124 4 1 0 0 3 18 0 2 0 1 0 0 35.6 2005 25 851 39 44 1 1 2 4 1 2 3 0 0 1 0 0 34.0 Means 23.2 692.6 59.1 62.4 29.9 Totals 232 6926 591 624 19 5 24 15 22 44 14 7 4 17 8 0 Y e a r Ci ta ti on s pe r pa pe r 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 199 8 19 97 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 25 20 15 10 5 F igure 1 . T ime S e r ie s P lot of C ita tions P e r P a pe r Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 34, 2007 74 Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning has appeared in the references for a number of ABSEL papers. Although the number of citations of the Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning in ABSEL Proceedings does not match the number of citations of Simulation & Gaming articles, in recent years they have eclipsed the Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Management Science, and the Harvard Business Review and appear on the average roughly once in every 6 ABSEL papers. Additionally in 1996, a new journal called the Journal of Management Education was first published. Although no effort was made to include the Journal of Management Education in the citation analysis for this study, it was noted that it has been cited increasingly in recent years in ABSEL and it clearly is one the journals that some ABSELers consult regularly as they do their research There are undoubtedly many other interesting observations that might be made based upon the results in Table 1. It seems appropriate to leave that additional scrutiny to the readers so that they may draw their own conclusions and focus on their specific areas of interest. The citation analysis of Simulation & Gaming articles produced some interesting results and provided the obvious opportunity for comparison with ABSEL papers. The typical Simulation & Gaming paper has about 30 citations, significantly more than the 12 to 13 citations in the typical ABSEL paper. The typical Simulation & Gaming paper has roughly 3 references to Simulation & Gaming papers and 3 references to papers from ABSEL Proceedings. The incidence of references to most of the other journals and sources that had some level of significance in the citation analysis of ABSEL Proceedings is very low. The result is not particularly surprising if one considers the fact that the emphasis of Simulation & Gaming has changed and evolved significantly, particularly in recent years. That point is apparent if one looks at the range of topical coverage currently under the purview of Simulation & Gaming. For example, one entire edition in recent years focused on issues that relate more closely to modern medical practice than modern business. Under those circumstances, one would not expect the references to focus on tradition business journals. It seems that the editors of Simulation & Gaming have established a practice of visiting issues of business simulations and experiential exercises intermittently (i.e., extensively in some volumes and not at all in others). It was noted anecdotally, that the Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning was the third most frequently cited source (after the ABSEL Proceedings and Simulation & Gaming) of those that were considered in the citation analysis in this study. CONCLUSIONS Without overstating the significance of the results, it seems that several conclusions can be drawn. It is clear that many ABSEL scholars have regularly consulted both the ABSEL Proceedings and Simulation & Gaming as key sources when they perform literature reviews for many years. Although that result, per se, is not shocking, it is at least reassuring that that is the case. Incidence of numerous citations in the ABSEL Proceedings of the Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning since 1991 is also significant when one realizes that the works in the Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning were all written by scholars who are recognized ABSEL researchers. Although we are all aware of the problems associated with attaching too much significant to averages, there are several averages that arose in the study that suggest positive aspects about the research being done by ABSELers. In Garfield’s (1979) text he indicates, “The average scientific article contains approximately 15 citations.” It is noteworthy that over the period of time from 1984 to 2006, the average citations per article in the ABSEL Proceedings have been between 12 and 13. Perhaps more significantly that number has trended upward over the years with citations per paper at 19.2 and 23.9, respectively, for the two most recent years. Although many of the articles in Simulation & Gaming cannot be attributed to ABSELers, the average citations per paper that was found in this study, 29.9, would certainly seem credible in comparison to the number, 15, reported by Garfield. It seems that the nettlesome practice by some authors of indicating that references will be provided on request peaked in 1997-1998 with 11 papers so designated in both 1997 and 1998, and recently has fallen out of favor. Since 2001, none of the published papers in the ABSEL Proceedings indicated that references would be provided on request. By way of comparison, in the period of time from 1996 to 2005, for which the citation analysis was performed for Simulation & Gaming, none of the papers specified that references would be provided on request. It is the author’s editorial opinion that works that do not use the on request are likely to be of higher quality, so the recent trend in the ABSEL Proceedings is probably commendable. To the extent that citations in published papers has any direct connection with the scholarly journals that researchers regularly consult, there may be some interesting implications for those interested in promoting ABSEL membership. To gingerly advance an argument that may be slightly tenuous, it would seem that ABSELers read the ABSEL Proceedings, Simulation & Gaming, the Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning, as well as a whole host of “management journals.” Additionally, recently the Journal of Management Education seems to have become significant resource for ABSELers. So, if ABSEL is attempting to reach out to attract new members, it might use these scholarly works as the medium. To close, it would appear that the citation analysis from this study indicates a number of very positive features in terms of the research being published by ABSELers. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Volume 34, 2007 75 REFERENCES Anderson, Philip H. and Leigh Lawton (1997). “Demonstrating the Learning Effectiveness of Simulations: Where We are and Where We Need to Go.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 24, 68-73. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Bloom, Benjamin S. (1956). Taxonomy of Education Objectives: The Classification of Education Goals Handbook I: Cognitive Domain, David McKay Company, Inc. New York, NY. Butler, Jr., John K. (1999). “ABSEL’s Contributions to Experiential in the 90s.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 26, 1. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Butler, Richard J., Peter M. Markulis, and Daniel R. Strang (1985). “Learning Theory and Research Design: How Has ABSEL Fared?” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Exercises, 12, 86-90. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Campbell, Donald T. and Julian C. Stanley (1963). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research, Rand McNally & Company, Chicago, Ill. Faria, A.J. (2000). “The Changing Nature of Simulation Research: A Brief ABSEL History.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 27, 84- 90. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Faria, A.J. (2001). “The Changing Nature of Simulation Research: A Brief.” Simulation & Gaming: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Theory, Practice, and Research, 32, 1, 97-110. Faria, A.J. and Joseph Wolfe (1999). “ABSEL’s Historical Research Interests.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 26, 1. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Garfield, Eugene (1979). Citation Indexing: Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology and Humanities, John Wiley & Sons, NY, NY. Goosen, Kenneth R. (1986). “An Analysis of ABSEL Conference Papers.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 13, 97-101. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Gosen, Jerry and John Washbush (2004). “A Review of Scholarship on Assessing Experiential Learning Effectiveness.” Simulation & Gaming: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Theory, Practice, and Research, 35, 2, 270-293. Graf, Lee A. (1999). “ABSEL’s Contributions to Experiential Learning/Experiential Exercises: The Decade of the 1970s.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 26, 1. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Gentry, James (ed.) (1991). Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning, Nichols/GP Publishing, East Brunswick. Howard, Barbara, Peter M. Markulis, Daniel R. Strang and Joshua Wixom (2006). “Simulations and Experiential Exercises – Do They Result in Learning? Have We Figured It Out Yet?” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 33, 100-106. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Howard, Barbara and Daniel R. Strang (2001). “ABSEL: The Way We Talk!” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 28, 111-116. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Howard, Barbara and Daniel R. Strang (2003). “ABSEL: The Way We Talk! Take II.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 30, 133-145. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Kelley, Lane & William D. Brice (1999). “The Contributions of ABSEL during the 1980s.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 26, 1. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Keys, Bernard (1977). “Review of Learning Research in Business Gaming.” New Horizons in Simulation Games and Experiential Learning, 3, 173-184. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Krippendorff, K. (1980). “Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology.” Beverly Hills: Sage. Markulis, Peter M., Phillip Ricci and Daniel R. Strang (1991). “A Critical Review and Assessment of ABSEL’s Award-Winning Procedures and Protocols.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 18, 61-65. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Markulis, Peter M., Phillip Ricci and Daniel R. Strang (1989). “A Review of Salient Trends in Proceedings’ Characteristics: A Fifteen Year Profile of ABSEL.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 16, 200-203. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Patz, Alan L., J. Bernard Keys and Hugh M. Cannon (1999). “Back from the Future: An ABSEL ‘Merlin’ Exercise for the Year 2005. Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 26, 1. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Peach, E. Brian and Richard G. Platt (2002). “The ABSEL Research Heritage and the BKL: Leveraging Their Value for Future Research.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 29, 260-264. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Wolfe, Joseph (1981). “Research on the Learning Effectiveness of Business Simulation Games—A Review of the State of Science.” Developments In Business Simulation & Experiential Learning, 8, 72. Reprinted in The Bernie Keys Library, 7th edition. Wolfe, Joseph and David Crookall (1998). “Developing a Scientific Knowledge of Simulation/Gaming.” Simulation & Gaming: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Theory, Practice, and Research, 29, 1, 7-19. Table of Contents Volume 34, 2007 Experiential Teaching May Lead To Experiential Learning The Role Of Learning Versus Performance Orientations When Reacting To Negative Outcomes In Simulation Games: Further Insights An Analysis Of The Interaction Of Firm Demand And Industry Demand In Business Simulations Consistency Of Participant Simulation Performance Across Simulation Games Of Growing Complexity Assessing And Incentivizing Learner Contribution And Performance Excellence: Creating Win-Win Evaluation Options The Technological Impact Analysis: A Research-Based Exercise To Heighten Learners' Technological Sensitivity Beginnings: How We Start the Semester and Individual Classes : A Roundtable Discussion Simulation Performance and Its Effectiveness As A PBL Problem: A Follow-Up Study The Use of Multimedia Learning Tools to Facilitate Online Learning of Business Statistics Forecasting Accuracy And Learning: A Key To Measuring Business Game Performance Panel Discussion: Alternative Ways of Using the Internet for Business Simulations to Input Decisions, Process, and Present Financial and Economic Data Output Absel Research -- One Additional Perspective On Where We Are And Where We Have Come From Assessing participant learning in a business simulation From Case Presentation To Case Facilitation: How Assessment Changed The Capstone Course The Use Of Computer-Assisted, Interactive Role-Play Simulation In Hong Kong Corporate Positioning: A Business Game Perspective Demonstration Of A Computer-Assisted Global Business Simulation Applying .NET Remoting To A Business Simulation Assessing Emotional Intelligence: The EQ Matrix Exercise Outcomes And Observations Of An Extended Accounting Board Game The Use Of Learning Styles Questionnaire In Hong Kong Forming Teams For Classroom Projects Online Budgeting And Marketing Control With The Proforma Analysis Package The Effect Of Experiential Learning Experiences On Management Skills Acquisition Students' Perceptions on the Individual Managerial Performance Orderness: A New Definition Of Alignment An Exploratory Study Of The Efficacy Of Servsafe® Online Team Behavior And Team Success Results From A Board Game Simulation Telecommuting Internships - Do They Work? The WEE GAME: A Pre-Game Effects On Learning When Students Have Information About Games And Their Outcomes When Playing Them Assessment And Simulations: Measuring The Academic Learning Compacts Within Dangerous Business: An Interactive Ethics Case Activity The Paradise Islands Assessing And Applying fiAppropriatefl Conflict Management Styles Distance Learning In Communication: Blended Or On-Line? Developing An On-Line Advanced Communication Course World Café: Simulating Seminar Dialogues in a Large Class The Programming Game: An Exploratory Collaboration Between Business Simulation And Instructional Design The Canary Principle: An Alternative Model for Providing Real-Time Coaching in an On-Line Discussion Environment Assessing Character Development Using A Direct-Approach Business Ethics Exercise Persistence Of Decisions By Simulation Game Participants The Invalidity of Profit = f(Product Quality) PIMS Validation of Marketing Games A Study of The Applicability of The Perceptions of Organizational Politics Scale (POPS) For Use in The University Classroom The ROI Of Connected Projects: A Payroll Example Initiation of Research on Gaming Simulation in Japan Inappropriate Use of Citations and Corrupting the Body of Knowledge: Accepting Urban Legends as Truth An Exploration Of The Perceived Value Of Highly Socio-Inductive Learning How "Whole" Is Whole Person Learning? An Examination Of Spirituality In Experiential Learning Modeling Outsourcing and Strategy Alignment into a Business Game Successful Integration Of Webct Into A Small Business School The Thinking Steps Model In Game Theory: A Qualitative Approach In Following The Rules The Application Of Means-End Theory To Understanding The Value Of Simulation-Based Learning Armchair Travel: An active learning approach to increasing global awareness and participant self-efficacy Goldratt's Thinking Process: Is there a place for it in the Total Enterprise Simulation Assessing And Developing Student Skills Using a Group Exercise Computer Business Simulation Design: Novelty & Complexity Issues