A Study of Team Cohesion and Player Satisfaction in Two Face-to-Face Games

A study of two face-to-face educational farming games, The Green Revolution Game and Africulture, examines whether game rules shape team cohesion and player satisfaction. Grounded in Social Identity Theory, the research hypothesized that a game with fixed team membership and collective judgment would foster stronger cohesion than one with individualized roles and changeable teams. The work also engages a literature in which member satisfaction lacks a settled definition, with communication, perceived progress toward goals, and fairness frequently identified as its drivers.

The central comparison drew on a between-subjects design of 36 participants, 16 playing the Green Revolution Game and 20 playing Africulture, who completed a 24-item questionnaire measuring team cohesion and three satisfaction factors: mixed-motive conflict, communication, and fairness. The Green Revolution Game produced significantly higher ratings of team cohesion, communication, and fairness than Africulture, each at p<.05. Mixed-motive conflict was somewhat lower in the Green Revolution Game, though this difference did not reach statistical significance. The authors conclude that rules grounded in social identity can measurably raise cohesion and satisfaction in simulation-based learning.

The findings carry explicit limitations. The sample was small, the two games are not identical in design, and playtime per annual cycle differed between them, all of which constrain how confidently the results generalize. The study's scope is limited to these two face-to-face educational simulations and to a short, single-session comparison rather than longitudinal or multi-setting evidence.