Terminological Ambiguity

Jan H. G. Klabbers
Additional contact information
Jan H. G. Klabbers: KMPC, Bemmel-Lingewaard, Netherlands, jklabbers@kmpc.nl

Simulation & Gaming, 2009, vol. 40, issue 4, 446-463

Abstract: Since its introduction in academia and professional practice during the 1950s, gaming has been linked to simulation. Although both fields have a few important characteristics in common, they are distinct in their form and underlying theories of knowledge and methodology. Nevertheless, in the literature, hybrid terms such as gaming/simulation and simulation gaming are used for practical or pragmatic reasons, causing confusion and ambiguity about the marking out of gaming versus simulation. Generally it is not clear whether authors are talking about games and simulations as artifacts of certain forms or whether they are referring to their functionality. The author elaborates on the confusion about these terms and offers a frame of reference to bring more terminological coherence and reduce methodological ambiguity.

Keywords: actor simulation; closed models; game; gaming/simulation; interactive simulation; link trainer; mathematical analysis; open models; operations research; play; problem framing; pure machine simulation; qualitative model; quantitative model; role play; rules of correspondence; simulation; simulation games (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2009
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1046878108325500 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:simgam:v:40:y:2009:i:4:p:446-463

DOI: 10.1177/1046878108325500

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Simulation & Gaming
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().