Abstract

Computer game designers have frequently identified game complexity or “challenge”
as a key variable in determining the level of enjoyment users derive from computer
games. However, no technical and psychological definition of complexity exists in
the gaming literature. The current paper reports on an experiment designed to test a
derived relations approach to defining game complexity. Twenty three participants
were recruited and exposed to a stimulus equivalence training procedure, designed to
train two five-member equivalence relations. Subsequently, participants were
presented with a simulated computer game in which they were required to
demonstrate responding in accordance with both one-node and three-node derived
stimulus equivalence relations under severe time constraints in order to gain a high
score. Participants demonstrated consistently correct responding in accordance with
DRR. In addition, significantly more correct responses were produced at the
relationally less complex (i.e., one-node) level. It is suggested that a derived relations
analysis of game complexity may serve as a viable framework within which to
investigate the complex processes involved in game playing.