Negotiating virtually and face-to-face: First experience from a serious game conducted in person and via smartphone application

Negotiating virtually and face-to-face: First experience from a serious game conducted in person and via smartphone application | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Negotiating virtually and face-to-face: First experience from a serious game conducted in person and via smartphone application Nils Haneklaus, László Horváth, Hendrik Brink, Tzong-Ru Lee, Matúš Mišík, and 4 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6110762/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Serious games and negotiation simulations are effective tools for teaching sustainable environmental practices. The Phosphorus Negotiation Game (P-Game), originally a face-to-face simulation on sustainable phosphorus fertilizer production, engages participants in evaluating the recovery of radiotoxic uranium during fertilizer production. To increase accessibility, a smartphone version was developed for virtual participation. This study compared self-reported knowledge gains between face-to-face and virtual P-Game participants. It was found that both formats significantly improved understanding of phosphorus and negotiation science, with no major differences in learning outcomes. Knowledge of phosphorus science increased by 92.3% (global face-to-face), 70.7% (Hungarian face-to-face), and 88.4% (online), while negotiation science/practice knowledge rose similarly across all groups. The face-to-face format promoted immediate engagement and motivation, while the online version offered flexibility and deeper reflection. The virtual P-Game received high user satisfaction, with a System Usability Scale score above 80. These findings highlight the virtual format’s potential as an effective complement to traditional face-to-face learning. Further research with larger, more diverse samples is recommended to fully explore its broader educational impact in sustainability contexts. Phosphorus Negotiation Game (P-Game) serious game negotiation simulation smartphone application sustainability education digital learning tools Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Highlights • Results from a face-to-face and virtual serious game are compared • The virtual game offers flexibility, while face-to-face enhances engagement • Both formats significantly improved participants knowledge • The developed virtual smartphone game earned high usability scores 1. Introduction Serious games [ 1 – 4 ] and negotiation simulations [ 5 – 8 ] are becoming increasingly popular teaching tools to foster sustainable environmental education by providing an interactive and engaging learning environment. These tools offer participants a practical way to explore complex socio-environmental issues, encouraging them to analyze different perspectives, develop critical thinking skills, and practice decision-making in simulated real-world scenarios. Such approaches align with the growing need for innovative educational methods that promote experiential learning and address global sustainability challenges. Most recently, [ 9 ] introduced the Phosphorus Negotiation Game (P-Game), a face-to-face serious negotiation game designed to support science-policy decision-making regarding sustainable phosphorus fertilizer production. Phosphate ore, one of the fifth most mined materials globally, is an essential raw material for agricultural production due to its phosphorus (P) content. However, phosphate ores often contain relevant concentrations of radiotoxic uranium, which, if not recovered during processing, can largely transfer to the final fertilizer product [ 10 – 12 ]. The presence of uranium poses potential environmental and health risks, making the decision to recover or leave it in the fertilizer a complex policy and economic challenge. In the P-Game, participants take on stakeholder roles to debate the advantages and disadvantages of recovering uranium during mineral fertilizer production. The goal is to persuade others using well-researched arguments while navigating scientific, economic, and political considerations. Since its inception, the P-Game has been successfully conducted with 788 participants across more than 20 countries, providing valuable insights into the decision-making processes of diverse stakeholder groups. To further expand its accessibility and impact, a virtual reality platform [ 13 ] and a smartphone application were developed, allowing the game to reach a broader audience beyond the constraints of in-person participation. Such digital adaptations of negotiation simulations could potentially enhance learning by offering a more flexible and inclusive approach, accommodating diverse geographical locations and enabling participants to engage asynchronously at their own pace [ 6 , 14 ]. Most negotiation classes or trainings have traditionally been conducted in person; however, the rapid advancement of technology has led to a significant increase in online or virtual negotiation courses. These formats have gained popularity due to their inherent flexibility [ 15 , 16 ], cost and time efficiency [ 17 , 18 ], and continuous technological improvements that increasingly simulate in-person interactions with higher fidelity [ 19 ]. While the trend towards virtual learning already existed before the COVID-19 pandemic, the global crisis accelerated the shift to online education, prompting a critical examination of its effectiveness in comparison to face-to-face methods [ 20 ]. A key debate in educational research concerns the effectiveness of virtual teaching and negotiation training, which was recently summarized by Oehlschläger and Merz [ 21 ]. One of the theoretical frameworks often referenced in this debate is the media richness theory [ 22 , 23 ], which suggests that learning outcomes are influenced by the richness of the communication medium used. According to this theory, richer media—such as in-person communication—can provide more effective learning experiences because they convey multiple cues (e.g., facial expressions, gestures, tone of voice) that enhance understanding and reduce ambiguity [ 24 , 25 ]. In contrast, virtual environments may require participants to invest more cognitive effort in navigating the interface and managing digital communication, potentially diverting cognitive resources from the actual learning process. The P-Game is grounded in British Parliamentary Style (BPS) debating, an interactive debating format that fosters engagement by enabling direct interaction between students and instructors (BPS) allowing for positive engagement between the teacher and the students [ 26 ]. This format encourages active participation, critical analysis, and structured argumentation while allowing for constructive feedback and reinforcement of contributions [ 27 ]. The question remains whether such an interactive approach can be effectively transferred to a virtual setting without losing the essential elements that drive engagement and learning outcomes. The present study seeks to explore this issue by comparing the effectiveness of face-to-face and virtual versions of the P-Game. Early observations suggest that while in-person debates benefit from real-time interactions and immediate feedback, virtual formats offer advantages in terms of accessibility, flexibility, and opportunities for asynchronous reflection. Comparisons between the effectiveness of these formats may provide insights similar to those observed in previous studies on telephone negotiations [ 28 ], where the absence of non-verbal cues was found to influence negotiation dynamics but not necessarily reduce overall effectiveness. The findings of this study align with several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), showcasing the P-Game’s potential to contribute to global sustainability efforts. The P-Game supports SDG 4: Quality Education by providing an engaging learning experience that promotes critical thinking and decision-making in environmental sustainability while enhancing accessibility through its virtual format, fostering inclusive and equitable education across diverse geographical and educational backgrounds. It also contributes to SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation by raising awareness about the environmental risks of phosphorus use, particularly the potential contamination from radiotoxic uranium in fertilizers. Furthermore, the digital adaptation of the P-Game exemplifies innovation in education, contributing to SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure by leveraging technology to enhance learning outcomes and interdisciplinary collaboration. The game’s focus on resource recovery and sustainable fertilizer production aligns with SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production, encouraging participants to explore strategies for minimizing environmental harm and maximizing resource efficiency. Additionally, the game indirectly supports SDG 13: Climate Action, equipping participants with the knowledge to advocate for sustainable agricultural practices that reduce environmental footprints and build climate resilience. By facilitating international cooperation and knowledge exchange among participants from various countries and disciplines, the P-Game also advances SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals, promoting cross-border collaboration and diverse perspectives. Overall, the P-Game serves as a valuable tool for advancing sustainability, offering an interactive platform for participants to develop the skills and knowledge needed to address complex environmental challenges effectively. The objective of this work was to better understand if all these positive aspects can be conserved if the P-Game is played using a smartphone application. Although comparisons between in-person and virtual games exist, this study offers new insights in a way that really the exact same games were played in-person and virtually using the same pre- and post-game surveys to capture the participants knowledge gains. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. The development of the online version of the P-Game For the online version of the P-Game Flutter [29], Dart [30] and Firebase [31] were used. Flutter is an open-source framework that can be used for building natively compiled applications for multiple platforms from a single codebase. Flutter was chosen due to its accessibility features, modern user interface (UI) capabilities, fast performance, and pre-built packages for common development tasks. Dart offers high performance due to native code compilation, cross-platform support, strong typing for early error detection, and a rich library ecosystem. Firebase is a mobile and web application development platform. It provided backend services for the development, user authentication, and real-time data management. The following key Firebase services were also used: Cloud Firestore, Cloud Functions, Authentication, and Cloud Storage. For the development, the Spiral Model was used. It was chosen due to its ability to handle risks effectively by combining elements of evolutionary, waterfall, and prototyping models. This iterative approach allowed for continuous refinement based on feedback, making it suitable for complex projects like the P-Game. The Business Logic Component (BLoC) architecture was used to separate the presentation layer from the business logic and data layers. This enhanced maintainability and scalability. The BLoC library’s Cubit class provided state management. Additionally, Google's Material Design language ensured a consistent look and feel across platforms. Several P-Game specific features were integrated into the online adaptation. Voice chat was used as the primary communication tool during debates to mitigate bias in argument evaluation by removing visual elements. Asynchronous participation allowed users to engage in debates at their time of convenience. This promoted inclusivity and allowed the participants to prepare thoroughly ahead of their contribution. The developed smartphone application would also allow for participation from different locations although we have not taken advantage of this feature in this first assessment yet. 2.2. Details of the application Before entering the application, the users can find themselves on a landing page. Here, the users can either log in or sign up before the game. An account can also be created using an already existing Google account. The landing page was accessed via a smartphone application or using a browser on a computer. Both can be seen in Fig. 1. After (signing up and) logging in, the users are taken to the lobby where they can see different debate rooms. They can also see whether a room is currently used, or the debate is already finished in a certain room. Users can also add new public and private debate rooms by pressing the “+” button in the bottom right corner of the screen. Naturally, if the users want to join a private debate room, they need to enter a password. The lobby can be seen in Fig. 2. After entering a selected room, the users are taken to the actual debating screen (shown in Fig. 3) where the voice messages are recorded or replayed. In the said figure, details about the debate can be seen on the top of the screen. According to the details, the debate should be about phosphorus mining. The details also show, and a short introduction is provided to help the participants understand the specific topic that was chosen for this debate. After the game has started, users can send voice recordings to each other simulating the BPS format used for the in-person P-Game. 2.3. Data collection Data was collected on the gaming experience and the system usability. To better understand the gaming experience of participants and also to be able to compare the results of the virtual P-Game experience with the participants experiences from playing the face-to-face P-Game we used the same pre- and post-game surveys that were previously used to quantify participants’ experience from playing the in-person P-Game [9]. Minor modifications were made to the survey questionnaire, primarily to include additional comments for better clarity of the Likert scale and open-ended questions. The pre- and post-game surveys, as illustrated in Fig. 4, remained largely unchanged. Despite the virtual P-Game being conducted on smartphones, participants were requested to complete printed copies of the surveys, maintaining consistency with the face-to-face P-Game approach. The surveys included both quantitative and qualitative elements to provide an understanding of the gaming experience and learning outcomes. Pre- and post-game surveys were used to measure changes in the participants’ understanding of phosphorus science as well as negotiation science/practice. Open-ended questions allowed participants to express their thoughts and experiences in their own words and were meant to provide feedback on the overall game design. Besides the pre-and-post game surveys that were already used for the face-to-face P-Game, we used a standard System Usability Scale (SUS) depicted in Fig. 5 to evaluate the usability of the online P-Game [32]. Testing of the virtual P-Game was conducted in two phases. We first conducted an initial pilot test with a small group of participants to identify and subsequently fix major technical issues. Results from this pre-pilot testing study are not reported here. After preliminary tests we conducted full-scale tests with a group of 29 participants in Hungary. 2.4. Data analysis Data from playing the virtual P-Game with 29 participants at the University of Pannonia in Veszprem in 2024 was compared to data from face-to-face P-Game sessions conducted with a different cohort of 30 participants in Hungary—19 students from the University of Pannonia in Veszprem in 2023 and 11 students from the University of Debrecen in 2024. Additionally, the obtained results were analyzed alongside data from all reported face-to-face P-Game rounds, which were conducted with a total of 788 participants across 22 countries between 2022 and 2024 [9]. The comparative analysis included statistical evaluations such as descriptive statistics, percentage change calculations with uncertainty propagation [33] and effect size assessments using Hedges' G parameter [34] that was computed using Microsoft Excel 365 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA). Significance testing through two-way ANOVA was performed in GraphPad Prism 10.4.1 (GraphPad Software, Inc., La Jolla, CA) to determine differences between groups. This comprehensive approach provided insights into the learning outcomes across different delivery modes and participant demographics. Data from the SUS is presented separately since such data was not obtained during the previous face-to-face P-Game rounds. 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Comparison of the face-to-face and virtual P-Game experience Table 1 provides an overview of the participants’ backgrounds. The self-reported educational background of the virtual P-Game group in Hungary was somewhat different to that of the face-to-face P-Game group in Hungary while it was fairly similar to that of the global face-to-face P-Game group. With regards to the level of education the virtual P-Game group from Hungary clearly shows the largest share of BSc-students, that is further reflected in a younger age of the participants. The gender distribution was in fairly good agreement among all three groups. It is worth mentioning that the participants of all three groups self-reported significantly different nationalities that result in potentially very different cultural backgrounds. This is no surprise. The P-Game was inspired by the Mercury Game [ 35 ] and the researchers developing and conducting the Mercury Game recommended including participants with diverse cultural backgrounds. This was achieved in the face-to-face P-Game played globally in 22 countries with participants self-reporting more than 60 nationalities[1]. The face-to-face P-Game in Hungary was also played with a relatively diverse group of students that self-reported 14 nationalities[2] while the virtual P-Game was conducted with a more homogenous group largely (> 96%) consisting of Hungarian students. Despite these differences, comparable improvements in self-reported knowledge of phosphorus science and negotiation science/practice were observed across all three groups. Specifically, self-reported knowledge of phosphorus science increased by 88.4 ± 82.5% in the virtual P-Game group from Hungary, 70.7 ± 48.1% in the Hungarian face-to-face P-Game group, and 92.3 ± 66.2% in the global face-to-face P-Game group, with corresponding Hedges’ G effect sizes of 1.03, 1.18, and 1.43, respectively. The relatively large standard deviations across groups suggest variability in learning gains, which may stem from differences in prior knowledge, engagement levels, and individual learning styles. Nevertheless, the consistently positive mean improvements indicate that both the virtual and face-to-face P-Game methodologies effectively engage students in addressing complex challenges such as the dilemma of unconventional uranium recovery from phosphate ores in mineral fertilizer production. The Hedges' G values, which assess the effect size by comparing changes in parameter values relative to the pooled standard deviations, suggest a strong impact of the intervention across all groups. Values greater than 0.8 are generally considered large, indicating that the P-Game had a significant and meaningful impact on participants' knowledge acquisition [ 36 ]. The self-reported knowledge improvements in negotiation science/practice showed a slightly different trend. The virtual P-Game group reported an increase of 55.6 ± 39.1%, whereas the face-to-face groups reported increases of 53.81 ± 33.83% (Hungary) and 70.5 ± 45.9% (global), with corresponding Hedges’ G values of 0.94, 1.04, and 1.26. The relatively high pre-game survey values in the virtual P-Game group suggest that students may have had prior exposure to the content, potentially explaining the observed differences in knowledge increases. This could be attributed to information sharing from previous face-to-face P-Game rounds, underscoring the need for further studies with a larger and more diverse sample size to better understand the impact of the virtual format on negotiation knowledge gains. Conducting the P-Game at different institutions could also help clarify whether the observed differences stem from prior exposure or other contextual factors. The Hedges' G values for both phosphorus science and negotiation science/practice are closely aligned, indicating a consistently strong effect of the P-Game intervention across both domains. This suggests that the P-Game is equally effective in enhancing knowledge in both areas, with minor variations likely attributable to differences in prior exposure and individual engagement levels rather than a fundamental disparity in the game's impact. Overall, both the online and face-to-face P-Game formats have demonstrated their capacity to enhance participants’ understanding of phosphorus science and negotiation skills. From a facilitation perspective, the face-to-face format was characterized by higher levels of direct engagement and seemingly greater motivation among participants. Informal feedback revealed that face-to-face debates fostered a competitive and dynamic environment, which encouraged active participation and immediate feedback loops. This heightened interaction likely contributed to stronger motivation and engagement, reinforcing the importance of personal interaction in educational settings. Conversely, the virtual P-Game format offered distinct advantages that were highlighted in participant feedback. The flexibility of asynchronous participation allowed users to engage with the material at their own pace, facilitating deeper reflection and a more thorough understanding of the topic. This flexibility was particularly beneficial for participants with scheduling constraints or those in different time zones. Additionally, the virtual format's location independence provides opportunities for global participation, fostering a broader exchange of ideas and perspectives that can enhance the learning experience through cross-cultural insights. The motivational aspects of both formats varied. Face-to-face participants often cited the energy and immediacy of live discussions as part of the P-Game as key motivational factors. In contrast, online participants appreciated the ability to prepare more for their speeches, and the reduced pressure of not having to perform in person in front of an audience that also happened to be their peers, further increasing that anxiety. Communication patterns also differed: face-to-face interactions benefitted from non-verbal cues and immediate feedback, while online interactions relied heavily on written and voice communication. The latter potentially reduced the immediacy but allowed for more thoughtful and considered responses. 3.2. Comparative Analysis of the Pre- and Post-Game surveys The bar charts (Fig. 6 ) illustrate self-reported pre- and post-game knowledge (P and Neg) across three participant groups: in-person global, in-person Hungarian, and online participants. The analyses presented in Fig. 6 is broken down into overall averages, gender, and academic fields, with statistical significance determined through a two-way ANOVA and indicated by * (p < 0.05), ** (p < 0.01), *** (p < 0.001), and **** (p < 0.0001). It is important to note that the in-person study included 788 participants from 22 countries, while the Hungarian in-person and online groups consisted of approximately 30 participants. Additionally, the pre-game vs. post-game comparisons were conducted exclusively within the online group, and the effect size (Hedges' g) analyses provide further context to the observed differences. For pre-game P knowledge (Fig. 6 a), the two-way ANOVA revealed no significant differences across any subcategories, indicating that participants across all groups—regardless of delivery mode, gender, or academic field—began with comparable baseline knowledge of P. In contrast, pre-game Neg knowledge (Fig. 6 c) showed significant differences, with the online group reporting higher scores overall and particularly within the social sciences subgroup (****). These findings suggest that online participants, especially those in social sciences, may have had greater prior exposure to or confidence in negotiation-related knowledge. However, given the small sample size of the online group, these results should be interpreted cautiously. Post-game results for P knowledge (Fig. 6 b) revealed significant differences in the social sciences subgroup, where online participants reported higher post-game scores than in-person groups. Similarly, post-game Neg knowledge (Fig. 6 d) showed that the online group significantly outperformed the in-person groups overall (*) and also the participants within the social sciences subgroup (**). These results suggest that the online delivery mode may offer unique benefits for social sciences participants in improving P and negotiation-related knowledge. However, the generalizability of these findings is limited by the smaller size of the online cohort compared to the larger in-person group. The pre-game vs. post-game comparisons (Figs. 6 e and 6 f), conducted exclusively within the online group, revealed significant gains in both P and Neg knowledge across most subcategories. The observed improvements, supported by statistical analysis, reinforce the effectiveness of the online P-Game format in enhancing participants' understanding across diverse demographic groups. The Hedges' g effect sizes provide additional insight into the magnitude of these improvements (Table 2 ). Table 2 Hedges’ G Effect Sizes for self-reported knowledge gains across different participant demographics in the online P-Game format, based on the pre- and post-game surveys. Group Knowledge on Phosphorous Science Knowledge on Negotiation Science/Practice All 1.03 0.94 Male 1.04 0.86 Female 0.91 0.77 BSc 1.08 1.06 Science 1.44 1.36 Social Science 0.68 0.63 For overall knowledge on phosphorous science, a large effect size (g = 1.025) suggests strong learning gains, with the largest gains observed in science participants (g = 1.44) and the smallest in social sciences participants (g = 0.68). Similarly, for knowledge on negotiation science/practice, a large effect size (g = 0.94) is noted, with science participants showing the greatest improvement (g = 1.36) and social sciences participants the least (g = 0.63). These effect sizes suggest that while the activity was effective across all groups, the magnitude of improvement varied, with science participants benefiting the most. These findings highlight that the online format may be particularly effective for participants in science fields, as evidenced by the large effect sizes for both P and Neg knowledge improvements in this subgroup. Social sciences participants, while reporting smaller effect sizes, still demonstrated meaningful gains, albeit less pronounced compared to other groups. The small sample size of the online group (approximately 30 participants) remains a limitation for generalizability, while the in-person study’s larger cohort of 788 participants from 22 countries provides a more robust dataset for analysis. Overall, the results emphasize the activity’s adaptability and effectiveness across different delivery modes, with notable benefits observed in the online format for specific subgroups, particularly those in science fields. 3.3. Results on the System Usability Scale The SUS score of this first group of participants was slightly higher than 81. According to standard SUS evaluation guidelines [ 32 ], a score above 68 is considered acceptable, whereas scores exceeding 80.3 are deemed excellent. The relatively high usability score suggests that the online platform is user-friendly and effective in delivering a good game experience. However, it is important to acknowledge that this initial evaluation was conducted with technologically proficient BSc students, which may have influenced the overall score. Participants from diverse educational and technical backgrounds may perceive and evaluate the usability of the platform differently. Therefore, continuous improvements and refinements will be essential to maintain and enhance usability, especially as new features and updates are introduced to the platform. Future assessments should consider broader participant demographics to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the platform’s accessibility and effectiveness across different user groups. 4. Conclusions, limitations and outlook The development of the virtual P-Game, based on the self-reported knowledge gains and SUS scores, has proven to be an effective and successful extension of its face-to-face counterpart. The results demonstrate that both the virtual and in-person formats can significantly enhance participants' knowledge of phosphorus science and negotiation science/practice. The observed improvements across different participant groups indicate that the virtual P-Game effectively engages students in complex, real-world challenges such as the dilemma of unconventional uranium recovery from phosphate ores during mineral fertilizer production. The online format has also provided increased accessibility, enabling individuals from diverse geographical locations to engage seamlessly with one another. This increased accessibility not only broadens the reach of the game but also enhances the inclusivity of the educational experience for participants who may have previously been unable to attend physical sessions. At a broader level, the virtual P-Game exemplifies how digital transformation can bridge gaps in education and create more inclusive learning environments. However, significant differences were observed in pre- and post-game self-reported knowledge across groups. The online participants, particularly in the social sciences subgroup, reported higher pre-game scores in negotiation knowledge, suggesting potential prior exposure to the topic, which may have influenced post-game knowledge increases. This underscores the need for future studies to account for pre-existing knowledge differences when interpreting learning outcomes. Additionally, while post-game improvements were significant across all groups, the results suggest that the face-to-face format may foster greater engagement and motivation due to the immediate and personal nature of interactions. In contrast, the flexibility of the online format appears to support deeper engagement with the material at an individual pace, potentially leading to higher quality contributions. Despite the promising findings, this study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. One primary limitation is the sample size and the lack of diversity among participants. The online format was tested with a relatively small sample of fewer than 30 participants, predominantly from Hungary, which does not represent a globally diverse population. Expanding the sample size and including participants from more diverse geographical, educational, and cultural backgrounds in future studies could yield more generalizable results. Another limitation is the relatively short testing period. A longer duration could facilitate deeper interactions, potentially leading to more comprehensive insights into learning dynamics and knowledge retention. Adjusting the pre- and post-game surveys and introducing alternative feedback mechanisms, such as real-time interactive elements or periodic assessments, could provide a more detailed understanding of participant engagement and learning outcomes. The face-to-face format allowed for immediate, informal feedback, which was harder to replicate in an online environment. This limitation may have affected the perceived depth of engagement and the immediacy of the learning experience in the virtual setting. Future research should focus on developing more sophisticated feedback systems for the online format to enhance participant engagement. Additionally, technological barriers, such as access to reliable internet and device compatibility, could have influenced participants’ ability to fully engage with the virtual P-Game. Differences in technology access may introduce variability into the user experience that was not captured in this study. Future studies should aim to enhance the platform’s support for various devices and connectivity conditions to ensure a more consistent and inclusive experience for all users. In conclusion, the findings suggest that while both virtual and in-person formats have unique advantages, further research with larger, more diverse samples and improved methodologies is needed to fully understand the potential of the virtual P-Game in various educational contexts. Declarations Declaration of Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process The authors declare that no generative AI and AI-assisted technology was used in the writing process. Competing Interests The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. Availability of Data and Materials The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Funding This work was supported by the National Research, Development and Innovation Office of Hungary [Project Number: 2021-1.2.4-TÉT-2021-00007], the Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research (BMBWF) through Austria's Agency for Education and Internationalization (OeAD) [Grant Numbers: APPEAR Project341, WTZ HU 06/2022, HU 06/2024, MK 13/2024]. APPEAR is a programme of the Austrian Development Organization. The project received further support from the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of North Macedonia [Grant Number: 20-667/21]. Ethics declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate The nature of the research, the methods used, and the fact that no personal data was stored or can be traced back to individuals, conforming with GDPR standards, means that the study is not subject to an ethics permit as specified by the Association of Medical Ethics Committee in Austria, the body responsible for such assessments in the country which led the study. A clinical trial number is therefore not applicable. The protocol used in this work was approved by the ethics committee of the University of Pannonia and the University for Continuing Education Krems that led the research project. Ethics approval and consent to participate Freely-given and informed consent was obtained for each participant. They were reassured that their participation is voluntary and that they were free to withdraw at any time. In addition, all information was gathered anonymously and handled confidentially. The study design assured adequate protection of study participants, and neither included clinical data about patients nor configured itself as a clinical trial. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. References K. Madani, T.W. Pierce, A. Mirchi, Serious games on environmental management, Sustain Cities Soc 29 (2017) 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.11.007. M. Stanitsas, K. Kirytopoulos, E. Vareilles, Facilitating sustainability transition through serious games: A systematic literature review, J Clean Prod 208 (2019) 924–936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.157. T. Ahmadov, A. Karimov, S. Durst, M. Saarela, W. Gerstlberger, M.F. Wahl, T. Karkkainen, A two-phase systematic literature review on the use of serious games for sustainable environmental education, Interactive Learning Environments (2024). https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2414429. P. Hallinger, R. Wang, C. Chatpinyakoop, V.T. Nguyen, U.P. Nguyen, A bibliometric review of research on simulations and serious games used in educating for sustainability, 1997–2019, J Clean Prod 256 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120358. D. Reckien, K. Eisenack, Climate Change Gaming on Board and Screen: A Review, Simul Gaming 44 (2013) 253–271. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878113480867. J.M. Kim, R.W. Hill, P.J. Durlach, H.C. Lane, E. Forbell, M. Core, S. Marsella, D. Pynadath, J. Hart, BiLAT: A Game-Based Environment for Practicing Negotiation in a Cultural Context | USC ICT, IOS Press, 2009. B.D. Douglas, M. Brauer, Gamification to prevent climate change: a review of games and apps for sustainability, Curr Opin Psychol 42 (2021) 89–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.04.008. D. Duchatelet, H. Jossberger, A. Rausch, Assessment and evaluation of simulation-based learning in higher education and professional training: An introduction, Studies in Educational Evaluation 75 (2022) 101210. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101210. N. Haneklaus, M. Kaggwa, J. Misihairabgwi, S. Abu El-Magd, N. Ahmadi, J. Ait Brahim, A. Amasi, A. Balláné Kovács, Ł. Bartela, H. Bellefqih, R. Beniazza, J. Bernas, E. Bilal, T. Bituh, Y. Chernysh, V. Chubur, J. Ćirić, C. Dolezal, A. Figulová, J. Filipi, G. Glavan, T. Guzsvinecz, L. Horváth, S. Josimovski, M. Kiselicki, M. Lazarus, M. Kazazić, I. Komlósi, A. Maged, T. Mashifana, G. Medunić, E. Mehić, F. Mongi, K. Mtei, D. Mwalongo, J. Mwimanzi, J. Nowak, O. Basal, K. Qamouche, M. Rajfur, H. Roubík, M. Santa, C. Sik-Lányi, M. Sippel, G. Steiner, A. Skorek-Osikowska, A. Slavov, P. Świsłowski, A. Tlili, K. Trenevska-Blagoeva, I. Tschalakov, T. Vlček, S. Wacławek, I. Zlatanović, M. Mišík, H. Brink, T.-R. Lee, The phosphorus negotiation game (P-Game): first evaluation of a serious game to support science-policy decision making played in more than 20 countries worldwide, Discover Sustainability 6 (2025) 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00693-6. N.H. Haneklaus, Unconventional uranium resources from phosphates, Encyclopedia of Nuclear Energy (2021) 286–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-819725-7.00152-5. N. Haneklaus, Y. Sun, R. Bol, B. Lottermoser, E. Schnug, To extract, or not to extract uranium from phosphate rock, that is the question, Environ Sci Technol 51 (2017) 753–754. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b05506. N.H. Haneklaus, D.A. Mwalongo, J.B. Lisuma, A.I. Amasi, J. Mwimanzi, T. Bituh, J. Ćirić, J. Nowak, U. Ryszko, P. Rusek, A. Maged, E. Bilal, H. Bellefqih, K. Qamouche, J.A. Brahim, R. Beniazza, H. Mazouz, E.M. van der Merwe, W. Truter, H.D. Kyomuhimbo, H. Brink, G. Steiner, M. Bertau, R.S. Soni, A.W. Patwardhan, P.K. Ghosh, T.T. Kivevele, K.M. Mtei, S. Wacławek, Rare earth elements and uranium in Minjingu phosphate fertilizer products: Plant food for thought, Resour Conserv Recycl 207 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.107694. L. Gyetvai, B. V Lovas, M. Kiss, M. Talas, B. Halmosi, J. Ara, C. Sik-Lanyi, N. Haneklaus, T. Guzsvinecz, J. Szűcs, Development of a Negotiation-based Serious Game in Virtual Reality to Help Teach Responsible Consumption and Production, in: 2022 1st IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Aspects of Virtual Reality (CVR), 2022: pp. 21–26. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVR55417.2022.9967488. J. Gratch, D. DeVault, G. Lucas, The Benefits of Virtual Humans for Teaching Negotiation, in: D. Traum, W. Swartout, P. Khooshabeh, S. Kopp, S. Scherer, A. Leuski (Eds.), Intelligent Virtual Agents, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2016: pp. 283–294. P.C. Abrami, R.M. Bernard, E.M. Bures, E. Borokhovski, R.M. Tamim, Interaction in distance education and online learning: using evidence and theory to improve practice, J Comput High Educ 23 (2011) 82–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-011-9043-x. J. Parlamis, L. Mitchell, Teaching Negotiations in the New Millennium: Evidence-Based Recommendations for Online Course Delivery, Negotiation Journal 30 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12047. D. Thi Hue Dung, The Advantages and Disadvantages of Virtual Learning, IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education 10 (2020) 45–48. https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-1003054548. B. Means, Y. Toyama, R. Murphy, M. Bakia, K. Jones, Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies Center for Technology in Learning, 2010. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.16709.19689. I. Geiger, From Letter to Twitter: A Systematic Review of Communication Media in Negotiation, Group Decis Negot 29 (2020) 207–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-020-09662-6. Y. Dwivedi, D.L. Hughes, C. Coombs, I. Constantiou, Y. Duan, J. Edwards, B. Gupta, B. Lal, S. Misra, P. Prashant, R. Raman, N. Rana, S. Sharma, N. Upadhyay, Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on information management research and practice: Transforming education, work and life, Int J Inf Manage 55 (2020) 102211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102211. P. Oehlschläger, M.A. Merz, Effectiveness of In-Person Versus Online Negotiation Teaching for Practitioners, Negotiation Journal (2023). https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12429. R. Daft, R. Lengel, Information Richness. A New Approach to Managerial Behavior and Organization Design, Res Organ Behav 6 (1983) 73. R. Daft, R. Lengel, Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design, Manage Sci 32 (1986) 554–571. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554. D. Sanford, Course format and learning: The moderating role of overall academic performance, International Journal of Management Education 15 (2017) 490–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2017.08.003. D.C.A. Hillman, D.J. Willis, C.N. Gunawardena, Learner‐interface interaction in distance education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners, American Journal of Distance Education 8 (1994) 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649409526853. J. Eckstein, M. Bartanen, British Parliamentary Debate and the Twenty-First-Century Student, Commun Stud 66 (2015) 458–473. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2015.1056916. C. Parrish, S. Guffey, D. Williams, J. Estis, D. Lewis, Fostering Cognitive Presence, Social Presence and Teaching Presence with Integrated Online—Team-Based Learning, TechTrends 65 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00598-5. A. Galin, M. Gross, G. Gosalker, E-negotiation versus face-to-face negotiation what has changed - if anything?, Comput Human Behav 23 (2007) 787–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.11.009. Flutter, Flutter Official Webpage, (2024). https://flutter.dev/ (accessed December 23, 2024). Dart, Dart Official Webpage, (2024). https://dart.dev/ (accessed December 23, 2024). Firebase, Firebase Official Webpage, (2024). https://firebase.google.com/ (accessed December 23, 2024). J.R. Lewis, The System Usability Scale: Past, Present, and Future, Int J Hum Comput Interact 34 (2018) 577–590. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1455307. J. Kirchner, Data Analysis Toolkit #5: Uncertainty Analysis and Error Propagation, 2001. https://seismo.berkeley.edu/~kirchner/Toolkits/Toolkit_05.pdf (accessed January 22, 2025). L. V Hedges, Distribution Theory for Glass’s Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators, Journal of Educational Statistics 6 (1981) 107–128. https://doi.org/10.2307/1164588. L.C. Stokes, N.E. Selin, The mercury game: evaluating a negotiation simulation that teaches students about science-policy interactions, J Environ Stud Sci 6 (2016) 597–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-014-0183-y. J. Cohen, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd Edition, Routledge, New York, 1988. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587. Footnotes [1] Austria, Bangladesh, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cape Verde, China, Congo, Croatia, Czech, Egypt, Ethiopia, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Haiti, Hungary, Indian, Indonesia, Iranian, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Kingdom of Eswatini, Lebanon, Lesotho, Lithuania, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Moroccan, Myanmar, Nepal, Nigeria, Nigerian, Pakistan, Palau, Palestine, Philippines, Poland, Romania, South Africa, Russia, Rwanda, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Sudan, Syria, Taiwan, Tanzania, Thailand, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United States of America, Vietnam, Zambia, Zimbabwe. [2] Bangladesh, Cape Verde, China, Egypt, Hungary, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Palestine, Syria, Thailand. Table 1 Table 1 is available in the Supplementary Files section. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Table1.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6110762","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":427125879,"identity":"39b8dbe9-a3d9-4b47-ba5a-981c6bc7a6ec","order_by":0,"name":"Nils Haneklaus","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University for Continuing Education Krems","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nils","middleName":"","lastName":"Haneklaus","suffix":""},{"id":427125880,"identity":"2a09b590-cee3-4eeb-b758-e1436cc45414","order_by":1,"name":"László Horváth","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Pannonia","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"László","middleName":"","lastName":"Horváth","suffix":""},{"id":427125881,"identity":"7ad542c2-d329-4065-99c5-77e0c653bb27","order_by":2,"name":"Hendrik Brink","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Pretoria","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hendrik","middleName":"","lastName":"Brink","suffix":""},{"id":427125882,"identity":"c5a18ba4-a82e-4a8a-93b6-74f6aa744777","order_by":3,"name":"Tzong-Ru Lee","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Chung Hsing University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tzong-Ru","middleName":"","lastName":"Lee","suffix":""},{"id":427125883,"identity":"39757756-0551-40cb-8042-9c45f18cb323","order_by":4,"name":"Matúš Mišík","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Slovak Academy of Sciences","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Matúš","middleName":"","lastName":"Mišík","suffix":""},{"id":427125884,"identity":"a665615e-101a-4368-92b3-0f1f49204639","order_by":5,"name":"Mijalche Santa","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mijalche","middleName":"","lastName":"Santa","suffix":""},{"id":427125885,"identity":"ab98ecc3-2eda-49bb-926a-cfa6854e819a","order_by":6,"name":"Patrícia Szabó","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Pannonia","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Patrícia","middleName":"","lastName":"Szabó","suffix":""},{"id":427125886,"identity":"b67865ae-3a1b-4f13-ab2b-77185fcff6cb","order_by":7,"name":"Tibor Guzsvinecz","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Pannonia","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tibor","middleName":"","lastName":"Guzsvinecz","suffix":""},{"id":427125887,"identity":"a68d8f40-5701-49f1-bb4c-167bb22b87fd","order_by":8,"name":"Cecília Sik-Lányi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Pannonia","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Cecília","middleName":"","lastName":"Sik-Lányi","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-02-26 07:38:27","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6110762/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6110762/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":78920388,"identity":"49e41ada-4fdd-4c09-9553-19daafc17396","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-03-20 20:27:16","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":127352,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe virtual P-Game landing page using a computer (left) or smartphone (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6110762/v1/44869c57f022b31dd8b150d0.png"},{"id":78920390,"identity":"b84e6146-cfd9-45ba-a6e9-23e910b98155","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-03-20 20:27:16","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":225524,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe lobby screen used in the virtual P-Game application.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6110762/v1/7bc49bab1b0693fcfefd1c21.png"},{"id":78919815,"identity":"cabfe70f-e47f-498a-837e-5c4be361a3d9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-03-20 20:19:15","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":600816,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDebating screen with the recorded voice messages used in the virtual P-Game application.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6110762/v1/5fda6416bc49eafbdbb29067.png"},{"id":78919824,"identity":"73c9d6ff-9b1b-4a40-9c12-8972157875a6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-03-20 20:19:16","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":940128,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePre-game (a) and post-game (b) surveys used for the face-to-face and also the virtual P-Game.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6110762/v1/f23c1f2066c69770c744fb22.png"},{"id":78919832,"identity":"f4160d2e-84d7-4c0a-92cf-1811f7c28d0d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-03-20 20:19:16","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":356180,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eStandard System Usability Scale (SUS) that was used in this work.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6110762/v1/54bc497fb45f5ae2382f958f.png"},{"id":78919819,"identity":"d83a2d96-7723-4443-846d-e867b5e603ab","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-03-20 20:19:16","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":274201,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eComparison of pre-game and post-game self-reported knowledge scores for phosphorus science (P) and negotiation science (Neg) across different participant groups and demographics. Panels (a) and (b) show the pre-game and post-game scores for phosphorus science, respectively, while panels (c) and (d) present the corresponding scores for negotiation science. Panels (e) and (f) compare pre- and post-game scores within the online \u003cem\u003eP-Game\u003c/em\u003egroup for phosphorus science and negotiation science, respectively. The data are categorized by gender (male, female) and educational background (BSc, MSc, Social Sciences). Statistical significance levels are indicated by *p\u0026lt;0.05, **p\u0026lt;0.01, ***p\u0026lt;0.001, and ****p\u0026lt;0.0001.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6110762/v1/11e46bc3e354ffa09164def7.png"},{"id":96708053,"identity":"3015ef18-aa1e-44f5-a458-07c374db1408","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-25 09:54:19","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":3510868,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6110762/v1/82117f02-4055-488a-ab00-aafac231d695.pdf"},{"id":78920599,"identity":"91341c23-1962-41f4-a969-1cd0ce81e606","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-03-20 20:35:16","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":506713,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table1.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6110762/v1/0ebf6a5b821aa4fda514f9db.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Negotiating virtually and face-to-face: First experience from a serious game conducted in person and via smartphone application","fulltext":[{"header":"Highlights","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Results from a face-to-face and virtual serious game are compared\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; The virtual game offers flexibility, while face-to-face enhances engagement\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Both formats significantly improved participants knowledge\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; The developed virtual smartphone game earned high usability scores\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSerious games [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR2 CR3\" citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e] and negotiation simulations [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR6 CR7\" citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e] are becoming increasingly popular teaching tools to foster sustainable environmental education by providing an interactive and engaging learning environment. These tools offer participants a practical way to explore complex socio-environmental issues, encouraging them to analyze different perspectives, develop critical thinking skills, and practice decision-making in simulated real-world scenarios. Such approaches align with the growing need for innovative educational methods that promote experiential learning and address global sustainability challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMost recently, [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e] introduced the Phosphorus Negotiation Game (P-Game), a face-to-face serious negotiation game designed to support science-policy decision-making regarding sustainable phosphorus fertilizer production. Phosphate ore, one of the fifth most mined materials globally, is an essential raw material for agricultural production due to its phosphorus (P) content. However, phosphate ores often contain relevant concentrations of radiotoxic uranium, which, if not recovered during processing, can largely transfer to the final fertilizer product [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR11\" citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e]. The presence of uranium poses potential environmental and health risks, making the decision to recover or leave it in the fertilizer a complex policy and economic challenge. In the P-Game, participants take on stakeholder roles to debate the advantages and disadvantages of recovering uranium during mineral fertilizer production. The goal is to persuade others using well-researched arguments while navigating scientific, economic, and political considerations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSince its inception, the P-Game has been successfully conducted with 788 participants across more than 20 countries, providing valuable insights into the decision-making processes of diverse stakeholder groups. To further expand its accessibility and impact, a virtual reality platform [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e] and a smartphone application were developed, allowing the game to reach a broader audience beyond the constraints of in-person participation. Such digital adaptations of negotiation simulations could potentially enhance learning by offering a more flexible and inclusive approach, accommodating diverse geographical locations and enabling participants to engage asynchronously at their own pace [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMost negotiation classes or trainings have traditionally been conducted in person; however, the rapid advancement of technology has led to a significant increase in online or virtual negotiation courses. These formats have gained popularity due to their inherent flexibility [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e], cost and time efficiency [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e], and continuous technological improvements that increasingly simulate in-person interactions with higher fidelity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. While the trend towards virtual learning already existed before the COVID-19 pandemic, the global crisis accelerated the shift to online education, prompting a critical examination of its effectiveness in comparison to face-to-face methods [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA key debate in educational research concerns the effectiveness of virtual teaching and negotiation training, which was recently summarized by Oehlschl\u0026auml;ger and Merz [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. One of the theoretical frameworks often referenced in this debate is the media richness theory [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e], which suggests that learning outcomes are influenced by the richness of the communication medium used. According to this theory, richer media\u0026mdash;such as in-person communication\u0026mdash;can provide more effective learning experiences because they convey multiple cues (e.g., facial expressions, gestures, tone of voice) that enhance understanding and reduce ambiguity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. In contrast, virtual environments may require participants to invest more cognitive effort in navigating the interface and managing digital communication, potentially diverting cognitive resources from the actual learning process.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe P-Game is grounded in British Parliamentary Style (BPS) debating, an interactive debating format that fosters engagement by enabling direct interaction between students and instructors (BPS) allowing for positive engagement between the teacher and the students [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e]. This format encourages active participation, critical analysis, and structured argumentation while allowing for constructive feedback and reinforcement of contributions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e]. The question remains whether such an interactive approach can be effectively transferred to a virtual setting without losing the essential elements that drive engagement and learning outcomes. The present study seeks to explore this issue by comparing the effectiveness of face-to-face and virtual versions of the P-Game.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEarly observations suggest that while in-person debates benefit from real-time interactions and immediate feedback, virtual formats offer advantages in terms of accessibility, flexibility, and opportunities for asynchronous reflection. Comparisons between the effectiveness of these formats may provide insights similar to those observed in previous studies on telephone negotiations [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e], where the absence of non-verbal cues was found to influence negotiation dynamics but not necessarily reduce overall effectiveness.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study align with several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), showcasing the P-Game\u0026rsquo;s potential to contribute to global sustainability efforts. The P-Game supports SDG 4: Quality Education by providing an engaging learning experience that promotes critical thinking and decision-making in environmental sustainability while enhancing accessibility through its virtual format, fostering inclusive and equitable education across diverse geographical and educational backgrounds. It also contributes to SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation by raising awareness about the environmental risks of phosphorus use, particularly the potential contamination from radiotoxic uranium in fertilizers. Furthermore, the digital adaptation of the P-Game exemplifies innovation in education, contributing to SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure by leveraging technology to enhance learning outcomes and interdisciplinary collaboration. The game\u0026rsquo;s focus on resource recovery and sustainable fertilizer production aligns with SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production, encouraging participants to explore strategies for minimizing environmental harm and maximizing resource efficiency. Additionally, the game indirectly supports SDG 13: Climate Action, equipping participants with the knowledge to advocate for sustainable agricultural practices that reduce environmental footprints and build climate resilience. By facilitating international cooperation and knowledge exchange among participants from various countries and disciplines, the P-Game also advances SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals, promoting cross-border collaboration and diverse perspectives.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOverall, the P-Game serves as a valuable tool for advancing sustainability, offering an interactive platform for participants to develop the skills and knowledge needed to address complex environmental challenges effectively. The objective of this work was to better understand if all these positive aspects can be conserved if the P-Game is played using a smartphone application. Although comparisons between in-person and virtual games exist, this study offers new insights in a way that really the exact same games were played in-person and virtually using the same pre- and post-game surveys to capture the participants knowledge gains.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials and methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.1. The development of the online version of the P-Game\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFor the online version of the P-Game Flutter [29], Dart [30] and Firebase [31] were used. Flutter is an open-source framework that can be used for building natively compiled applications for multiple platforms from a single codebase. Flutter was chosen due to its accessibility features, modern user interface (UI) capabilities, fast performance, and pre-built packages for common development tasks. Dart offers high performance due to native code compilation, cross-platform support, strong typing for early error detection, and a rich library ecosystem. Firebase is a mobile and web application development platform. It provided backend services for the development, user authentication, and real-time data management. The following key Firebase services were also used: Cloud Firestore, Cloud Functions, Authentication, and Cloud Storage.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFor the development, the Spiral Model was used. It was chosen due to its ability to handle risks effectively by combining elements of evolutionary, waterfall, and prototyping models. This iterative approach allowed for continuous refinement based on feedback, making it suitable for complex projects like the P-Game. The Business Logic Component (BLoC) architecture was used to separate the presentation layer from the business logic and data layers. This enhanced maintainability and scalability. The BLoC library’s Cubit class provided state management. Additionally, Google's Material Design language ensured a consistent look and feel across platforms.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeveral P-Game specific features were integrated into the online adaptation. Voice chat was used as the primary communication tool during debates to mitigate bias in argument evaluation by removing visual elements. Asynchronous participation allowed users to engage in debates at their time of convenience. This promoted inclusivity and allowed the participants to prepare thoroughly ahead of their contribution. The developed smartphone application would also allow for participation from different locations although we have not taken advantage of this feature in this first assessment yet.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Details of the application\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBefore entering the application, the users can find themselves on a landing page. Here, the users can either log in or sign up before the game. An account can also be created using an already existing Google account. The landing page was accessed via a smartphone application or using a browser on a computer. Both can be seen in Fig.\u0026nbsp;1.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAfter (signing up and) logging in, the users are taken to the lobby where they can see different debate rooms. They can also see whether a room is currently used, or the debate is already finished in a certain room. Users can also add new public and private debate rooms by pressing the “+” button in the bottom right corner of the screen. Naturally, if the users want to join a private debate room, they need to enter a password. The lobby can be seen in Fig.\u0026nbsp;2.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAfter entering a selected room, the users are taken to the actual debating screen (shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;3) where the voice messages are recorded or replayed. In the said figure, details about the debate can be seen on the top of the screen. According to the details, the debate should be about phosphorus mining. The details also show, and a short introduction is provided to help the participants understand the specific topic that was chosen for this debate. After the game has started, users can send voice recordings to each other simulating the BPS format used for the in-person P-Game.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Data collection\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eData was collected on the gaming experience and the system usability. To better understand the gaming experience of participants and also to be able to compare the results of the virtual P-Game experience with the participants experiences from playing the face-to-face P-Game we used the same pre- and post-game surveys that were previously used to quantify participants’ experience from playing the in-person P-Game [9]. Minor modifications were made to the survey questionnaire, primarily to include additional comments for better clarity of the Likert scale and open-ended questions. The pre- and post-game surveys, as illustrated in Fig.\u0026nbsp;4, remained largely unchanged. Despite the virtual P-Game being conducted on smartphones, participants were requested to complete printed copies of the surveys, maintaining consistency with the face-to-face P-Game approach.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe surveys included both quantitative and qualitative elements to provide an understanding of the gaming experience and learning outcomes. Pre- and post-game surveys were used to measure changes in the participants’ understanding of phosphorus science as well as negotiation science/practice. Open-ended questions allowed participants to express their thoughts and experiences in their own words and were meant to provide feedback on the overall game design.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBesides the pre-and-post game surveys that were already used for the face-to-face P-Game, we used a standard System Usability Scale (SUS) depicted in Fig.\u0026nbsp;5 to evaluate the usability of the online P-Game [32].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTesting of the virtual P-Game was conducted in two phases. We first conducted an initial pilot test with a small group of participants to identify and subsequently fix major technical issues. Results from this pre-pilot testing study are not reported here. After preliminary tests we conducted full-scale tests with a group of 29 participants in Hungary.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.4. Data analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eData from playing the virtual P-Game with 29 participants at the University of Pannonia in Veszprem in 2024 was compared to data from face-to-face P-Game sessions conducted with a different cohort of 30 participants in Hungary—19 students from the University of Pannonia in Veszprem in 2023 and 11 students from the University of Debrecen in 2024. Additionally, the obtained results were analyzed alongside data from all reported face-to-face P-Game rounds, which were conducted with a total of 788 participants across 22 countries between 2022 and 2024 [9]. The comparative analysis included statistical evaluations such as descriptive statistics, percentage change calculations with uncertainty propagation [33] and effect size assessments using Hedges' G parameter [34] that was computed using Microsoft Excel 365 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA). Significance testing through two-way ANOVA was performed in GraphPad Prism 10.4.1 (GraphPad Software, Inc., La Jolla, CA) to determine differences between groups. This comprehensive approach provided insights into the learning outcomes across different delivery modes and participant demographics.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eData from the SUS is presented separately since such data was not obtained during the previous face-to-face P-Game rounds.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results and discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Comparison of the face-to-face and virtual P-Game experience\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e provides an overview of the participants\u0026rsquo; backgrounds. The self-reported educational background of the virtual P-Game group in Hungary was somewhat different to that of the face-to-face P-Game group in Hungary while it was fairly similar to that of the global face-to-face P-Game group. With regards to the level of education the virtual P-Game group from Hungary clearly shows the largest share of BSc-students, that is further reflected in a younger age of the participants. The gender distribution was in fairly good agreement among all three groups. It is worth mentioning that the participants of all three groups self-reported significantly different nationalities that result in potentially very different cultural backgrounds. This is no surprise. The P-Game was inspired by the Mercury Game [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e] and the researchers developing and conducting the Mercury Game recommended including participants with diverse cultural backgrounds. This was achieved in the face-to-face P-Game played globally in 22 countries with participants self-reporting more than 60 nationalities[1]. The face-to-face P-Game in Hungary was also played with a relatively diverse group of students that self-reported 14 nationalities[2] while the virtual P-Game was conducted with a more homogenous group largely (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;96%) consisting of Hungarian students.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDespite these differences, comparable improvements in self-reported knowledge of phosphorus science and negotiation science/practice were observed across all three groups. Specifically, self-reported knowledge of phosphorus science increased by 88.4\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;82.5% in the virtual P-Game group from Hungary, 70.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;48.1% in the Hungarian face-to-face P-Game group, and 92.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;66.2% in the global face-to-face P-Game group, with corresponding Hedges\u0026rsquo; G effect sizes of 1.03, 1.18, and 1.43, respectively. The relatively large standard deviations across groups suggest variability in learning gains, which may stem from differences in prior knowledge, engagement levels, and individual learning styles. Nevertheless, the consistently positive mean improvements indicate that both the virtual and face-to-face P-Game methodologies effectively engage students in addressing complex challenges such as the dilemma of unconventional uranium recovery from phosphate ores in mineral fertilizer production. The Hedges\u0026apos; G values, which assess the effect size by comparing changes in parameter values relative to the pooled standard deviations, suggest a strong impact of the intervention across all groups. Values greater than 0.8 are generally considered large, indicating that the P-Game had a significant and meaningful impact on participants\u0026apos; knowledge acquisition [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe self-reported knowledge improvements in negotiation science/practice showed a slightly different trend. The virtual P-Game group reported an increase of 55.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;39.1%, whereas the face-to-face groups reported increases of 53.81\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;33.83% (Hungary) and 70.5\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;45.9% (global), with corresponding Hedges\u0026rsquo; G values of 0.94, 1.04, and 1.26. The relatively high pre-game survey values in the virtual P-Game group suggest that students may have had prior exposure to the content, potentially explaining the observed differences in knowledge increases. This could be attributed to information sharing from previous face-to-face P-Game rounds, underscoring the need for further studies with a larger and more diverse sample size to better understand the impact of the virtual format on negotiation knowledge gains. Conducting the P-Game at different institutions could also help clarify whether the observed differences stem from prior exposure or other contextual factors. The Hedges\u0026apos; G values for both phosphorus science and negotiation science/practice are closely aligned, indicating a consistently strong effect of the P-Game intervention across both domains. This suggests that the P-Game is equally effective in enhancing knowledge in both areas, with minor variations likely attributable to differences in prior exposure and individual engagement levels rather than a fundamental disparity in the game\u0026apos;s impact.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall, both the online and face-to-face P-Game formats have demonstrated their capacity to enhance participants\u0026rsquo; understanding of phosphorus science and negotiation skills. From a facilitation perspective, the face-to-face format was characterized by higher levels of direct engagement and seemingly greater motivation among participants. Informal feedback revealed that face-to-face debates fostered a competitive and dynamic environment, which encouraged active participation and immediate feedback loops. This heightened interaction likely contributed to stronger motivation and engagement, reinforcing the importance of personal interaction in educational settings.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConversely, the virtual P-Game format offered distinct advantages that were highlighted in participant feedback. The flexibility of asynchronous participation allowed users to engage with the material at their own pace, facilitating deeper reflection and a more thorough understanding of the topic. This flexibility was particularly beneficial for participants with scheduling constraints or those in different time zones. Additionally, the virtual format\u0026apos;s location independence provides opportunities for global participation, fostering a broader exchange of ideas and perspectives that can enhance the learning experience through cross-cultural insights.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe motivational aspects of both formats varied. Face-to-face participants often cited the energy and immediacy of live discussions as part of the P-Game as key motivational factors. In contrast, online participants appreciated the ability to prepare more for their speeches, and the reduced pressure of not having to perform in person in front of an audience that also happened to be their peers, further increasing that anxiety. Communication patterns also differed: face-to-face interactions benefitted from non-verbal cues and immediate feedback, while online interactions relied heavily on written and voice communication. The latter potentially reduced the immediacy but allowed for more thoughtful and considered responses.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Comparative Analysis of the Pre- and Post-Game surveys\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe bar charts (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e) illustrate self-reported pre- and post-game knowledge (P and Neg) across three participant groups: in-person global, in-person Hungarian, and online participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe analyses presented in Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e is broken down into overall averages, gender, and academic fields, with statistical significance determined through a two-way ANOVA and indicated by * (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), ** (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), *** (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), and **** (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). It is important to note that the in-person study included 788 participants from 22 countries, while the Hungarian in-person and online groups consisted of approximately 30 participants. Additionally, the pre-game vs. post-game comparisons were conducted exclusively within the online group, and the effect size (Hedges\u0026apos; g) analyses provide further context to the observed differences.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFor pre-game P knowledge (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003ea), the two-way ANOVA revealed no significant differences across any subcategories, indicating that participants across all groups\u0026mdash;regardless of delivery mode, gender, or academic field\u0026mdash;began with comparable baseline knowledge of P. In contrast, pre-game Neg knowledge (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003ec) showed significant differences, with the online group reporting higher scores overall and particularly within the social sciences subgroup (****). These findings suggest that online participants, especially those in social sciences, may have had greater prior exposure to or confidence in negotiation-related knowledge. However, given the small sample size of the online group, these results should be interpreted cautiously.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePost-game results for P knowledge (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003eb) revealed significant differences in the social sciences subgroup, where online participants reported higher post-game scores than in-person groups. Similarly, post-game Neg knowledge (Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003ed) showed that the online group significantly outperformed the in-person groups overall (*) and also the participants within the social sciences subgroup (**). These results suggest that the online delivery mode may offer unique benefits for social sciences participants in improving P and negotiation-related knowledge. However, the generalizability of these findings is limited by the smaller size of the online cohort compared to the larger in-person group.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe pre-game vs. post-game comparisons (Figs. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003ee and \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003ef), conducted exclusively within the online group, revealed significant gains in both P and Neg knowledge across most subcategories. The observed improvements, supported by statistical analysis, reinforce the effectiveness of the online P-Game format in enhancing participants\u0026apos; understanding across diverse demographic groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe Hedges\u0026apos; g effect sizes provide additional insight into the magnitude of these improvements (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHedges\u0026rsquo; G Effect Sizes for self-reported knowledge gains across different participant demographics in the online P-Game format, based on the pre- and post-game surveys.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGroup\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKnowledge on Phosphorous Science\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKnowledge on Negotiation Science/Practice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAll\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.04\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBSc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.06\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eScience\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSocial\u0026nbsp;Science\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFor overall knowledge on phosphorous science, a large effect size (g\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.025) suggests strong learning gains, with the largest gains observed in science participants (g\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.44) and the smallest in social sciences participants (g\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.68). Similarly, for knowledge on negotiation science/practice, a large effect size (g\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.94) is noted, with science participants showing the greatest improvement (g\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.36) and social sciences participants the least (g\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.63). These effect sizes suggest that while the activity was effective across all groups, the magnitude of improvement varied, with science participants benefiting the most.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThese findings highlight that the online format may be particularly effective for participants in science fields, as evidenced by the large effect sizes for both P and Neg knowledge improvements in this subgroup. Social sciences participants, while reporting smaller effect sizes, still demonstrated meaningful gains, albeit less pronounced compared to other groups. The small sample size of the online group (approximately 30 participants) remains a limitation for generalizability, while the in-person study\u0026rsquo;s larger cohort of 788 participants from 22 countries provides a more robust dataset for analysis. Overall, the results emphasize the activity\u0026rsquo;s adaptability and effectiveness across different delivery modes, with notable benefits observed in the online format for specific subgroups, particularly those in science fields.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Results on the System Usability Scale\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe SUS score of this first group of participants was slightly higher than 81. According to standard SUS evaluation guidelines [\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e], a score above 68 is considered acceptable, whereas scores exceeding 80.3 are deemed excellent. The relatively high usability score suggests that the online platform is user-friendly and effective in delivering a good game experience. However, it is important to acknowledge that this initial evaluation was conducted with technologically proficient BSc students, which may have influenced the overall score. Participants from diverse educational and technical backgrounds may perceive and evaluate the usability of the platform differently. Therefore, continuous improvements and refinements will be essential to maintain and enhance usability, especially as new features and updates are introduced to the platform. Future assessments should consider broader participant demographics to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the platform\u0026rsquo;s accessibility and effectiveness across different user groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Conclusions, limitations and outlook","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe development of the virtual P-Game, based on the self-reported knowledge gains and SUS scores, has proven to be an effective and successful extension of its face-to-face counterpart. The results demonstrate that both the virtual and in-person formats can significantly enhance participants' knowledge of phosphorus science and negotiation science/practice. The observed improvements across different participant groups indicate that the virtual P-Game effectively engages students in complex, real-world challenges such as the dilemma of unconventional uranium recovery from phosphate ores during mineral fertilizer production. The online format has also provided increased accessibility, enabling individuals from diverse geographical locations to engage seamlessly with one another. This increased accessibility not only broadens the reach of the game but also enhances the inclusivity of the educational experience for participants who may have previously been unable to attend physical sessions. At a broader level, the virtual P-Game exemplifies how digital transformation can bridge gaps in education and create more inclusive learning environments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, significant differences were observed in pre- and post-game self-reported knowledge across groups. The online participants, particularly in the social sciences subgroup, reported higher pre-game scores in negotiation knowledge, suggesting potential prior exposure to the topic, which may have influenced post-game knowledge increases. This underscores the need for future studies to account for pre-existing knowledge differences when interpreting learning outcomes. Additionally, while post-game improvements were significant across all groups, the results suggest that the face-to-face format may foster greater engagement and motivation due to the immediate and personal nature of interactions. In contrast, the flexibility of the online format appears to support deeper engagement with the material at an individual pace, potentially leading to higher quality contributions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite the promising findings, this study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. One primary limitation is the sample size and the lack of diversity among participants. The online format was tested with a relatively small sample of fewer than 30 participants, predominantly from Hungary, which does not represent a globally diverse population. Expanding the sample size and including participants from more diverse geographical, educational, and cultural backgrounds in future studies could yield more generalizable results.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnother limitation is the relatively short testing period. A longer duration could facilitate deeper interactions, potentially leading to more comprehensive insights into learning dynamics and knowledge retention. Adjusting the pre- and post-game surveys and introducing alternative feedback mechanisms, such as real-time interactive elements or periodic assessments, could provide a more detailed understanding of participant engagement and learning outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe face-to-face format allowed for immediate, informal feedback, which was harder to replicate in an online environment. This limitation may have affected the perceived depth of engagement and the immediacy of the learning experience in the virtual setting. Future research should focus on developing more sophisticated feedback systems for the online format to enhance participant engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, technological barriers, such as access to reliable internet and device compatibility, could have influenced participants\u0026rsquo; ability to fully engage with the virtual P-Game. Differences in technology access may introduce variability into the user experience that was not captured in this study. Future studies should aim to enhance the platform\u0026rsquo;s support for various devices and connectivity conditions to ensure a more consistent and inclusive experience for all users.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, the findings suggest that while both virtual and in-person formats have unique advantages, further research with larger, more diverse samples and improved methodologies is needed to fully understand the potential of the virtual P-Game in various educational contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDeclaration of Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that no generative AI and AI-assisted technology was used in the writing process.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting Interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of Data and Materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis work was supported by the National Research, Development and Innovation Office of Hungary [Project Number: 2021-1.2.4-T\u0026Eacute;T-2021-00007], the Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research (BMBWF) through Austria\u0026apos;s Agency for Education and Internationalization (OeAD) [Grant Numbers: APPEAR Project341, WTZ HU 06/2022, HU 06/2024, MK 13/2024]. APPEAR is a programme of the Austrian Development Organization. The project received further support from the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of North Macedonia [Grant Number: 20-667/21].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics declarations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe nature of the research, the methods used, and the fact that no personal data was stored or can be traced back to individuals, conforming with GDPR standards, means that the study is not subject to an ethics permit as specified by the Association of Medical Ethics Committee in Austria, the body responsible for such assessments in the country which led the study. A clinical trial number is therefore not applicable. The protocol used in this work was approved by the ethics committee of the University of Pannonia and the University for Continuing Education Krems that led the research project.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFreely-given and informed consent was obtained for each participant. They were reassured that their participation is voluntary and that they were free to withdraw at any time. In addition, all information was gathered anonymously and handled confidentially. The study design assured adequate protection of study participants, and neither included clinical data about patients nor configured itself as a clinical trial.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eK. Madani, T.W. Pierce, A. Mirchi, Serious games on environmental management, Sustain Cities Soc 29 (2017) 1\u0026ndash;11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.11.007.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eM. Stanitsas, K. Kirytopoulos, E. Vareilles, Facilitating sustainability transition through serious games: A systematic literature review, J Clean Prod 208 (2019) 924\u0026ndash;936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.157.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eT. Ahmadov, A. Karimov, S. Durst, M. Saarela, W. Gerstlberger, M.F. Wahl, T. Karkkainen, A two-phase systematic literature review on the use of serious games for sustainable environmental education, Interactive Learning Environments (2024). https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2414429.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eP. Hallinger, R. Wang, C. Chatpinyakoop, V.T. Nguyen, U.P. Nguyen, A bibliometric review of research on simulations and serious games used in educating for sustainability, 1997\u0026ndash;2019, J Clean Prod 256 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120358.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eD. Reckien, K. Eisenack, Climate Change Gaming on Board and Screen: A Review, Simul Gaming 44 (2013) 253\u0026ndash;271. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878113480867.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJ.M. Kim, R.W. Hill, P.J. Durlach, H.C. Lane, E. Forbell, M. Core, S. Marsella, D. Pynadath, J. Hart, BiLAT: A Game-Based Environment for Practicing Negotiation in a Cultural Context | USC ICT, IOS Press, 2009.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eB.D. Douglas, M. Brauer, Gamification to prevent climate change: a review of games and apps for sustainability, Curr Opin Psychol 42 (2021) 89\u0026ndash;94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.04.008.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eD. Duchatelet, H. Jossberger, A. Rausch, Assessment and evaluation of simulation-based learning in higher education and professional training: An introduction, Studies in Educational Evaluation 75 (2022) 101210. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101210.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eN. Haneklaus, M. Kaggwa, J. Misihairabgwi, S. Abu El-Magd, N. Ahmadi, J. Ait Brahim, A. Amasi, A. Ball\u0026aacute;n\u0026eacute; Kov\u0026aacute;cs, Ł. Bartela, H. Bellefqih, R. Beniazza, J. Bernas, E. Bilal, T. Bituh, Y. Chernysh, V. Chubur, J. Ćirić, C. Dolezal, A. Figulov\u0026aacute;, J. Filipi, G. Glavan, T. Guzsvinecz, L. Horv\u0026aacute;th, S. Josimovski, M. Kiselicki, M. Lazarus, M. Kazazić, I. Koml\u0026oacute;si, A. Maged, T. Mashifana, G. Medunić, E. Mehić, F. Mongi, K. Mtei, D. Mwalongo, J. Mwimanzi, J. Nowak, O. Basal, K. Qamouche, M. Rajfur, H. Roub\u0026iacute;k, M. Santa, C. Sik-L\u0026aacute;nyi, M. Sippel, G. Steiner, A. Skorek-Osikowska, A. Slavov, P. Świsłowski, A. Tlili, K. Trenevska-Blagoeva, I. Tschalakov, T. Vlček, S. Wacławek, I. Zlatanović, M. Mi\u0026scaron;\u0026iacute;k, H. Brink, T.-R. Lee, The phosphorus negotiation game (P-Game): first evaluation of a serious game to support science-policy decision making played in more than 20 countries worldwide, Discover Sustainability 6 (2025) 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00693-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eN.H. Haneklaus, Unconventional uranium resources from phosphates, Encyclopedia of Nuclear Energy (2021) 286\u0026ndash;291. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-819725-7.00152-5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eN. Haneklaus, Y. Sun, R. Bol, B. Lottermoser, E. Schnug, To extract, or not to extract uranium from phosphate rock, that is the question, Environ Sci Technol 51 (2017) 753\u0026ndash;754. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b05506.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eN.H. Haneklaus, D.A. Mwalongo, J.B. Lisuma, A.I. Amasi, J. Mwimanzi, T. Bituh, J. Ćirić, J. Nowak, U. Ryszko, P. Rusek, A. Maged, E. Bilal, H. Bellefqih, K. Qamouche, J.A. Brahim, R. Beniazza, H. Mazouz, E.M. van der Merwe, W. Truter, H.D. Kyomuhimbo, H. Brink, G. Steiner, M. Bertau, R.S. Soni, A.W. Patwardhan, P.K. Ghosh, T.T. Kivevele, K.M. Mtei, S. Wacławek, Rare earth elements and uranium in Minjingu phosphate fertilizer products: Plant food for thought, Resour Conserv Recycl 207 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.107694.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eL. Gyetvai, B. V Lovas, M. Kiss, M. Talas, B. Halmosi, J. Ara, C. Sik-Lanyi, N. Haneklaus, T. Guzsvinecz, J. Szűcs, Development of a Negotiation-based Serious Game in Virtual Reality to Help Teach Responsible Consumption and Production, in: 2022 1st IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Aspects of Virtual Reality (CVR), 2022: pp. 21\u0026ndash;26. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVR55417.2022.9967488.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJ. Gratch, D. DeVault, G. Lucas, The Benefits of Virtual Humans for Teaching Negotiation, in: D. Traum, W. Swartout, P. Khooshabeh, S. Kopp, S. Scherer, A. Leuski (Eds.), Intelligent Virtual Agents, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2016: pp. 283\u0026ndash;294.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eP.C. Abrami, R.M. Bernard, E.M. Bures, E. Borokhovski, R.M. Tamim, Interaction in distance education and online learning: using evidence and theory to improve practice, J Comput High Educ 23 (2011) 82\u0026ndash;103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-011-9043-x.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJ. Parlamis, L. Mitchell, Teaching Negotiations in the New Millennium: Evidence-Based Recommendations for Online Course Delivery, Negotiation Journal 30 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12047.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eD. Thi Hue Dung, The Advantages and Disadvantages of Virtual Learning, IOSR Journal of Research \u0026amp; Method in Education 10 (2020) 45\u0026ndash;48. https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-1003054548.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eB. Means, Y. Toyama, R. Murphy, M. Bakia, K. Jones, Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies Center for Technology in Learning, 2010. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.16709.19689.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eI. Geiger, From Letter to Twitter: A Systematic Review of Communication Media in Negotiation, Group Decis Negot 29 (2020) 207\u0026ndash;250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-020-09662-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eY. Dwivedi, D.L. Hughes, C. Coombs, I. Constantiou, Y. Duan, J. Edwards, B. Gupta, B. Lal, S. Misra, P. Prashant, R. Raman, N. Rana, S. Sharma, N. Upadhyay, Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on information management research and practice: Transforming education, work and life, Int J Inf Manage 55 (2020) 102211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102211.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eP. Oehlschl\u0026auml;ger, M.A. Merz, Effectiveness of In-Person Versus Online Negotiation Teaching for Practitioners, Negotiation Journal (2023). https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12429.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eR. Daft, R. Lengel, Information Richness. A New Approach to Managerial Behavior and Organization Design, Res Organ Behav 6 (1983) 73.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eR. Daft, R. Lengel, Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design, Manage Sci 32 (1986) 554\u0026ndash;571. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eD. Sanford, Course format and learning: The moderating role of overall academic performance, International Journal of Management Education 15 (2017) 490\u0026ndash;500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2017.08.003.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eD.C.A. Hillman, D.J. Willis, C.N. Gunawardena, Learner‐interface interaction in distance education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners, American Journal of Distance Education 8 (1994) 30\u0026ndash;42. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649409526853.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJ. Eckstein, M. Bartanen, British Parliamentary Debate and the Twenty-First-Century Student, Commun Stud 66 (2015) 458\u0026ndash;473. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2015.1056916.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eC. Parrish, S. Guffey, D. Williams, J. Estis, D. Lewis, Fostering Cognitive Presence, Social Presence and Teaching Presence with Integrated Online\u0026mdash;Team-Based Learning, TechTrends 65 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00598-5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eA. Galin, M. Gross, G. Gosalker, E-negotiation versus face-to-face negotiation what has changed - if anything?, Comput Human Behav 23 (2007) 787\u0026ndash;797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.11.009.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFlutter, Flutter Official Webpage, (2024). https://flutter.dev/ (accessed December 23, 2024).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDart, Dart Official Webpage, (2024). https://dart.dev/ (accessed December 23, 2024).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFirebase, Firebase Official Webpage, (2024). https://firebase.google.com/ (accessed December 23, 2024).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJ.R. Lewis, The System Usability Scale: Past, Present, and Future, Int J Hum Comput Interact 34 (2018) 577\u0026ndash;590. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1455307.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJ. Kirchner, Data Analysis Toolkit #5: Uncertainty Analysis and Error Propagation, 2001. https://seismo.berkeley.edu/~kirchner/Toolkits/Toolkit_05.pdf (accessed January 22, 2025).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eL. V Hedges, Distribution Theory for Glass\u0026rsquo;s Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators, Journal of Educational Statistics 6 (1981) 107\u0026ndash;128. https://doi.org/10.2307/1164588.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eL.C. Stokes, N.E. Selin, The mercury game: evaluating a negotiation simulation that teaches students about science-policy interactions, J Environ Stud Sci 6 (2016) 597\u0026ndash;605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-014-0183-y.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJ. Cohen, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd Edition, Routledge, New York, 1988. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Footnotes","content":"\u003cp\u003e[1]\u0026nbsp;Austria, Bangladesh, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cape Verde, China, Congo, Croatia, Czech, Egypt, Ethiopia, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Haiti, Hungary, Indian, Indonesia, Iranian, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Kingdom of Eswatini, Lebanon, Lesotho, Lithuania, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Moroccan, Myanmar, Nepal, Nigeria, Nigerian, Pakistan, Palau, Palestine, Philippines, Poland, Romania, South Africa, Russia, Rwanda, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Sudan, Syria, Taiwan, Tanzania, Thailand, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United States of America, Vietnam, Zambia, Zimbabwe.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[2] Bangladesh, Cape Verde, China, Egypt, Hungary, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Palestine, Syria, Thailand.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Table 1","content":"\u003cp\u003eTable 1 is available in the Supplementary Files section.\u003c/p\u003e\n"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Phosphorus Negotiation Game (P-Game), serious game, negotiation simulation, smartphone application, sustainability education, digital learning tools","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6110762/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6110762/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eSerious games and negotiation simulations are effective tools for teaching sustainable environmental practices. The Phosphorus Negotiation Game (P-Game), originally a face-to-face simulation on sustainable phosphorus fertilizer production, engages participants in evaluating the recovery of radiotoxic uranium during fertilizer production. To increase accessibility, a smartphone version was developed for virtual participation. This study compared self-reported knowledge gains between face-to-face and virtual P-Game participants. It was found that both formats significantly improved understanding of phosphorus and negotiation science, with no major differences in learning outcomes. Knowledge of phosphorus science increased by 92.3% (global face-to-face), 70.7% (Hungarian face-to-face), and 88.4% (online), while negotiation science/practice knowledge rose similarly across all groups. The face-to-face format promoted immediate engagement and motivation, while the online version offered flexibility and deeper reflection. The virtual P-Game received high user satisfaction, with a System Usability Scale score above 80. These findings highlight the virtual format\u0026rsquo;s potential as an effective complement to traditional face-to-face learning. Further research with larger, more diverse samples is recommended to fully explore its broader educational impact in sustainability contexts.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Negotiating virtually and face-to-face: First experience from a serious game conducted in person and via smartphone application","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-03-20 20:19:10","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6110762/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"1b669b2e-16ef-4538-b99e-3c526af04ee1","owner":[],"postedDate":"March 20th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-11-19T07:58:39+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-03-20 20:19:10","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6110762","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6110762","identity":"rs-6110762","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}