Exploring ethical and moral complexities of the troubles through simulation and empathy

Purpose This study investigates whether historically structured board game (HSBG) simulations can foster historical empathy and moral reasoning when teaching the Northern Ireland Troubles – a contested history largely absent from formal curricula. It examines participant perceptions of simulation appropriateness, the relationship between empathy and moral justification and how demographic factors shape engagement with politically sensitive historical content. Design/methodology/approach Non-experimental cross-sectional survey design recruiting 65 participants through gaming forums. Self-report questionnaire measured familiarity with the Troubles, attitudes towards simulation pedagogy, faction role preferences and moral reasoning using Likert scales. Quantitative analysis employed descriptive statistics, Pearson correlations and chi-square tests to examine relationships between participant characteristics and attitudes towards violence, empathy and simulation appropriateness. Findings Participants demonstrated an “empathy gap” – the capacity to empathise with violent actors (87.7%) while resisting moral justification of violence (32.3%). Strong support emerged for simulation-based approaches (87.7% endorsement), though uncertainty persisted regarding mechanisms fostering empathy. Role selection correlated with violence justification attitudes: IRA and Nationalist faction choices showed significant positive correlations with greater willingness to justify political violence, revealing how factional perspectives shape moral reasoning. Research limitations/implications Severe demographic homogeneity (92.3% male, predominantly middle-aged Western gamers) limits generalisability beyond hobbyist populations. Convenience sampling through gaming forums introduces self-selection bias favouring game-based learning proponents. Absence of qualitative data prevents understanding reasoning processes underlying quantitative patterns. Small Irish subsample (5%) underrepresents voices most directly affected by the Troubles. Survey measured attitudes rather than actual learning outcomes, preventing causal claims about simulation effectiveness. Practical implications Educators must provide substantial pre-game scaffolding (historical context, explicit learning objectives, ethical boundary-setting) rather than treating HSBGs as standalone interventions. Active facilitation during gameplay proves essential for monitoring emotional responses and prompting ethical reflection. Post-game debriefing transforms raw experience into reflective understanding through structured discussion and perspective-taking assessments. Implementation requires trauma-informed approaches acknowledging proximity effects in communities directly affected by conflict. Social implications Simulation-based pedagogy offers structured approaches for addressing contested histories systematically excluded from formal education despite significance in national narratives. By creating safe spaces for perspective-taking across factional boundaries, HSBGs may support reconciliation efforts in post-conflict societies. However, ideological transparency demands explicit acknowledgment that simulations constitute authored interpretations rather than neutral historical representations, requiring critical engagement with embedded values and design choices. Originality/value First empirical study examining perceptions of simulating the Troubles specifically, addressing complete absence of research on teaching this conflict through game-based approaches. Introduces “historical empathy gap” construct operationalising distinction between affective empathy and moral justification. Contributes to underexplored area of analogue HSBGs while educational technology research privileges digital simulations, demonstrating face-to-face formats' distinctive affordances for contested history pedagogy.