Experimental wargaming reveals insights into human behavior using data capture and advanced technology in military contexts.
Professional wargames are strategy games used for numerous purposes, including specialized training, problem exploration, and scientific experimentation. Professional military wargaming in the United States Department of Defense (DoD) is steeped in time-honored method and tradition. Rapid advances in technology including mobile computing, artificial intelligence, networked information sharing, and digital gaming have transformed the way in which people make fundamental tactical and operational decisions, while giving researchers new tools for studying human behavior in conflict. Wargaming with these tools provides greater clarity and precision through enhanced graphical and computational resources, variable gameplaying modalities, and exponential increases in data capture and analysis. To date, analytical wargaming has lagged in the DoD, in favor of proven educational and experiential games developed over many decades, largely because data collection and analysis of analog games are imprecise, inefficient, and limited in opportunity and quantity. Recent success has been found, however, in leveraging technology to conduct analytical wargames as a method of experimentation. This experimental wargaming is conducted specifically to generate and analyze data scientifically, using controlled, repeatable games with objective measures, to confirm or reject predetermined hypotheses about methods, behavior, technology, capability, or policy. In this paper, the authors provide an overview of experimental wargaming, defining and discussing related terms, baselining its current state, analyzing strengths and weaknesses, and summarizing results obtained by researchers who are using experimental wargaming across domains. The authors also review lessons learned and benefits gained from this research, and offer recommendations on employing experimental wargaming as a scientific research method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Viraldo et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: