
Table 3: Comments made by participant P5 regarding a mutual action. 
01  Moderator  : Next, let’s turn over the event card. 
02  P5  : It’s a rainy day! 
03 
Other 
(Pinus Densiflora) 
: Great! I can move forward three squares! 
04  P5  : I can’t move much. 
05  Other  : Just one square? 
06 P5  : Yes. 
07  Other  : One, two, three (counts squares). I’ve really moved ahead. 
08 P5  : [Mutual action with Pinus Densiflora occurs.] Wait a minute. Now I have 
to move back two squares. You’re the worst! 
Note. P5: Participant 5 
 
3.2 Results 
Table 1 shows the number of comments that 
indicated immersion as well as the number of 
comments unrelated to immersion. More than 70% 
of the total comments made by P1, P3, P4, and P5 
indicated immersion, and more than 60% of the total 
comments made by P2 indicated the same.  
Table 2 shows P3’s comments relating to an 
event card. P3 was hoping for a large disturbance, so 
that the plant (Mallotus Japonicus), the role of which 
he played, could move forward [01]. At the same 
time, the participant playing the role of Castanopsis 
was hoping for a sunny day or a rainy day event card, 
so that her plant could move forward [02]. When the 
event card indicated a landslide, the participant 
playing the role of Castanopsis was disappointed as 
she had to move back four squares [06], while P3 
was happy at being able to move forward [07]. 
Table 3 shows P5’s comments relating to a mutual 
action. When a rainy day event card appeared, the 
participant playing the role of Pinus Densiflora was 
happy to be able to move forward three 
squares [03], while P5 was unhappy at only being  
able to move forward by a square [04]. Due to the 
movements of each plant, Rubus Microphyllus and 
Pinus Densiflora arrived at the same square, 
resulting in a mutual action. Consequently, Rubus 
Microphyllus had to move back two squares, and 
expressed anger toward the player playing Pinus 
Densiflora [08]. 
4 CONCLUSIONS 
In this paper, we proposed and tested a movement-
based “Human SUGOROKU” game designed to 
educate students about vegetation succession while 
having fun. The results of our evaluation, based on 
participants’ comments during the game, indicated 
that the participants were thoroughly immersed in 
the game. We surmise that there are two reasons for 
this result: (1) The participants were able to 
experience fondness for the plant they played, since 
the participants themselves were the pieces in the 
SUGOROKU game. (2) Because the participants 
had to move forward or backward according to 
whether the plants flourished or decayed, 
respectively, they felt as if they were the actual 
plants.  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
This research was partly supported by the Grants-in-
Aid for Scientific Research (B) (No. 23300303) and 
(B) (No. 24300290). 
REFERENCES 
Matsumura, T., Takeda, Y., 2010. Relationship between 
species richness and spatial and temporal distance 
from seed source in semi-natural grassland, Vegetation 
Science 13, pages 336-345. 
Deguchi, A., Inagaki, S., Kusunoki, F., Yamaguchi, E., 
Takeda, Y., Sugimoto, M., 2010. Vegetation 
interaction game: Digital SUGOROKU of vegetation 
succession for children, Entertainment Computing-
ICEC, Lecture Notes in Computer Science LNCS6243, 
pages 493-495. 
Deguchi, A., Inagaki, S., Kusunoki, F., Yamaguchi, E., 
Takeda, Y., Sugimoto, M., 2009. Development and 
evaluation of a digital vegetation interaction game for 
children,  ICEC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5709, Springer, 
pages 288-289. 
Nnakayama, T., Adachi, T., Muratu, K., Mizoguchi, H., 
Namatame, M., Sugimoto, M., Kusunoki, F., 
Life-sizeBoardGame"HumanSUGOROKU"ToTeachChildrenaboutVegetationSuccession-ApplicationofHuman
SensingTechnologytoEmbodiedEducation
299