Abstract
Procedural rhetorics as proposed by Ian Bogost (2007) have had a significant impact on the conceptualization of how games convey meaning and has served also as an influential game design paradigm (Sicart 2011). Yet, the concept was also subject of criticism, mainly due to the dominant role procedurality is ascribed to have in conveying the meaning and persuasiveness of videogames, arguing that there is more to the meaning of videogames than the games' mechanics and rules (Sicart 2011; Möring 2013; Deterding 2016).
The present debate was on both sides predominantly held on a theoretical level and to my knowledge there have not been any empirical studies examining the effects and interpretations of procedural rhetorics. One of the challenges of such a research would be also the lack of a concrete operationalized definition of procedural representation that could be the basis of an empirical research design.
The aim of this paper is to provide such an operationalized account of what procedural representation is, that will be used in my further research as the basis for the design of a laboratory experiment aiming to verify whether a measurable effect on attitude change among players can be attained by modifying only the procedural elements of a game.