The Games for Communication project gets under way in earnest today, with student volunteers taking a battery of tests relating to communication style and competence as well as a few other tests intended to measure related skills such as those associated with collaboration.
The instruments being used to measure communication skill include:
- Self-Perceived Communication Competence Scale 
- Communicative Adaptability Scale 
- SocioCommunicative Style Scale 
The Self-Perceived Communication Competence Scale and the Communicative Adaptability Scale are well-established empirical means of measuring self-reported communication abilities, while the SocioCommunicative Style Scale may be used by participants to measure their perceptions of other participants’ communication behaviour. It was thought important to include at least one observation-based instrument in the experiment, which otherwise relies on valid but self-reported measures. The use of such instruments, which place participants in the role of researcher, will also help ensure that the students involved are an integral component of the research process.
Communication competence (and style) will be benchmarked today using these quantitative measures. We’ll then embark on an 8-week programme of game-based activities, and measure those skills and competencies again at the end of the project. A control group comprising students with similar characteristics to those in the experiment group will be identified and tested on the same schedule.
While we didn’t play any games today, we did take delivery of some important hardware, to be used for research purposes only:
 McCroskey, J. C., & McCroskey, L. L. (1988). Self‐report as an approach to measuring communication competence. Communication Research Reports, 5(2), 108–113. doi:10.1080/08824098809359810
 Duran, R. L. (1983). Communicative adaptability: A measure of social communicative competence. Communication Quarterly, 31(4), 320–326. doi:10.1080/01463378309369521
 Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (1990). Reliability and separation of factors on the assertiveness-responsiveness measure. Psychological Reports, 67, 449–450.