Free text questions
mistakes
In the pretest, 17 students formulated what they anticipated from MC-Duell. Most frequently expected with 7 references were increasing long-term retention, as well as consolidating and revising EbM content in a playful approach. Three students hoped to increase their motivation. Once mentioned were learning new EbM content or advance in recalling it, recognizing knowledge gaps, exchanging with others, implementing acquired statistic skills to writing a scientific thesis, learning from mistakes and increase self-confidence in risk competence. In the posttest, 6 respondents drafted what they enjoyed about MC-Duell. Leading answer with 3 mentions was its playful approach on EbM. Each two times appreciated were the fun in playing it and its potential use for practicing EbM before tests. Once acknowledged were the freely pickable number of rounds, the time limit, its interactivity along with its playability on the side and on the move. Simultaneously, 12 students described what they disliked or could be improved. The majority of 9 participants found it inconvenient, that a partner is indispensable to play MC-Duell. Instead, they suggested adding a single-player mode, beating their own best performance, buffering the game score until an opponent joins or playing against a computer. Four students criticised MC-Duell’s exclusive availability via the intranet of the university. The time limit was considered problematic twice because it kept students from rethinking the answers properly. Two participants asked for explanations for right and wrong answers. One time it was faulted that the same questions appeared twice in one match and that the items were unoriginal. Once animadverted was the competitive character. Furthermore, one participant asked for a scripted synopsis.