Prosperia: Impact Analysis
A study of 832 lower secondary school students shows that Prosperia exceeds standard benchmarks in both engagement and participation, leaving a measurable behavioral mark two weeks post-game: an increased consideration for the interests of others.
A game that students love and that activates the class
83% of students give Prosperia a positive rating, with an average satisfaction score of 5.83 out of 7 compared to 4.60 for board games in general (d=0.67, p<.001). This isn’t just courtesy feedback: it is the measure of an experience that fully engages with the task and maintains attention.
Self-reported participation during the game reaches 5.79 out of 7, compared to 4.82 for regular class participation (d=0.54, p<.001).
Furthermore, 76% of students state they would like to play again.
Prosperia functions as a participatory educational experience, not merely a recreational break. For schools and partners, this means that buy-in and engagement are not problems to solve before starting: they are already built into the game.
Competition that doesn’t erase cooperation
Prosperia’s most distinctive finding emerges over time: two weeks after the session, students report an increased tendency to consider the interests of others when performing a task, moving from 4.38 to 4.74 out of 7 (d=0.18, p<.001).
While some tendencies related to the desire to excel grow slightly (d between 0.10 and 0.12), the increase in consideration for others’ interests is larger. This profile aligns with the game’s semi-competitive structure: players can pursue their individual goals, but the well-being of the community remains essential for everyone. Although the change is small at an individual level, it is statistically robust and observed after just a single session.
A training ground for relational reasoning
Prosperia places students before decisions where individual interest and common goals interact in practical ways. It is not an economic simulation: it is a context where personal choices have visible consequences for the group, and where competition does not rule out collective responsibility.
This positions it as a tool for civic education, social skills, and active citizenship: contexts where participation is not an abstract goal, but a measurable outcome. The game mechanics are the engine. The experience is the proof.
