‘The mannequin is more lifelike’: The significance of fidelity for students’ learning in simulation-based training in the social- and healthcare programmes

Keywords: Fidelity, learning process, simulation, social- and healthcare programme


The article concerns fidelity in relation to using mannequins in simulation-based training in social- and healthcare education. The article addresses two issues. What influences fidelity, and how does the degree of fidelity influence the students’ learning processes? Simulation-based training is organized in three phases; briefing, scenario, and debriefing. The article focuses on the scenario phase. A central issue in relation to the scenario phase is fidelity; i.e. the degree to which the scenario matches the practice it is intended to simulate. The article deals with the factors that influence the students’ perception of fidelity and with the impact of degree of fidelity on the students’ learning processes. The empirical data include obser-views, combining observations with interviews with students and teachers in social- and healthcare colleges. The analysis shows that a high degree of fidelity simulation in the sense of employing a mannequin has advantages, such as engaging students in learning and enabling them to try out practical skills. Moreover, the degree of fidelity should be adjusted to the students’ practical experiences in order to optimize their learning process. Lower degrees of fidelity may have a positive impact on developing creative thinking and reducing the students’ anxiety. The implication for developing practice is that the social- and healthcare colleges employ a multifaceted approach to fidelity based on ensuring optimal learning conditions for the students. The implication for further research is to specify and systematize the interrelation of learning outcome targets, students’ qualifications and the usages of different degrees of fidelity.


Ahn, S.-e., & Rimpiläinen, S. (2018). Maintaining Sofia: Or how to reach the intended learning outcomes during a medical simulation training. International Journal of Learning Technology, 13(2), 115–129. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2018.092095

Akroyd, M., Jordan, G., & Rowlands, P. (2016). Interprofessional, simulationbased technology-enhanced learning to improve physical health care in psychiatric settings course. Health Informatics Journal, 22(2), 312–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458214557098

Arafeh, J.M.R. (2017). Update: Simulation-based training. The Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal Nursing, 31(4), 286–289. https://doi.org/10.1097/JPN.0000000000000288

Atesok, K., Satava, R.M., Marsh, J.L., & Hurwitz, S.R. (2017). Measuring surgical skills in simulation-based training. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 25(10), 665–672. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-16-00253

Aarkrog, V. (2018). Simulation-based teaching and learning in the social and health care programmes: A literature study. In L.M. Herrera, M. Teräs, & P. Gougoulakis (Eds.), Emergent issues in vocational education & training: Voices from cross-national research (pp. 236–255). Stockholm: Premiss.

Bowling, A.M., & Underwood, P.W. (2016). Effect of simulation on knowledge, self-confidence, and skill performance in the USA: A quasi-experimental study. Nursing and Health Sciences, 18(3), 292–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12267

Bredmose, P.P., Habig, K., Davies, G. Grier, G., & Lockey, D.J. (2010). Scenario based outdoor simulation in pre-hospital trauma care using a simple mannequin model. Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, 18(13), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-18-13

Chen, R., Grierson, L.E., & Norman, G.R. (2015). Evaluating the impact of highand low-fidelity instruction in the development of auscultation skills. Medical Education, 49(3), 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12653

Cook, D., Brydges, R., Zendejas, B., Hamstra, S.J., & Hatala, R. (2013). Technology-enhanced simulation to assess health professional: A systematic review of validity evidence, research methods, and reporting quality. Academic Medicine, 88(6), 872–883. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31828ffdcf

Dennis, D.M, Sainsbury, D., Redwood, T.M., Ng, L., & Furness, A. (2016). Introducing simulation based learning: Activities to physiotherapy course curricula. Creative Education, 7(6), 878–885. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2016.76092

Dieckmann, P., Gaba, D., & Rall, M. (2007). Deepening the theoretical foundations of patient simulation as social practice. Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 2(3), 183–193. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180f637f5

Dwyer, T., Searl, K.R., McAllister, M., Guering, M., & Friel, D. (2015). Advanced life simulation: High-fidelity simulation without the high technology. Nurse Education in Practice, 15(6), 430–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2015.05.007

Fanning, R., & Gaba, D. (2007) The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simulation in Healthcare, 2(2), 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180315539

Grierson, L.E.M. (2014). Information processing, specificity of practice, and the transfer of learning: Considerations for reconsidering fidelity. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 19(2), 281–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-014-9504-x

Hamstra, S.J., Brydges, R., Hatala, R., Zendejas, B., & Cook, D. (2014). Reconsidering fidelity in simulation-based training. Academic Medicine, 89(3), 387–392. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000130

Johnston, S., Coyer, F., & Nash, R. (2017) Simulation debriefing based on principles of transfer of learning: A pilot study. Nurse Education in Practice, 26, 102–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2017.08.002

Kinney, S., & Henderson, D. (2008). Comparison of low fidelity simulation learning strategy with traditional lecture. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 4(2), e15–e18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2008.06.005

Kirkman, T.R. (2013). High fidelity simulation effectiveness in nursing students’ transfer of learning. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship 10(1), 171–176. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijnes-2012-0009

Kragelund, L., Moser, A., & van Zadelhoff, E. (2015). Using the obser-views in qualitative research: Benefits and challenges. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(5), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406915621426

Kuipers, D.A., Terlouw, G., Wartena, B.O., van’t Veer, J.T.B., Prins, J.T., & Pierie, J.P.E.N. (2017). The role of transfer in designing games and simulations for health: Systematic review. JMIR Serious Games, 5(4), e23. https://doi.org/10.2196/games.7880

Lapkin, S., & Lewett-Jones, T. (2011). A cost-utility analysis of medium vs. highfidelity human patient simulation manikins in nursing education. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 20(23–24), 3543–3552. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03843.x

Lawrence, K., Messias, DA.K.H., & Carson, M.L. (2018). Practice of high fidelity simulation use in baccalaureate nursing programs. Nursing Forum, 53(4), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12279

Lee, K.H.K., Grantham, H., & Russell, B. (2008). Comparison of high- and lowfidelity mannequins for clinical performance assessment. Emergency Medicine Australasia, 20(6), 508–514. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-6723.2008.01137.x

Lioce, L., Meakim, C.H., Fey, M.K., Chmil, J.V., Mariani, B., & Alinier, G. (2015). Standards of best practice: Simulation standard IX: Simulations design. Clinical Simulations in Nursing, 11(6), 309–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2015.03.005

Loo, M.E., Krishnasamy, C., & Lim, W.S. (2018). Considering face, rights, and goals: A critical review of rapport management in facilitator-guided simulation debriefing approaches. Simulation in Healthcare, 13(1), 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000258

Norman, G., Dore, K., & Grierson. L. (2012). The minimal relationship between simulation fidelity and transfer of learning. Medical Education, 46(7), 636–647. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04243.x

Poikela, P., Ruokamo, H., & Teräs, M. (2015). Comparison of meaningful learning characteristics in simulated nursing practice after traditional versus computerbased simulation method: A qualitative videography study. Nurse Education Today, 35(2), 373–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2014.10.009

Presado, M.H.C.V., Colaco, S., Rafael, H., Baixinho, C.L., Felix, I., Saraiva, C., & Rebelo, I. (2018). Apreder com a simulacão de alta fidelidade [Learning with high fidelity simulation]. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 23(1), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232018231.23072017

Seropian, M.A., Brown, K., Gavilanes, J.S., & Driggers, B. (2004). Simulation: Not just a manikin. Journal of Nursing Education, 43(4), 164–169.

Spetalen, H., & Sannerud, R. (2013). Erfaringer med bruk av simulering som transferstrategi [Experiences from applicating simulation as a strategy for transfer]. Nordic Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 3, 1–17.https://doi.org/10.3384/njvet.2242-458X.13v3i1a7

Tosterud, R., Hedelin, B., & Hall-Lord, M.L. (2013). Nursing students’ perceptions of high- and low-fidelity simulation used as learning methods. Nurse Education in Practice, 13(4), 262–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2013.02.002

Tun, J.K., Alinier, G., Tang, J., & Kneebone, R.L. (2015). Redefining simulation fidelity for healthcare education. Simulation & Gaming, 46(2), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878115576103

Walsh, M., Tran, Q., Waseem, A., Khan, A., & Haase, D. (2017). High-fidelity simulation for resuscitation nurses: Balloon tamponade in bleeding esophageal varices. Critical Care Medicine, 46(1), 171. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ccm.0000528395.63088.5e

How to Cite
Aarkrog, V. (2019). ‘The mannequin is more lifelike’: The significance of fidelity for students’ learning in simulation-based training in the social- and healthcare programmes. Nordic Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 9(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3384/njvet.2242-458X.19921
Peer-reviewed research articles