Gamification and Behaviour

AlMarshedi, Alaa; Wanick, Vanissa; Wills, Gary; Ranchhod, Ashok

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-45557-0_2

Cited by 51 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, human motivation and behaviour is not separate from culture. It has been argued that gamification can have different impacts on different cultures (AlMarshedi, Wanick, Wills, & Ranchhod, 2017). For example, some cultures value competition whereas others are more cooperation‐oriented (Hofstede, Hofstede & Minkov, 2010).…”

Section: Limitations and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

An experimental study on the effects of gamified cooperation and competition on English vocabulary learning

Dindar¹,

Ren²,

Järvenoja³

2020

Brit J Educational Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gamification has become a popular approach to blending learning with fun and enjoyable experiences. However, gamification research has been criticized for mostly focusing on game mechanics and related outcomes while paying little attention to the psychological processes that mediate the relationship between these mechanics and outcomes. Furthermore, the majority of existing gamification studies have focused on competitive game features. Thus, the full potential of cooperative gamification has yet to be explored. Given this background, the current study compared how gamified cooperation and competition impact task effort, learning achievement, motivation and social relatedness in English vocabulary learning with a mobile application. The study utilized Social Interdependence Theory to explicate the psychological processes in gamified cooperation and competition. 75 participants were randomly assigned to either the gamified cooperation or the gamified competition condition and studied English vocabulary for 14 days. No difference was observed between the conditions regarding task effort, learning achievement and motivation. However, social relatedness in the gamified cooperation group was significantly higher than in the gamified competition group. The current findings emphasize that the positive influence of gamified cooperation on creating meaningful connections amongst learners should not be ignored, even though it facilitates similar learning and motivational outcomes as gamified competition.

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

An experimental study on the effects of gamified cooperation and competition on English vocabulary learning

Dindar¹,

Ren²,

Järvenoja³

2020

Brit J Educational Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Let's compare this stereotypical example of a failed effort towards behavior change with an example guided by a core principle of successful behavior change as championed by B. J. Fogg, the founder of Stanford's Behavior Design Lab. The principle is basically this, if you want to develop a new habit, make it small (Lieber, 2016;Al Marshedi et al, 2017;Fogg, 2019;Fogg and Euchner, 2019;Olt and Szasz, 2019). It's important to say here that the "habit" that eventually emerges as the micro-identity that might be described in terms of one's exercise routine, is not at all straightforwardly equivalent to habits as understood by Fogg.…”

Section: Seeding a Habitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bringing Forth Within: Enhabiting at the Intersection Between Enaction and Ecological Psychology

James

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Baggs and Chemero (2018) propose that certain tensions between enaction and ecological psychology arise due different interpretations about what is meant by the "environment." In the enactive approach the emphasis is on the umwelt, which describes the environment as the "meaningful, lived surroundings of a given individual." The ecological approach, on the other hand, emphasises what they refer to as the habitat "the environment as a set of resources for a typical, or ideal, member of a species." By making this distinction, these authors claim they are able to retain the best of both the ecological and the enactive approaches. Herein I propose an account of the individuation of habits that straddles this distinction, what I call a compatabilist account. This is done in two parts. The first part teases out a host of compatibilities that exist between the enactive account as developed by Di Paolo et al. (2017) and the skilled intentionality framework as developed by Bruineberg and Rietveld (2014) and Rietveld and Kiverstein (2014). In part two these compatibilities are brought together with the that these compatibilities can be brought together with the philosophy of Gilbert Simondon to develop the notion of enhabiting. Enhabiting describes a set of ongoing processes by which an umwelt emerges from and is reproduced within the relationship between an embodied subject and their habitat. Thus, enhabiting points toward a point of intersection between enaction and ecological psychology. To enhabit is bring forth (to enact), within (to inhabit).

show abstract

“…The objective of the test is to obtain rigorous information thinking about the needs of the projects in which gamification is applied; for this, an approach in which the protagonist of the evaluation is the expert in this sector is chosen because such an expert has knowledge of the applicability of the system and understands the needs when choosing the best gamification properties, such as mechanics, dynamics and perception towards the players [ 56 ]. Therefore, a methodology of user-centered design (UCD) is applied [ 57 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative Assessment of Effective Gamification Design Processes Using Motivators to Identify Game Mechanics

Villegas

Fonseca

Peña

et al. 2021

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research focuses on the study and qualitative assessment of the relationships between motivators and game mechanics per the ratings of expert gamification consultants. By taking this approach, it is intended that during the design phase of a gamified system, decisions can be made about the design of the system based on the motivators of each of the profiles. These motivators can be determined from the information provided by the potential players themselves. The research presented starts from a previous analysis in which, based on the three most used gamification frameworks and through a card sorting technique that allows the user to organize and classify the content, a set of mechanics are determined. In the present study, each of the mechanics is analyzed, and a more precise motive is decided. As a result, a higher level of personalization is achieved and, consequently, approximates a higher level of gamification effectiveness. The main conclusions are implemented in the development of the Game4City 3.0 project, which addresses gamified and interactive strategies to visualize urban environments in 3D at an educational and social level.

show abstract

Gamification and Behaviour

Cited by 51 publications

References 22 publications

An experimental study on the effects of gamified cooperation and competition on English vocabulary learning

An experimental study on the effects of gamified cooperation and competition on English vocabulary learning

Bringing Forth Within: Enhabiting at the Intersection Between Enaction and Ecological Psychology

Qualitative Assessment of Effective Gamification Design Processes Using Motivators to Identify Game Mechanics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About