Substitutive competition: Virtual pets as competitive buffers to alleviate possible negative influence on pupils

Abstract

Although competition is regarded as a powerful motivator in game-based learning, it might have a negative influence, such as damage to confidence, on students who lose the competition. In this paper, we propose an indirect approach, substitutive competition, to alleviate such negative influences. The approach is used to develop a My-Pet v3 system, in which pupils master subject materials to make their pets stronger, and compete against each other. Specifically, pupils learn Chinese idioms in a pet-training game scenario, and their mastery of the material is related to the pets' strength to win the competition. The result of the competition is influenced by whether pupils spend enough effort on the learning tasks. This intention is expected to alleviate the negative influence that results from direct competition. A within-subject experiment was conducted to examine the influence of substitutive competition. The results indicated that substitutive competition seems a promising scheme to maximise the power of competition. However, there were no apparent evidences in this study to demonstrate its effect to alleviate pupils' sense of failure, as compared with other two direct competition conditions. Practitioner notesWhat is already known about this topic:• Competition is a critical factor in technology-enhanced learning. • The possible negative influences of competitive learning should be a cause for concern. • Several approaches have been applied to learning successfully, such as anonymous competition and group competition.What this paper adds:• This paper proposes a new approach-substitutive competition.• Students prepare their substitutes, ie, virtual pets, to compete with others' surrogates, instead of direct competition.

Toward Meaningful Engagement: A Framework for Design and Research of Gamified Information Systems

“…For example, applying social cognitive theory in educational contexts, researchers have found that losing a competition can decrease a learner's self-efficacy and learning outcomes (e.g., Santhanam et al 2016). Hence researchers have proposed alternative competition designs (Chen et al 2012;Cheng et al 2009). Given that there may not be a one-size-fits-all design for competition, the types of gamification design elements used to induce competition, and how they are presented, can have a significant impact on outcomes.…”

Reciprocal Tutoring: Design with Cognitive Load Sharing

“…Student models can be open for students to raise self-reflection and interaction among students (Bull 2004;Bull and Kay 2007). In addition, open student models can be applied to portray animal companions or avatars in order to motivate students to learn and help others (Chen et al , 2012. Open student models can also be applied in CLS.…”

“…Agents may also encourage, criticize, or praise students to enhance student motivation and, consequently, learning performance. For example, the My-Pet system provides a trainable animal companion to enhance student motivation (Chen et al 2012(Chen et al , 2013. Studies have also revealed that various students prefer different levels of agents (Hietala and Niemirepo 1998;Chou et al 2002a;Uresti and Boulay 2004).…”

The Effect of Different Features for Educational Computer-Based Competition Environments

“…Moreover, different features to try to mitigate negative emotions, such as anxiety and frustration, while using computer-based competition environments have been implemented and evaluated with successful results. Examples of these features are the introduction of virtual pets instead of the own students' images [3], the combination of competition with cooperation or collaboration [14] [15] [16], or the assignment of opponents with a similar knowledge level using the Equal Opportunity Tactic (EOT) approach [17].…”