We don’t need no stinkin’ badges: The impact of reward features and feeling rewarded in educational games

McKernan, Brian; Martey, Rosa Mikeal; Stromer‐Galley, Jennifer; Kenski, Kate; Clegg, Benjamin A.; Folkestad, James E.; Rhodes, Matthew G.; Shaw, Adrienne; Saulnier, E.T.; Strzalkowski, Tomek

doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.028

Cited by 31 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Haaranen et al (2014) evaluated that users of LMSs have strongly negative emotions towards badges. Hence, to achieve long-term effects regarding motivation, more approaches should focus on the use of intrinsically motivating gamification elements (McKernan et al 2015). More precisely, basic psychological literature demonstrates that individuals are intrinsically motivated to fulfill activities that satisfy their basic psychological needs (Deci and Ryan 2000).…”

Section: Rq 22: Which Gamification Elements Would Users Of Lmss Combmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Agony of Choice Analyzing User Preferences Regarding Gamification Elements in Learning Management Systems

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gamification is an approach to motivate users of information systems by implementing game elements. Despite its potentials, the use of gamification in practice has also received criticism because most gamification elements are integrated into systems without considering the preferences of the respective users and without considering contextual aspects. Hence, we aim at identifying which elements users of learning management systems prefer. Furthermore, we want to identify their preferences regarding the amount and combination of gamification elements. To identify user preferences, we conducted a discrete choice task among learning management system users following the best-worst scaling method. Our results show that users prefer a bundle of four gamification elements: level, goals, status, and points. This is especially interesting since popular elements, such as a leaderboard or badges, are not most preferred. This highlights the need to consider user preferences and contextual aspects to ensure a successful implementation of gamification elements.

show abstract

Section: Rq 22: Which Gamification Elements Would Users Of Lmss Combmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Agony of Choice Analyzing User Preferences Regarding Gamification Elements in Learning Management Systems

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our second game, CYCLES Carnivale, involved creating six versions of the game, 100 play and pilot testers, 1224 experiment participants recruited from three universities, and interviews with 60 of those participants. The details of each experiment are described elsewhere [4][5][6][7][8][9]. In addition to the university participants in the experiments, the play tests and interviews with intelligence analysts provided ongoing feedback on the game mechanics and content.…”

Section: Materials and Methods: Cycles Training Center And Cycles Carmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Researchers have long argued that digital games are uniquely suited for teaching and training users [1][2][3]. Yet, despite decades of research demonstrating that games can be effective pedagogical tools, we found in a series of studies where many of the features that were typically assumed to be foundational for designing effective educational games were not as important as other factors that past games research has rarely manipulated [4][5][6][7][8][9]. By quantitatively and qualitatively analyzing the design changes made over multiple iterations of two games, in this article, we outline a process to empirically assess iterative game design and identify several new variables for experimental training game research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Analyzing Iterative Training Game Design: A Multi-Method Postmortem Analysis of CYCLES Training Center and CYCLES Carnivale

Shaw

McKernan

Martey

et al. 2018

MTI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

That games can be used to teach specific content has been demonstrated numerous times. However, although specific game features have been conjectured to have an impact on learning outcomes, little empirical research exists on the impact of iterative design on learning outcomes. This article analyzes two games that have been developed to train an adult audience to recognize and avoid relying on six cognitive biases (three per game) in their decision making. The games were developed iteratively and were evaluated through a series of experiments. Although the experimental manipulations did not find a significant impact of the manipulated game features on the learning outcomes, each game iteration proved more successful than its predecessors at training players. Here, we outline a mixed-methods approach to postmortem game design analysis that helps us understand what might account for the improvement across games, and to identify new variables for future experimental training game studies.

show abstract

“…A key takeaway in this regard was the realization that, regardless of game genre, we did not need a game that also teaches bias mitigation; instead, we needed a teaching strategy that was a game. With respect to addressing these pedagogical goals, both games were either simplified or adapted more closely to our teaching strategies (Barton et al, 2015; Martey et al, 2014; McKernan et al, 2015; Shaw et al, 2016; Symborski et al, 2014) across multiple game iterations to achieve maximum game efficacy. The result is a teaching game where every element is consequential: There is no room for extraneous content that could distract players’ focus on learning.…”

Section: The Game: Find a Teaching Strategy That Is Also A Gamementioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons Learned About Serious Game Design and Development

Strzalkowski

Symborski

2016

Games and Culture

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of a serious game combines the skills of numerous disciplines, from subject matter experts on the topic being taught; to story developers, game designers, and software developers; to instructional designers, educational assessment scientists, and others. This section provides commentary on the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity's unique game development program, Sirius, where multiple games with the same training goal were independently developed and tested by different teams. We compare the experience of two of these teams not only in game design but also in how skills of various disciplines were woven together to produce and validate their games. Lessons learned are reviewed to provide guidelines and takeaway points to assist game development practitioners in their future efforts to create effective serious games.

show abstract

We don’t need no stinkin’ badges: The impact of reward features and feeling rewarded in educational games

Cited by 31 publications

References 34 publications

The Agony of Choice Analyzing User Preferences Regarding Gamification Elements in Learning Management Systems

The Agony of Choice Analyzing User Preferences Regarding Gamification Elements in Learning Management Systems

Analyzing Iterative Training Game Design: A Multi-Method Postmortem Analysis of CYCLES Training Center and CYCLES Carnivale

Lessons Learned About Serious Game Design and Development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About