No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Seven Points to Reappropriate Gamification
Abstract
Games have always been everywhere. This is increasingly so because of the expanding pervasiveness of games in contemporary culture, shift to post-industrial era and the general awakening to the importance of human motivation, creativity and empowerment in the context of today’s human pursuits. This sudden but explosively expanding trend of gamification of our reality has suffered from growing pains, which has led to polarized, ideological and opportunistic discussions, narrative and debate about what gamification is, how it should be defined, how it should be applied (if at all), where it should be applied as well as about its overall ethical and societal premise and scope. In this chapter, we attempt to make sense of some of the prevailing foci of this discussion during the early growing pains of the development of gamification. We feel that this sense-making effort is crucial for a mature, constructive and healthy development of increasing pervasiveness of gamification, which commands an increasing meaning and importance in our daily lives. Therefore, in this chapter we wish to reclaim the discussion and help redirect it to its constructive rails and to save it from the dangers of Luddism toward ludism.
... Gamification processes, which express the processes in which game elements and elements are used for different purposes, by focusing on a fulfillment philosophy that is user-centered and makes entertainment possible; It is shaped within the scope of the inductive approach by emphasizing differentiation and do-it-yourself (DIY) (Moran, 2010). The first approaches to gamification in the literature were mainly handled on the basis of differentiation and DIY, and tried to be effective on the sanctification and humanization of various areas (Thibault and Hamari, 2021;Sesliokuyucu and Arica, 2022). ...
... Gamification and gamification processes, which are used with various purposes and objectives in the fields of science and practice, are conceptualized in different ways in the theoretical field. Emphasizing a number of generally non-homogeneous activities such as games and playing paves the way for different definitions of gamification, thus drawing a framework from a broad perspective on the concept and subject of gamification (Thibault and Hamari, 2021). In this context, definitions and approaches related to gamification in studies in the literature are given in Table 1. ...
Ensuring continuity by increasing the satisfaction, loyalty, and experience of existing and new customers is an essential requirement in terms of long-term competition for businesses that offer omnichannel services. In this context, with the growth and spread of digital platforms, social media, and mobile technologies, the use of gamification processes, which are used extensively in service design, in omnichannel service systems comes to the fore. Gamification processes are used extensively in various non-game contexts to create a connection with users, and to influence and improve the behavior of actors in the ecosystem. Gamification, which creates positive and enjoyable experiences for customers through a gaming platform, plays a key role in the interaction between omnichannel customers and businesses operating in this field, who behave very differently from traditional customers. Customers will increase their demand from service providers. When they find service providers that offer the experience they want, they will become more loyal and profitable customers.
... In relation to the first research question, although there is scientific evidence of the engagement and motivation capacity that games and gamification provide for university students (e.g., [27,28]), it has been observed that at least 25% of the students interviewed had prejudices about the usefulness or fun that games in general, and breakouts and escape rooms in particular, could produce. These negative prejudices can be related to misinformation and infoxication about gamification and games, relating them to wasting time or even that they are harmful [29,30]. Ref. [31] found these types of prejudices in more adult people, observing that they were reduced in younger people; however, our results show that it is still necessary to train young people who will work in socio-community intervention in this didactic tool to banish these prejudices. ...
This article examines the implementation of a cooperative training workshop for Spanish undergraduate social educators. The workshop aimed to explore the integration of escape rooms and breakouts in teaching, specifically addressing cyberbullying as a curricular topic. A total of 40 students participated in designing and qualitatively evaluating the training workshop. The findings highlight the workshop’s effectiveness in enhancing social education students’ training, preparing them for future professional careers, and enhancing their learning, teamwork, and proficiency in utilising ICT programs and resources. The study underscores the significance of incorporating these innovative approaches to improve student motivation, interest, and overall skill development.
... This cultural change, that today is becoming an increasingly global form of ludificaition, is at the heart of the many strategies to motivate and attract users, commonly referred to as "gamification" [8]. While the debate about these practices is very much open [21], we recognise that the intrinsic ability of playfulness to disrupt and challenge [19] [6] is a very good fit for the critical and satirical approach of the IoB. Therefore, we decided to include a playful, surreal and situationist character in the IoB. ...
... Indeed, it has been suggested that gamification should move away from a focus on the artifact towards a focus on experiences supporting eudaimonia, or a good life [11], and from extrinsically motivating mechanisms to enjoyable experiences of play as the core of game-based learning [43]. Designers have been encouraged to provide open spaces where players may find their own path, rather than determining a solution for players to discover [47], i.e., enabling rather than controlling [48]. These recommendations fit well with the characteristics of climate change as an engagement problem, described next. ...
... Similarly, designers can provide spaces where players are allowed to find their own path, rather than assuming that they know best [21]. In other words, enabling rather than controlling [22]. ...
Physical inactivity, the fourth leading cause of death worldwide, can harm the economy, national growth, community welfare, health, and quality of life. On the other hand, physical activities (PA) have numerous advantages, including fewer cardiovascular diseases, cancer, and diabetes, fewer psychological disorders, and improved cognitive abilities. Despite the benefits of PA, people are less likely to participate. The main factor is a lack of entertainment in exercise, which demotivates society from engaging in healthy activities. In this work, we proposed a hardware-software symmetry that can entertain people while performing PA. We developed a step-box with sensors and a gamified music application synchronized with the footsteps. The purpose of this study is to show that incorporating appropriate gamification allows participants to engage actively in tedious and economic exercises. Participants (N = 90) participated in 20-min daily exercise sessions for three days. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction following exercise sessions. The results show that the gamified sensor step-box increased efficiency, effectiveness, and participant satisfaction. The findings suggest that gamification fundamentals in simple exercises increase excitement and may help people to maintain PA.
Gamification is a thriving technique that has attracted attention in higher education. Despite the increasing number of studies published in recent years, the problem is that the relationships between gamification and students' knowledge, engagement and satisfaction have not yet been theoretically and empirically explored in the same piece of research in the literature. As an added value to the literature, our study provides, for the first time, a complete conceptual framework for the implementation of a global gamification strategy in higher education, which leads to an improvement in the teaching-learning process -The 8-Pointed Higher Education Gamification Star-. This conceptual framework is concretized in a detailed gamified instructional activity -The ECOn⁺ Star Battles-ready to be replicated in any other higher education context that would be interested in adopting it. Furthermore, our research is supported by a quantitative analysis based on the PLS-SEM data analysis technique proposing The Higher Education Gamification Measurement Scale-HEGx⁺ and providing statistically significant results that shed light on the influence of gamification on students' knowledge, engagement and satisfaction. Our results conclude that gamification directly influences students' engagement and knowledge. At the same time, gamification does not directly affect students' satisfaction; it indirectly affects it through knowledge and engagement. These results are particularly relevant in a gamified instructional design in higher education where without student satisfaction, gamification and the advantages it can bring to the teaching-learning process are not sustainable in the long term.
The use of gamified designs has been gaining exponential research interest during the last decade, centered around user-centric designs aiming to persuade individuals to a successful individual behavioral change. In the focus of scientific interest are those, which lead to a maintained behavioral change led by intrinsic motivation. Such designs are at the center of attention in diverse sustainability-related topics as well (e.g., education, crowdsourcing, healthcare, individual wellbeing, eco-friendly behaviors, etc.). A focal point of such approaches lies in their rigorous conceptualization, for which design science offers detailed guidelines, resulting in successful artifacts, generated to deliver tailored solutions for users, providing value creation. The present paper aims to investigate, in what types of sustainability-related contexts are gamified approaches proposed as design science artifacts for successful value reaction. The goal of the paper is to identify and explore these research areas and hand a holistic overview about promising and innovative, applied approaches, conducted as design science artifacts. This goal is reached through a narrative synthesis method, searching and selecting papers at Scopus, Web of Science, and ACM Digital Library as databases, following the PRISMA 2020 Guidelines, interpreting N = 14 records. The results of this study deliver a structured summary about successfully gamified design science artifacts centered around value creation in pro-sustainability areas, offering a snapshot of the present standing of research in this applied domain of interest
Dijitalleşme kamusal alanda vatandaşlar ve kurumlar arasındaki
etkileşimin farklılaşmasını sağlarken, ilişki ve işbirliğine dayalı anlayışların
gelişimine imkân tanımaktadır. İlişki ve işbirliği ağında şekillenen anlayışlar,
vatandaşların yerel hizmetlere katılımı ve karar alma süreçlerini etkilemektedir. Oyunlaştırma stratejileri son dönemlerde yerel yönetimler
tarafından vatandaşlarla birlikte etkin ve verimli üretim kararı alma ve
gerçekleştirmenin bir yolu olarak sıkça kullanılmaktadır. Motivasyonel oyun
unsurları ve stratejilerinin oyun dışı bağlamlarda kullanılmasını vurgulayan
oyunlaştırma süreçleri, yerel hizmetlerde aktörlerin psikolojik ve davranışsal
değişimlerini de şekillendirmektedir. Buna ek olarak, oyunlaştırma
süreçleriyle karşılıklı bilgi akışı, sistematik veri setlerinin oluşturulması ve
verilerin karar verme süreçlerinde kullanılmasını mümkün kılınmaktadır. Bu
sayede yerel yönetimlerin vatandaş gözüyle yenilik kararları alması, mevcut
faaliyetlerinde iyileştirme ve geliştirme çabalarına yön vermesi olanaklı hal
almaktadır. Bu çıkış noktasından hareketle hazırlanan çalışmada, yerel
hizmetlerde oyunlaştırma kavramının vatandaş katılım süreçleri ve güncel
örnekler aracılığıyla öneminin ortaya konulması amaçlanmaktadır.
Although management gamification has immense potential to broadly benefit both management and employees, its impact to date has been lackluster and its value unclear. I credit this to a market proliferation of rhetorical or “fake” gamification, a process which involves the decoration of existing organizational processes with game elements but with little or no attention paid to the psychological processes by which those elements influence human behavior. For gamification to be successful, specific psychological characteristics of employees or customers must be targeted, and game elements must be chosen to influence those characteristics. In theoretical terms, legitimate gamification in management can be defined as a family of work and product design techniques inspired by game design, whereas rhetorical gamification is at best novice gameful design and at worst a swindle, an attempt to make something appear “game-like” purely to sell more gamification. Only by carefully distinguishing legitimate and rhetorical gamification can legitimate gamification’s potential be fully realized.
In this paper, we present the development and validation of an instrument for measuring users' gameful experience while using a service. Either intentionally or unintentionally , systems and services are becoming increasingly gamified and having a gameful experience is progressively important for the user's overall experience of a service. Gamification refers to the transformation of technology to become more game-like, with the intention of evoking similar positive experiences and motivations that games do (the gameful experience) and affecting user behavior. In this study, we used a mixed-methods approach to develop an instrument for measuring the gameful experience. In a first qualitative study, we developed a model of the gameful experience using data from a questionnaire consisting of open-ended questions posed to users of Zombies, Run!, Duolingo, and Nike+ Run Club. In a second study, we developed the instrument and evaluated its dimensionality and psycho-metric properties using data from users of Zombies, Run! (N = 371). Based on the results of this second study, we further developed the instrument in a third study using data from users of Duolingo (N = 507), in which we repeated the assessment of dimensionality and psychometric properties, this time including confirmation of the model. As a result of this work, we devised GAMEFULQUEST, an instrument that can be used to model and measure an individual user's gameful experience in systems and services, which can be used for user-adapted gamification and for informing user-modeling research within a gamification context.
This article reports the findings of AI4People, an Atomium—EISMD initiative designed to lay the foundations for a “Good AI Society”. We introduce the core opportunities and risks of AI for society; present a synthesis of five ethical principles that should undergird its development and adoption; and offer 20 concrete recommendations—to assess, to develop, to incentivise, and to support good AI—which in some cases may be undertaken directly by national or supranational policy makers, while in others may be led by other stakeholders. If adopted, these recommendations would serve as a firm foundation for the establishment of a Good AI Society.
Gamification is now a well-established technique in Human-Computer Interaction. However, research on gamification still faces a variety of empirical and theoretical challenges. Firstly, studies of gamified systems typically focus narrowly on understanding individuals. short-term interactions with the system, ignoring more difficult to measure outcomes. Secondly, academic research on gamification has been slow to improve the techniques through which gamified applications are designed. Third, current gamification research lacks a critical lens capable of exploring unintended consequences of designs. The 14 articles published in this special issue face these challenges with great methodological rigor. We summarize them by identifying three main themes: the determination to improve the quality and usefulness of theory in the field of gamification, the improvements in design practice, and the adoption of a critical gaze to uncover side-effects of gamification designs. We conclude by providing an overview of the questions that we feel must be addressed by future work in gamification. Gamification studies would benefit from a wider use of theories to account for the complexity of human behavior, a more thorough exploration of the many opportunities coming from the world of games, and an ethical reflection on the use of game design elements in serious domains.
Today, our reality and lives are increasingly game-like, not only because games have become a pervasive part of our lives, but also because activities, systems and services are increasingly gamified. Gamification refers to designing information systems to afford similar experiences and motivations as games do, and consequently, attempting to affect user behavior. In recent years, popularity of gamification has skyrocketed and manifested in growing numbers of gamified applications, as well as a rapidly increasing amount of research. However, this vein of research has mainly advanced without an agenda, theoretical guidance or a clear picture of the field.
To make the picture more coherent, we provide a comprehensive review of the gamification research (N = 819 studies) and analyze the research models and results in empirical studies on gamification. While the results in general lean towards positive findings about the effectiveness of gamification, the amount of mixed results is remarkable. Furthermore, education, health and crowdsourcing as well as points, badges and leaderboards persist as the most common contexts and ways of implementing gamification. Concurrently, gamification research still lacks coherence in research models, and a consistency in the variables and theoretical foundations. As a final contribution of the review, we provide a comprehensive discussion, consisting of 15 future research trajectories, on future agenda for the growing vein of literature on gamification and gameful systems within the information system science field.
Big data technologies have been adopted by both the public and private sectors to develop and expand surveillance capacities. This article traces the institutional processes and political-economic interests of the public and private stakeholders involved in the construction of China’s Social Credit System (SCS), which is currently on track for full deployment on 1.4 billion citizens by 2020. The SCS aims to centralize data platforms into a big data–enabled surveillance infrastructure to manage, monitor, and predict the trustworthiness of citizens, firms, organizations, and governments in China. A punishment/reward system based on credit scores will determine whether citizens and organizations are able to access things like education, markets, and tax deductions. While the SCS is widely described by the Western news media as a means of “big brother” or political control, we find that it is a complicated system that focuses primarily on financial and commercial activities rather than political ones. This article presents a framework for understanding state surveillance infrastructures by exploring how various government agencies are cooperating to establish this centralized data infrastructure with the aim of scoring credit, and discussing the distinct but interconnected processes of data collection, data aggregation, and data analytics.
‘Gamification’ is understood as the application of game systems – competition, rewards, quantifying player/user behaviour – into non-game domains, such as work, productivity and fitness. Such practices are deeply problematic as they represent the capture of ‘play’ in the pursuit of neoliberal rationalization and the managerial optimization of working life and labour. However, applying games and play to social life is also central to the Situationist International, as a form of resistance against the regularity and standardization of everyday behaviour. In this article, the authors distinguish between two types of gamification: first, ‘gamification-from-above’, involving the optimization and rationalizing of work practices by management; and second, ‘gamification-from-below’, a form of active resistance against control at work. Drawing on Autonomism and Situationism, the authors argue that it is possible to transform non-games into games as resistance, rather than transferring game elements out of playful contexts and into managerial ones. Since the original ‘gamification’ term is now lost, the authors develop the alternative conception as a practice that supports workers, rather than one used to adapt behaviour to capital. The article concludes with a renewed call for this ‘gamification-from-below’, which is an ideal form of resistance against gamification-from-above and its capture of play in pursuit of work.
Computer games and organizations are becoming increasingly interwoven in the 21st century. Sophisticated computer games connected by networks are turning into spaces for organizing. Therefore, it may not be surprising that conventional organizations are now scrounging these games for novel ways to enhance efficiency. The result is the formation of game/organization hybrids; uneasy recontextualizations of partly incompatible ideas, values and practices. We begin this essay by elucidating what it is socially that makes something a game by exploring the notion's anthropological foundations. We then introduce two examples of actual game/organization hybrids; raiding in computer games and gamification in formal organizations. We conclude by discussing the implications of such hybridization and suggest venues for how organization and management scholars can benefit from studying computer games and theories of play.
Gamification is the use of elements and techniques from video game design in non-game contexts. Amid the rapid growth of this practice, normative questions have been under-explored. The primary goal of this article is to develop a normatively sophisticated and descriptively rich account for appropriately addressing major ethical considerations associated with gamification. The framework suggests that practitioners and designers should be precautious about, primarily, but not limited to, whether or not their use of gamification practices: (1) takes unfair advantage of workers (e.g., exploitation); (2) infringes any involved workers’ or customers’ autonomy (e.g., manipulation); (3) intentionally or unintentionally harms workers and other involved parties; or (4) has a negative effect on the moral character of involved parties.
This paper announces the "Games Against Health" (GAH) research agenda, a criticism of, and response to, the cultural imperialism of the "Games for Health" paradigm. Committed to player-centric design ethics, GAH seeks to dismantle the "games for health" myth as neo-liberal elitist diktat. We acknowledge the values, tastes and pleasures of billions of game players worldwide. We argue that game designers should engage more efficiently in the disimprovement of player health and wellbeing in order to cater to those players' existing preferences. We hope the paper can serve as a convenient reference for those designing psychotic, sociopathic or antisocial games.
“Gamification” has gained considerable scholarly and practitioner attention; however, the discussion in academia has been largely confined to the human–computer interaction and game studies domains. Since gamification is often used in service design, it is important that the concept be brought in line with the service literature. So far, though, there has been a dearth of such literature. This article is an attempt to tie in gamification with service marketing theory, which conceptualizes the consumer as a co-producer of the service. It presents games as service systems composed of operant and operand resources. It proposes a definition for gamification, one that emphasizes its experiential nature. The definition highlights four important aspects of gamification: affordances, psychological mediators, goals of gamification and the context of gamification. Using the definition the article identifies four possible gamifying actors and examines gamification as communicative staging of the service environment.
The era of Big Data has begun. Computer scientists, physicists, economists, mathematicians, political scientists, bio-informaticists, sociologists, and other scholars are clamouring for access to the massive quantities of information produced by and about people, things, and their interactions. Significant questions emerge. Will large-scale search data help us create better tools, services, and public goods? Or will it usher in a new wave of privacy incursions and invasive marketing? Will data analytics help us understand online communities and political movements? Or will it be used to track protesters and suppress speech? Will it transform how we study human communication and culture, or narrow the palette of research options and alter what 'research' means? Given the rise of Big Data as a socio-technical phenomenon, we argue that it is necessary to critically interrogate its assumptions and biases. In this article, we offer six provocations to spark conversations about the issues of Big Data: a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon that rests on the interplay of technology, analysis, and mythology that provokes extensive utopian and dystopian rhetoric.
Learning is a goal driven social activity determined by motivational factors. To be able to efficiently gamify learning for improved student motivation and engagement, the educators have to understand the related aspects studied in games, motivational psychology and pedagogy. This will help them to identify the factors that drive and explain desired learning behaviors. This paper presents a survey of the main approaches employed in gamification and the emerging new directions in the context of the relevant motivational psychology and pedagogy. The focus is on the motivational factors that impact learning and understanding of behavior change. The purpose of the paper is two-fold: on one side, to provide analysis and guide to relevant works related to gamification along with outlining the emerging trends, and on the other, to provide foundation for evaluation and identification of the areas of possible improvements.
By making work seem more like leisure time, gamification and corporate training games serve as a mechanism for solving a range of problems and, significantly, of increasing productivity. This piece examines the implications of gamification as a means of productivity gains that extend
Frederick Winslow Taylor’s principles of scientific management, or Taylorism. Relying on measurement and observation as a mechanism to collapse the domains of labour and leisure for the benefit of businesses (rather than for the benefit or fulfilment of workers), gamification potentially
subjugates all time into productive time, even as business leaders use games to mask all labour as something to be enjoyed. In so doing, this study argues, the agency of individuals – whether worker or player – becomes subject to the rationalized nature of production. This rationalization
changes the nature of play, making it a duty rather than a choice, a routine rather than a process of exploration. Taken too far or used unthinkingly, it renders Huizinga’s magic circle into one more regulated office cubicle.
Gamification as the process of turning extra-ludic activities into play can be seen in two different ways: following Bataille, we would hope that play could be a flight line from the servitude of the capital-labour relationship. Following Adorno and Benjamin, however, we might discover
that the escape from the drudgery of the worker leads to an equally alienating drudgery of the player. I argue that gamification might be seen as a form of ideology and therefore a mechanism of the dominant class to set agenda and to legitimize actions taken by this very class or group. Ever
since the notion of gamification was introduced widely, scholars have suggested that work might be seen as a sort of leisure activity. This article analyses the controversial dialectics of play and labour and the ubiquitous notion of gamification as ideology.
This article presents six critiques of the currently dominant rendition of gamification, and six invitations to rethink it. It suggests expanding the remit of gamification (1) from the structuring of objects to the framing of contexts, and (2) from game design elements to motivational affordances. In its current form, gamification presents an additive, atomistic and deterministic conception of experience design. Truly learning from game design means to adopt a (3) relational account of experience, and (4) an emergent-systemic method of experience design. The paper suggests to move (5) from avoiding harm and coercion to facilitating the good life, and (6) from the instrumental perfection of existing orders to their critical transformation. In summary, in presents a rethought, positive vision of gamification as a critical, transformative, socio-technical systems design practice for motivational affordances in the service of human flourishing: eudaimonic design.
The era of Big Data has begun. Computer scientists, physicists, economists, mathematicians, political scientists, bio-informaticists, sociologists, and other scholars are clamoring for access to the massive quantities of information produced by and about people, things, and their interactions. Diverse groups argue about the potential benefits and costs of analyzing genetic sequences, social media interactions, health records, phone logs, government records, and other digital traces left by people. Significant questions emerge. Will large-scale search data help us create better tools, services, and public goods? Or will it usher in a new wave of privacy incursions and invasive marketing? Will data analytics help us understand online communities and political movements? Or will it be used to track protesters and suppress speech? Will it transform how we study human communication and culture, or narrow the palette of research options and alter what ‘research’ means? Given the rise of Big Data as a socio-technical phenomenon, we argue that it is necessary to critically interrogate its assumptions and biases. In this article, we offer six provocations to spark conversations about the issues of Big Data: a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon that rests on the interplay of technology, analysis, and mythology that provokes extensive utopian and dystopian rhetoric.
Four studies apply self-determination theory (SDT; Ryan & Deci, 2000) in investigating motivation for computer game play,
and the effects of game play on well-being. Studies 1–3 examine individuals playing 1, 2 and 4 games, respectively and show
that perceived in-game autonomy and competence are associated with game enjoyment, preferences, and changes in well-being
pre- to post-play. Competence and autonomy perceptions are also related to the intuitive nature of game controls, and the
sense of presence or immersion in participants’ game play experiences. Study 4 surveys an on-line community with experience
in multi-player games. Results show that SDT’s theorized needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness independently predict
enjoyment and future game play. The SDT model is also compared with Yee’s (2005) motivation taxonomy of game play motivations.
Results are discussed in terms of the relatively unexplored landscape of human motivation within virtual worlds.
A science of positive subjective experience, positive individual traits, and positive institutions promises to improve quality of life and prevent the pathologies that arise when life is barren and meaningless. The exclusive focus on pathology that has dominated so much of our discipline results in a model of the human being lacking the positive features that make life worth living. Hope, wisdom, creativity, future mindedness, courage, spirituality, responsibility, and perseverance are ignored or explained as transformations of more authentic negative impulses. The 15 articles in this millennial issue of the American Psychologist discuss such issues as what enables happiness, the effects of autonomy and self-regulation, how optimism and hope affect health, what constitutes wisdom, and how talent and creativity come to fruition. The authors outline a framework for a science of positive psychology, point to gaps in our knowledge, and predict that the next century will see a science and profession that will come to understand and build the factors that allow individuals, communities, and societies to flourish.
Despite the buzz around gamification as an exciting new method to engage students, evidence of its ability to enhance learning is mixed. In fact, gamification has attracted considerable controversy (“gamification is bullshit”) and some derogatory labels such as “exploitationware.” Therefore, in order to make the case for or against gamification in education, it is important to examine the effects (if any) of gamification on student learning achievements. This study is a meta-analysis of 30 independent interventions (3,202 participants) drawn from 24 quantitative studies that have examined the effects of gamification on student academic performance in various educational settings. The results show an overall significant medium effect size in favor of gamification over learning without gamification (Hedges' g = 0.504, 95% CI [0.284–0.723], p < 0.001). No publication bias is detected. An analysis of 32 qualitative studies reveals four reasons for learners' enjoyment of gamification: (a) gamification can foster enthusiasm; (b) gamification can provide feedback on performance; (c) gamification can fulfill learners’ needs for recognition; and (d) gamification can promote goal setting, and two reasons for their dislike of gamification: (a) gamification does not bring additional utility and (b) gamification can cause anxiety or jealousy. We conclude by highlighting two unresolved questions, and suggesting several future research directions concerning gamification in educational contexts.
Background and Aim: Gamefulness is commonly cited as the primary goal of gamification, a family of approaches employed in education, business, healthcare, government, and elsewhere. However, gamefulness is defined imprecisely across the literature. To address this, we present a theory of gamefulness that splits gamefulness into more specific constructs and outlines their effects in a process model.
Method: We integrate extant literature from psychology, human-computer interaction, and other fields to define gameful design, systems, and experiences. Most critically, we argue that gameful experience is the core focal construct of this theory and define it as an interactive state occurring when a person perceives non-trivial achievable goals created externally, is motivated to pursue them under an arbitrary set of behavioral rules, and evaluates that motivation as voluntary.
Results: We present six resulting propositions: (1) gameful systems lead to gameful experiences, (2) gameful systems impact psychological characteristics, (3) effective gameful design leads to a gameful system, (4) gameful systems lead to behavioral change, (5) behavioral change causes the distal outcomes gamification designers target, and (6) individual differences moderate the effectiveness of gameful systems.
Conclusion: Gameful experience theory provides researchers with a unified foundation to study gamification from any social scientific lens.
"Like Dewey, he has revolted against the empiricist dogma and the Kantian dualisms which have compartmentalized philosophical thought. . . . Unlike Dewey, he has provided detailed incisive argumentation, and has shown just where the dogmas and dualisms break down." --Richard Rorty, The Yale Review
The Luddites of today don't necessarily oppose technology, but they do worry that labor-saving software and automation will harm lower-income workers. Although skill-biased technological change has contributed to a rise in income inequality since the early 1980s, innovations will deliver net benefits to the less affluent so long as the state's capacity for mischief is constrained. When subjected to economic logic, the Luddite fallacies are no more compelling today than they were at any time in the past, whether driven by direct animosity toward labor saving machinery or instead linked to distaste for technology based income inequality. It may be that the past politics of wealth and income redistribution have so distorted the incentives in labor supply decisions that the supply of skilled labor complementary with new technology lags the growth in demand, resulting in less productivity and output.
The punk subculture and its music helped change the way people talked about social stratification in Britain in the late-1970s. Punk reintroduced working-class and youth values of rebellion into British culture, exposing the wider public to the privations of youth in the economic climate of the era. Punk values were promoted through rhetoric both old and new - for example, with the repeated use of words like 'anarchy', 'pop' and 'violence'. Other texts included political affiliations, connections to older art movements, fashion and attitude. These texts acquired attention through the outrageous songs and actions of bands like the Sex Pistols, which were covered widely in the tabloid and music presses. But the subculture's efforts to protest the professionalisation of British society were doomed to failure because the musicians involved could not help becoming professionalised themselves. Young people came to appreciate less iconoclastic versions of punk, especially 'new wave' music. Thus the punk subculture, for all its rhetoric, ultimately failed to create a 'revolution' in British culture.
The demand for minority representation in video games often focuses on proving that members of marginalized groups are gamers. In turn, it is asserted that the gaming industry should focus on appealing to these players via targeted content. Being targeted as a gamer, however, does not a gamer make. Identity as a gamer intersects with other identities like gender, race, and sexuality. Negative connotations about gaming lead people to not identify as gamers, and even to not play video games. This article concludes, based on interview data, that those invested in diversity in video games must focus their attention on the construction of the medium, and not the construction of the audience as such. This shift in academic attention is necessary to develop arguments for representation in games that do not rely on marking groups as specific kinds of gaming markets via identifiers like gender, race, and sexuality.
In an effort to create a positive experience at work, managers have deployed a wide range of initiatives and practices designed to improve the affective experience for workers. One such practice is gamification, introducing elements from games into the work environment with the purpose of improving employees’ affective experiences. Games have long been played at work, but they have emerged spontaneously from the employees themselves. Here, we examine whether managerially-imposed games provide the desired benefits for affect and performance predicted by prior studies on games at work or whether they are a form of “mandatory fun.” We highlight the role of consent (Burawoy, 1979) as a psychological response to mandatory fun, which moderates these relationships and, in a field experiment, find that games, when consented to, increase positive affect at work, but, when consent is lacking, decrease positive affect. In a follow up laboratory experiment, we also find that legitimation and a sense of individual agency are important sources of consent.
This article argues that a mythology of Luddism was evident in the disturbances of 1812. Luddism was not a coherent campaign. It did not have clear aims or a united organization. It was, rather, a shared narrative which sustained the participants and their supporters for over two years. The mythology focused on the fiction of 'General Ludd' and his armies. This was a psychological response to the militarization of the population during the Napoleonic Wars. The creation of a mythology was reflective of provincial consciousness, uniting the north of England against their national enemies in government as well as their local enemies in the factories. Luddism was a movement of pro-action rather than reaction. This article expands upon "Writings of the Luddites," Binfield's anthology of Luddite texts. It also adopts recent arguments in sociology concerning the role of narrative in social protest.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate several of the most commonly used American introductory textbooks in the field of recreation and leisure studies with respect to their historical treatment of colonial recreation and the Puritans in the United States. Most of these texts contain numerous errors with respect to both recreation legislation and recreation practice, effectively perpetuating an ahistorical image of the dour Puritan. The dour Puritan, it is suggested, functions as a “myth"—i.e., an essentialized narrative that castigates the story's characters in order to serve the storyteller's present purposes. The Puritans thus function as a proxy for those who continue to advocate instrumental or oppositional recreation ethics, and as a foil to those authors advocating a more expressivist ethic. Finally, I suggest that this reductivist myth is not only a disservice to our historical understanding of the past, but also to the complexities and nuances of recreation ethics more generally.
The meaning of the term automation is reviewed through its definition and related definitions, historical evolution, technological progress, benefits and risks,
and domains and levels of applications. Asurvey of 331 people around the world adds insights to the current meaning of automation
to people, with regard to: What is your definition of automation?
Where did you encounter automation first in your life? and What is the most important contribution of automation to society? The survey respondents include 12 main aspects of the definition in their responses; 62 main types of first automation encounter;
and 37 types of impacts, mostly benefits but also two benefit–risks combinations: replacing humans, and humansʼ inability
to complete tasks by themselves. The most exciting contribution of automation found in the survey was to encourage/inspire creative work; inspire newer solutions. Minor variations were found in different regions of the world. Responses about the first automation encounter are somewhat
related to the age of the respondent, e.g., pneumatic versus digital control, and to urban versus farming childhood environment.
The chapter concludes with several emerging trends in bioinspired automation, collaborative control and automation, and risks
to anticipate and eliminate.
First, a number of previous theories of intrinsic motivation are reviewed. Then, several studies of highly motivating computer games are described. These studies focus on what makes the games fun, not on what makes them educational. Finally, with this background, a rudimentary theory of intrinsically motivating instruction is developed, based on three categories: challenge, fantasy, and curiosity.Challenge is hypothesized to depend on goals with uncertain outcomes. Several ways of making outcomes uncertain are discussed, including variable difficulty level, multiple level goals, hidden information, and randomness. Fantasy is claimed to have both cognitive and emotional advantages in designing instructional environments. A distinction is made between extrinsic fantasies that depend only weakly on the skill used in a game, and intrinsic fantasies that are intimately related to the use of the skill. Curiosity is separated into sensory and cognitive components, and it is suggested that cognitive curiosity can be aroused by making learners believe their knowledge structures are incomplete, inconsistent, or unparsimonious.
One of the main aims of game studies is to investigate to what extent and in what ways computer games are currently transforming the understanding of and the actual construction of personal and cultural identities. Computer games and other digital technologies such as mobile phones and the Internet seem to stimulate playful goals and to facilitate the construction of playful identities. This transformation advances the ludification of today's culture in the spirit of Johan Huizinga's homo ludens.
Sustained growth in both incomes and life spans are the hallmarks of modern development. Fluctuations around trend in the former, or business cycles, have been a traditional focus in macroeconomics, while similar cyclical patterns in mortality are also interesting and are now increasingly studied. In this paper, I assess the welfare implications of cyclical fluctuations in mortality using a new utility-theoretic model of preferences over uncertain length of life. Echoing the classic result of Lucas (1987) regarding business cycles, my findings suggest that short-term fluctuations in mortality are not very costly. While consumption fluctuations are relatively large, cyclical fluctuations in mortality are tiny compared to the much larger static uncertainty in length of life that derives from naturally rising mortality rates through age. Secular improvements in life expectancy and gains against static health inequalities appear to be much more important than cyclical mortality.
Apocalypse postponed
- U Eco
Eco, U. (1994). Apocalypse postponed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Play for life. Play theory and play as emotional survival
- T Henricks
Henricks, T. (2017). Foreword. In B. Sutton-Smith (Ed.), Play for life. Play theory and play as emotional survival. American Journal of Play special issue,
The Strong.
Disney hotel workers try to stay ahead of the ‘electronic whip
- S Lopez
Lopez, S. (2010, October 19). Disney hotel workers try to stay ahead of the 'electronic whip'. LA Times.