This is a guest post written by the undergraduate student Samantha Stahlke of the HCI Games Group. It has appeared on Medium and on the group’s homepage before. We encourage the discussion on Medium.
As a first-year wading (well, cliff-diving, really) into the depths of academic research reports last fall, I was struck with what you might call “jargon fatigue.” Though I was no stranger to general scientific reading, upon broaching the field of game research, I was quickly overwhelmed by a veritable tsunami of seemingly obscure terms related to the research fields surrounding statistics, sociology, and design theory.
Clinging to nothing but a thesaurus and a handful of Wikipedia links, I pulled through, and now proudly report that I understand what a MANOVA is, even if in the most simplistic and inevitably misinformed of ways. One word, despite its status as a seemingly obvious portmanteau, remained somewhat of a cryptic mystery in its meaning: gamification.
Ask any academic what the term “gamification” means and they will no doubt provide you with an informative cascade of phrases related to system design, repurposed game mechanics, “tangible progression,” motivation, and task management. However, like verbose snowflakes, no two answers will be the same. In fact, a number of papers regarding gamification have been written for the sole purpose of defining the term (including one co-authored by our group director). Continue reading
The 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, happening on January 5-8, 2016 at the Grnad Hyatt in Kauai, has a special section on “Gamification: Motivations, Effects and Analytics” as part of its Decision Analytics, Mobile Services, and Service Science track. Continue reading
Or at least, that’s what our study at Aarhus University found. Something had been bothering me for a while about gamification – both as a game scientist and as a psychologist trained in evidence based practice. All this talk of gamification involves a lot of hype and claims about game elements like badges, levels and achievements, but pundits never bother to dissociate the effects of each such mechanic. Would it make a difference if we removed, say, the leaderboards? What if we took all the game rules out? What if visually and verbally presenting something as a game is just as important as the game mechanics? Continue reading
Since the original deadline was cut very close to the end of the winter holidays, CHI decided to extend the allowed deadline for all workshop submissions. You can submit (or resubmit) your papers to the CHI 2015 Workshop “Gamifying Research” until January 19, 2015.
CHI PLAY, now in its second year in London, is an international and interdisciplinary conference by the ACM Special Interest Group Computer-Human Interaction for researchers and professionals across all areas of play, games and human-computer interaction (HCI) working in “player-computer interaction”. Continue reading