Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investigation of Social Predictors of Competitive Behavior in Persuasive Technology

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Persuasive Technology: Development and Implementation of Personalized Technologies to Change Attitudes and Behaviors (PERSUASIVE 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 10171))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Research has shown that Competition is one of the most powerful persuasive strategies to intrinsically motivate users in a social context towards performing a target behavior. However, in persuasive technology research, studies showing the predictors of the “persuasiveness of Competition” as a motivational strategy are scarce. Consequently, based on a sample size of 213 Canadians, we tested a model using three socially influential strategies (Social Learning, Social Comparison and Reward) as predictors of Competition. Our model accounts for 42% of the variation in Competition and reveals that Reward is the strongest predictor of Competition, followed by Social Comparison, but Social Learning is not a predictor. Moreover, it reveals that Social Comparison mediates the influence of Reward on Social Learning and Competition. Our findings provide designers of persuasive applications with insight into the possibility of implementing Reward, Social Comparison and Competition as effective co-strategies for stimulating user engagement in gamified applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bandura, A.: Social learning theory, pp. 1–46. Stanford University (1971)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Busch, M., Schrammel, J., Tscheligi, M.: Personalized persuasive technology – development and validation of scales for measuring persuadability. In: Berkovsky, S., Freyne, J. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2013. LNCS, vol. 7822, pp. 33–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-37157-8_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Cheng, R.: Persuasion strategies for computers as persuasive technologies. vol. 10, no. 2010, pp. 1–7. Department of Computer Science University of Saskatchewan (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Eyck, A., Geerlings, K., Karimova, D., Meerbeek, B., Wang, L., IJsselsteijn, W., Kort, Y., Roersma, M., Westerink, J.: Effect of a virtual coach on athletes’ motivation. In: IJsselsteijn, Wijnand, A., Kort, Yvonne, A.,W., Midden, C., Eggen, B., Hoven, E. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2006. LNCS, vol. 3962, pp. 158–161. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi:10.1007/11755494_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Festinger, L.: A theory of social comparison. Hum. Relat. 7, 117–140 (1954)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fogg, B.J. et al.: Motivating, influencing, and persuading users. In: Human Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies, and Emerging Applications, pp. 133–146 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fogg, B.J.: Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Garcia, S.M., et al.: The psychology of competition: a social comparison perspective. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 8(6), 634–650 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hair, J.F., et al.: A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications Inc., Washington DC (2014)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., Pakkanen, T.: Do persuasive technologies persuade? - a review of empirical studies. In: Spagnolli, A., Chittaro, L., Gamberini, L. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2014. LNCS, vol. 8462, pp. 118–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07127-5_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Huber, M.Z., Hilty, L.M.: Gamification and sustainable consumption: overcoming the limitations of persuasive technologies. Adv. Intell. Syst. Comput. 310, 367–385 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaptein, M.: Adaptive persuasive messages. In: An E-Commerce Setting: The Use of Persuasion Profiles, Ecis 2011, Paper 183 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kaptein, M., Lacroix, J., Saini, P.: Individual differences in persuadability in the health promotion domain. In: Ploug, T., Hasle, P., Oinas-Kukkonen, H. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6137, pp. 94–105. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13226-1_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Malone, T.W., Lepper, M.R.: Making learning fun: a taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. Aptit. Learn. Instr. 3(3), 223–253 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Miller, N.E., Dollard, J.: Social Learning and Imitation. New Haven, CT, US (1941)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Oinas-Kukkonen, H.: Persuasive systems design: key issues, process model, and system features. Inf. Syst. 24, 485–500 (2009). March 2009

    Google Scholar 

  17. Orji, R.: Exploring the persuasiveness of behavior change support strategies and possible gender differences. CEUR Workshop Proc. 1153, 41–57 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Orji, R. et al.: Towards personality-driven persuasive health games and gamified systems. In: Proceedings SIGCHI Conference Human Factors Computer System (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L.: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25(1), 54–67 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sanchez, G.: PLS path modeling with R. R News, vol. 235 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Skinner, B.: Science and Human Behavior, p. 480. Simon and Schuster, New York (1965)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Spittle, M., et al.: Applying self-determination theory to understand the motivation for becoming a physical education teacher. Teach. Teacher Educ. 25(1), 190–197 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Stibe, A.: Socially influencing systems: persuading people to engage with publicly displayed twitter-based systems (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Stibe, A.: Towards a framework for socially influencing systems: meta-analysis of four PLS-SEM based studies. In: MacTavish, T., Basapur, S. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9072, pp. 172–183. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-20306-5_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Stibe, A., Larson, K.: Persuasive cities for sustainable wellbeing: quantified communities. In: Younas, M., Awan, I., Kryvinska, N., Strauss, C., Thanh, D. (eds.) MobiWIS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9847, pp. 271–282. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44215-0_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Stibe, A., Oinas-Kukkonen, H.: Comparative analysis of recognition and competition as features of social influence using Twitter. In: Bang, M., Ragnemalm, E.L. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7284, pp. 274–279. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-31037-9_26

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Stiglitz, J.E.: Theory of Competition, Incentives and Risk. Palgrave Macmillan, London (1986)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  28. Sundar, S.S., Bellur, S., Jia, H.: Motivational technologies: a theoretical framework for designing preventive health applications. In: Bang, M., Ragnemalm, E.L. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7284, pp. 112–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-31037-9_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Vansteenkiste, M., Deci, E.L.: Competitively contingent rewards and intrinsic motivation: can losers remain motivated? Motiv. Emot. 27(4), 273–299 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Wong, K.K.: Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) techniques using SmartPLS. Mark. Bull. 24(1), 1–32 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada

    Kiemute Oyibo & Julita Vassileva

Authors
  1. Kiemute Oyibo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julita Vassileva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kiemute Oyibo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Peter W. de Vries

  2. University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland

    Harri Oinas-Kukkonen

  3. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Liseth Siemons

  4. University de Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Nienke Beerlage-de Jong

  5. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Lisette van Gemert-Pijnen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Oyibo, K., Vassileva, J. (2017). Investigation of Social Predictors of Competitive Behavior in Persuasive Technology. In: de Vries, P., Oinas-Kukkonen, H., Siemons, L., Beerlage-de Jong, N., van Gemert-Pijnen, L. (eds) Persuasive Technology: Development and Implementation of Personalized Technologies to Change Attitudes and Behaviors. PERSUASIVE 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10171. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55134-0_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55134-0_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-55133-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-55134-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation