skip to main content
research-article

Validation of EGameFlow: A Self-Report Scale for Measuring User Experience in Video Game Play

Published: 12 September 2018 Publication History

Abstract

The development of a relevant model for measuring user enjoyment of video game play has received a great deal of attention in game-based and flow-based literature. EGameFlow, a self-report scale instrument created from the original game enjoyment framework proposed by Sweetser and Wyeth, provides a necessary and potentially useful tool for game enjoyment researchers. However, the scale itself is quite new. The utility of EGameFlow cannot be determined until its rigorousness has been verified. The purpose of this study was to test the validity, reliability, and applicability of EGameFlow for measuring players’ experiences in video game play. A total of 167 participants played an interactive video game and then evaluated their game playing experiences via the refined 27-item EGameFlow scale, which included the following seven dimensions: concentration, goal clarity, feedback, challenge, autonomy, immersion, and social interaction. Confirmatory factor analysis, reliability testing, and discriminant validity checks were administered. Empirical results indicated that the refined scale was both valid and reliable. Implications of these findings and direction for future research were also discussed.

References

[1]
K. Altinkemer and W. Shen. 2008. A multigenerational diffusion model for IT-intensive game consoles. J. Assoc. Info. Syst. 9, 8 (2008), 442--461.
[2]
R. P. Bagozzi and L. W. Phillips. 1982. Representing and testing organizational theories: A holistic constructural. Admin. Sci. Quart. 27, 459--490.
[3]
S. S. Brahma. 2009. Assessment of construct validity in management research: A structured guideline. J. Manage. Res. 9, 2 (2009), 59--71.
[4]
W. Broll, J. Ohlenburg, I. Lindt, I. Herbst, and A. K. Braum. 2006. Meeting technology challenges of pervasive augmented reality games. In Proceedings of Netgames. 1--12.
[5]
K. E. Buckley and C. A. Anderson. 2006. A theoretical model of the effects and consequences of playing video games. In Playing Video Games--Motives, Responses, and Consequences, P. Coreder and J. Bryant (Eds.). LEA, Mahwah, NJ, 363--373.
[6]
D. Carr. 2005. Contexts, gaming pleasures, and gendered preferences. Simul. Gam. 36, 464--482.
[7]
F. Chen, P. J. Curran, K. A. Bollen, J. Kirby, and P. Paxton. 2008. An experimental evaluation of the use of fixed cutoff points in RMSEA test statistic in structural equation models. Sociol. Methods Res. 36, 4 (2008), 462--494.
[8]
J. Chen. 2007. Flow in games and everything else. Commun. ACM 50, 4 (2007), 31--34.
[9]
W. W. Chin, N. Johnson, and A. Schwartz. 2008. A fast-form approach to measuring technology acceptance and other constructs. MIS Quart. 32, 4 (2008), 687--703.
[10]
C. Chou, and M. J. Tsai. 2007. Gender differences in Taiwan high school students’ computer game playing. Comput. Hum. Behav. 23, 1 (2007), 812--824.
[11]
T. D. Cook and D. Campbell. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issue for Field Settings. Rand McNally, Chicago, IL.
[12]
B. Cowley, D. Charles, M. Black, and R. Hickey. 2008. Toward an understanding of flow in video games. ACM Comput. Edu. 6, 2 (2008), 1--27.
[13]
M. Csikszentmihalyi. 1990. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper Perennial, New York, NY.
[14]
M. Csikszentmihalyi. 2000. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety: Experiencing Flow in Work and Play. Jossey-Boss, San Francisco, CA.
[15]
D. Cyr, M. Head, and H. Larios. 2010. Color appeal in website design within and across cultures: A multi-method evaluation. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Studies 68, 1--21.
[16]
F. D. Davis. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart. 13, 3 (1989), 319--334.
[17]
F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw. 1989. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Manage. Sci. 35, 8 (1989), 982--1003.
[18]
H. I. Day. 1981. Play a lucid behavior. In Advances in Intrinsic Motivation and Aesthetics, H. I. Day, Ed. Plenum Press, New York, NY, 225--250.
[19]
Y. A. W. De Kort, K. Poels, and W. A. Ijsselsteijn. 2007. Digital games and social presence technology: Development of the social presence in gaming questionnaire (SPGQ). Presence 1--9.
[20]
H. Desurvire, M. Caplan, and J. A. Toth. 2004. Using heuristics to evaluate the playability of games. In Extended Abstracts of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, New York, NY, 1509--1512.
[21]
C. Fornell, and F. D. Larcker. 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Market. 18, 1 (1981), 39--50.
[22]
F. L. Fu, R. C. Su, and S. C. Yu. 2009. EGameFlow: A scale to measure learners’ enjoyment of e-learning games. Comput. Edu. 52, 101--112.
[23]
D. Gefen and D. Straub. 2005. A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-graph: Tutorial and annotated example. Commun. Assoc. Info. Syst. 16, 91--109.
[24]
D. W. Gerbing and J. C. Anderson. 1988. An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. J. Market. Res. 25, 5 (1988), 186--192.
[25]
B. Gros. 2007. Digital games in education: The design of games-based learning. J. Res. Technol. Edu. 40, 10 (2007), 23--38.
[26]
I. Ha, Y. Yoon, and M. Choi. 2007. Determinants of adoption of mobile game sunder mobile broadband wireless access environment. Info. Manage. 44, 276--286.
[27]
J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R. E. Anderson. 2009. Multivariate Data Analysis, (7th ed). Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
[28]
E. C. Hirschman and M. B. Holbrook. 1982. The experiential aspects of consumption: Emerging concepts, methods and propositions. J. Market. 46, 92--101.
[29]
D. Hoffman and T. Novak. 1997. A new marketing paradigm for electronic commerce. Info. Soc. 13, 43--54.
[30]
M. B. Holbrook, R. W. Chestnut, T. A. Oliva, and E. A. Greenleaf. 1984. Play as a consumption experience: the roles of emotions, performance, and personality in the enjoyment of games. J. Consume. Res. 11 (Sept.), 728--739.
[31]
J. B. Horrigan. 2003. Consumption of information goods and services in the United States. Pew Internet 8 American Life Project, Washington, DC.
[32]
C. L. Hsu and H. P. Lu. 2004. Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social influence and flow experience. Info. Manage. 41, 853--868.
[33]
B. Ip and G. Jacobs. 2005. Segmentation of the games market using multivariate analysis. J. Target. Measure. Anal. Market. 13, 2 (2005), 275-297.
[34]
J. Ivory and S. Kalyanaraman. 2007. The effects of technological advancement and violent content in video games in players’ feelings of presence, involvement, physiological arousal, and aggression. J. Commun. 57, 532--555.
[35]
S. A. Jackson and H. W. Marsh. 1995. Development and validation of a scale to measure optimal experience: The flow state scale. J. Sport Exercise Psychol. 18, 17--35.
[36]
G. Jacobs and B. Ip. 2005. Establishing user requirements: Incorporating gamer preferences into interactive games design. Design Studies 26, 243--255.
[37]
C. Jennett, A. L. Cox, P. Cairns, S. Dhoparee, A. Epps, T. Tijs, and A. Walton. 2008. Measuring and defining the experience of immersion in games. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Studies 66, 641--661.
[38]
D. Johnson and J. Wiles. 2003. Effective affective user interface design in games. Ergonomics 46, 13 (2003), 1332--1345.
[39]
M. G. Jones. 1998. Creating engagement in computer-based learning environments. In Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (ACET’98).
[40]
A. H. Jorgenson. 2004. Marrying HCI/usability and computer games: A preliminary look. In Poceedings of NordiCHI’04. 393--396.
[41]
J. Keller and H. Bless. 2008. Flow and regulatory compatibility: An experimental approach to the flow model of intrinsic motivation. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 34, 2 (2008), 196--209.
[42]
F. N. Kerlinger and H. B. Lee. 2000. Foundations of Behavioral Research, (4th ed.). Cengage Learning, Belmont, CA.
[43]
C. Klimmt, T. Hartmann, and A. Frey. 2007. Effectance and control as determinants of video game enjoyment. CyberPsychol. Behav. 10 (Nov. 2007), 845--847.
[44]
R. B. Kline. 2005. Principles and Practice on Structural Equation Modeling. (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press, New York.
[45]
J. A. Krosnick. 1999. Survey research. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 50, 537--567.
[46]
K. Lucas and J. L. Sherry. 2004. Sex differences in video game play: A communication-based explanation. Commun. Res. 31, 499--523.
[47]
L. E. Nacke. 2010. Wiimote vs. controller: electroencephalographic measurement of affective gameplay interaction. In Proceedings of Futureplay@Vancouver Digital Week. 1--8.
[48]
L. Nacke, S. Stellmach, D. Sasse, and C. A. Lindley. 2009. Gameplay experience in a gaze interaction game. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Communication by Gaze Interaction (COGAIN’09), The Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagan, Denmark, 49--54.
[49]
J. C. Nunnally. 1978. Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill, New York.
[50]
C. Magerkurth, T. Engelke, and M. Memisoglu. 2004. Augmenting the virtual domain with physical and social elements. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advancements in Computer Entertainment. Singapore, 2004, 163--172.
[51]
C. Magerkurth, A. D. Cheok, R. L. Mandryk, and T. Nilsen. 2005. Pervasive games: Bringing computer entertainment back to the real world. ACM Comput. Entertain. 3, 3 (2005), 1--19.
[52]
T. W. Malone. 1981a. Heuristics for designing enjoyable user interfaces: Lessons for computer games. Assoc. Comput. Machine. 63--68.
[53]
T. W. Malone. 1981b. Toward a theory of intrinsically motivation instruction. Cogn. Sci. 4, 13 (1981), 333--369.
[54]
O’Leary-Kelly and R. J. Vokurka. 1998. The empirical assessment of construct validity. J. Operat. Manage. 16, 287--405.
[55]
D. Ortqvist and M. Liljedahl. 2010. Immersion and gameplay experience: A contingency framework. Int. J. Comput. Games Technol. 2010, 1--11.
[56]
M. Pasch, N. Bianchi-berthouze, B. Van Dijk, and A. Njholt. 2009. Movement-based sports video games: Investigating motivation and gaming experience. Entertain. Comput. 1, 49--61.
[57]
M. A. Schilling. 2003. Technological leapfrogging: Lessons from the U.S. video game console industry. Cal. Manage. Rev. 45, 3 (2003), 6--32.
[58]
P. E. Spector. 1994. Using self-report questionnaires in OB research: A comment on the use of a controversial method. J. Organiz. Behav. 15, 5 (1994), 385--392.
[59]
F. Strack and N. Schwarz. 2007. Asking questions: Measurement in the social sciences. In Psychology's Territories: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives from Different Disciplines. M. Ash and T. Sturn (Eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 225--250.
[60]
P. Sweetser and P. Wyeth. 2005. GameFlow: A model for evaluating player enjoyment in games. ACM Comput. Entertain. 3, 3 (2005), 1--24.
[61]
P. Thomas and R. Macredie. 1994. Games and the design of human-computer interfaces. Innovat. Edu. Teach. Mater. 31, 2 (1994), 134--142.
[62]
F. T. Tschang. 2007. Balancing the tensions between rationalization and creativity in the video game industry. Organiz. Sci. 18, 6 (2007), 989--1005.
[63]
F. Tschang. 2005. Video games as interactive experiential products and their manner of development. Int. J. Innovat. Manage. 9, 1 (2005), 103--131.
[64]
N. Venkatraman and C. H. Lee. 2004. Preferential linkage and network evolution: A conceptual model and empirical test in the U.S. video game sector. Acad. Manage. J. 47, 2 (2004), 876--892.
[65]
P. Vorderer, C. Klimmt, and U. Ritterfeld. 2004. Enjoyment: At the heart of media entertainment. Commun. Theory 14, 4 (2004), 388--408.
[66]
D. Weibel, B. Wissmath, S. Habegger, Y. Striner, and R. Groner. 2008. Playing online games against computer-vs. human-controlled opponents: Effects on presence, flow, and enjoyment. Comput. Hum. Behav. 24, 2274--2291.
[67]
J. Wu, P. Li, and S. Rao. 2008. Why they enjoy virtual game worlds? an empirical investigation. J. Electron. Commerce Res. 9, 3 (2008), 219--230.
[68]
J. J. Wu and Y. S. Chang. 2005. Towards understanding members’ interactivity, trust, and flow in online travel community. Industr. Manage. Data Syst. 10, 7 (2005), 937--954.
[69]
W. Van Den Hoogen, W. Ijsselsteijni, and Y. De Kort. 2008. Exploring behavioral expressions of player experience in digital games. In Proceedings of the Workshop in Facial and Bodily Expression for Control and Adaptation of Games (ECAG’08). 11--19.
[70]
H. Van Der Heijden. 2004. User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quart. 28, 4 (2004), 695--704.
[71]
G. N. Yannakakis and J. Hallam. 2007. Towards optimizing entertainment in computer games. Appl. Artific. Intell. 21, 933--971.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)EGame-flow: psychometric properties of the scale in the Mexican contextJournal of Applied Research in Higher Education10.1108/JARHE-06-2023-0233Online publication date: 17-May-2024
  • (2024)Exploring the Landscape of UX Subjective Evaluation Tools and UX Dimensions: A Systematic Literature Review (2010–2021)Interacting with Computers10.1093/iwc/iwae01736:4(255-278)Online publication date: 31-May-2024
  • (2024)Design and Evaluation of a Serious Game on Household SustainabilityGames and Learning Alliance10.1007/978-3-031-78269-5_14(145-155)Online publication date: 20-Nov-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Validation of EGameFlow: A Self-Report Scale for Measuring User Experience in Video Game Play

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image Computers in Entertainment
      Computers in Entertainment   Volume 16, Issue 3
      Theoretical and Practical Computer Applications in Entertainment
      September 2018
      127 pages
      EISSN:1544-3574
      DOI:10.1145/3236468
      Issue’s Table of Contents
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 12 September 2018
      Accepted: 01 July 2018
      Revised: 01 July 2018
      Received: 01 July 2018
      Published in CIE Volume 16, Issue 3

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Video games
      2. flow experience
      3. survey instrument

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

      Funding Sources

      • Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) of Taiwan, ROC

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)84
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6
      Reflects downloads up to 17 Jan 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)EGame-flow: psychometric properties of the scale in the Mexican contextJournal of Applied Research in Higher Education10.1108/JARHE-06-2023-0233Online publication date: 17-May-2024
      • (2024)Exploring the Landscape of UX Subjective Evaluation Tools and UX Dimensions: A Systematic Literature Review (2010–2021)Interacting with Computers10.1093/iwc/iwae01736:4(255-278)Online publication date: 31-May-2024
      • (2024)Design and Evaluation of a Serious Game on Household SustainabilityGames and Learning Alliance10.1007/978-3-031-78269-5_14(145-155)Online publication date: 20-Nov-2024
      • (2023)A Scoping Review of Heuristics in Videos Games Research: Definitions, Development, Application, and OperationalisationProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36110357:CHI PLAY(402-424)Online publication date: 29-Sep-2023
      • (2022)A study of player behavior and motivation to purchase Dota 2 virtual in game itemsKybernetes10.1108/K-08-2021-067852:6(1937-1961)Online publication date: 19-Jan-2022
      • (2022)Incorporation of simulation features to improve higher order thinking skillsThe International Journal of Management Education10.1016/j.ijme.2022.10062820:2(100628)Online publication date: Jul-2022
      • (2022)Development of the Gaming Input Quality Scale (GIPS)Assessing the Quality of Experience of Cloud Gaming Services10.1007/978-3-031-06011-3_6(129-149)Online publication date: 3-May-2022
      • (2021)To Be or Not to Be Stuck, or Is It a Continuum?Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/34746565:CHI PLAY(1-35)Online publication date: 6-Oct-2021
      • (2021)Gaming and anxiety in the nursing simulation lab: A pilot study of an escape roomJournal of Professional Nursing10.1016/j.profnurs.2021.01.00637:2(298-305)Online publication date: Mar-2021
      • (2021)SELF-REPORT MEASURE OF DISPOSITIONAL FLOW EXPERIENCE IN THE VIDEO GAME CONTEXT: CONCEPTUALISATION AND SCALE DEVELOPMENTInternational Journal of Human-Computer Studies10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102746(102746)Online publication date: Nov-2021
      • Show More Cited By

      View Options

      Login options

      Full Access

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media