Luiz Rodrigues
Armando M. Toda
Seiji Isotani
ABSTRACT
Personalized gamification has gained substantial interest due to the expectation that it can improve gamification's success. Considering some secondary studies on this topic, they lack to present the characteristics of empirical studies and some aspects on how personalization approaches were designed. In this paper, we present a literature review based on previous research to address these gaps. Based on our analysis, our results provide: insights on how experiments to compare personalized gamification and non-personalized gamification are designed and evaluated; evidence on the effectiveness of personalized gamification found in primary studies; and an overview of how personalization approaches were designed. Our analysis converged in possible guidelines and a research agenda revealing five main needs: i) empirical studies comparing one size fits all and personalized gamification; ii) qualitative user studies; iii) personalization approaches that consider contextual characteristics as well as iv) rely on a broader, unambiguous set of game elements; and v) a benchmark of established resources to increase research reproducibility.
- Rasha Najib Aljabali and Norasnita Ahmad. 2018. A Review on Adopting Personalized Gamified Experience in the Learning Context. In 2018 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services (IC3e). IEEE, 61–66.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Shurui Bai, Khe Foon Hew, and Biyun Huang. 2020. Is gamification “bullshit”? Evidence from a meta-analysis and synthesis of qualitative data in educational contexts. Educational Research Review (2020), 100322.Google Scholar
- Johan Baldeón, Inmaculada Rodríguez, and Anna Puig. 2016. LEGA: A LEarner-centered GAmification Design Framework. In Proceedings of the XVII International Conference on Human Computer Interaction (Salamanca, Spain) (Interacción ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 45, 8 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998626.2998673Google ScholarDigital Library
- Simone S Borges, Riichiro Mizoguchi, Vinicius HS Durelli, Ig I Bittencourt, and Seiji Isotani. 2016. A link between worlds: Towards a conceptual framework for bridging player and learner roles in gamified collaborative learning contexts. In Advances in Social Computing and Digital Education. Springer, 19–34.Google Scholar
- Klaudia Bovermann and Theo J Bastiaens. 2020. Towards a motivational design? Connecting gamification user types and online learning activities. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning 15, 1 (2020), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-019-0121-4Google ScholarCross Ref
- Charles Butler. 2014. A framework for evaluating the effectiveness of gamification techniques by personality type. In International Conference on HCI in Business. Springer, 381–389.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Geiser Chalco Challco, Dilvan A Moreira, Riichiro Mizoguchi, and Seiji Isotani. 2014. An ontology engineering approach to gamify collaborative learning scenarios. In CYTED-RITOS International Workshop on Groupware. Springer, 185–198.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David Codish and Gilad Ravid. 2014. Personality based gamification-Educational gamification for extroverts and introverts. In Proceedings of the 9th CHAIS Conference for the Study of Innovation and Learning Technologies: Learning in the Technological Era, Vol. 1. 36–44.Google Scholar
- Lamya F Daghestani, Lamiaa F Ibrahim, Reem S Al-Towirgi, and Hesham A Salman. 2020. Adapting gamified learning systems using educational data mining techniques. Computer Applications in Engineering Education 28, 3 (2020), 568–589.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mouna Denden, Ahmed Tlili, Fathi Essalmi, and Mohamed Jemni. 2017. Educational gamification based on personality. In 2017 IEEE/ACS 14th International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications (AICCSA). IEEE, 1399–1405.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Denden, A. Tlili, F. Essalmi, and M. Jemni. 2017. An investigation of the factors affecting the perception of gamification and game elements. In 2017 6th International Conference on Information and Communication Technology and Accessibility (ICTA). IEEE, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTA.2017.8336019Google Scholar
- Mouna Denden, Ahmed Tlili, Fathi Essalmi, and Mohamed Jemni. 2018. Does personality affect students’ perceived preferences for game elements in gamified learning environments?. In 2018 IEEE 18th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT). IEEE, 111–115.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Christo Dichev and Darina Dicheva. 2017. Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review. International journal of educational technology in higher education 14, 1 (2017), 9.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fernando Timoteo Fernandes and Plinio Thomaz Aquino Junior. 2016. Gamification aspects in the context of electronic government and education: A case study. In International Conference on HCI in Business, Government, and Organizations. Springer, 140–150.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lauren S Ferro, Steffen P Walz, and Stefan Greuter. 2013. Towards personalised, gamified systems: an investigation into game design, personality and player typologies. In Proceedings of The 9th Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment: Matters of Life and Death. ACM, 7.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Paul Garner, Sally Hopewell, Jackie Chandler, Harriet MacLehose, Elie A Akl, Joseph Beyene, Stephanie Chang, Rachel Churchill, Karin Dearness, Gordon Guyatt, 2016. When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist. bmj 354 (2016), i3507.Google Scholar
- Mohammad Hajarian, Azam Bastanfard, Javad Mohammadzadeh, and Madjid Khalilian. 2019. A personalized gamification method for increasing user engagement in social networks. Social Network Analysis and Mining 9, 1 (2019), 47.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Stuart Hallifax, Serna Audrey, Marty Jean-Charles, Lavoué Guillaume, and Lavoué Elise. 2019. Factors to Consider for Tailored Gamification. In CHI Play. ACM, Barcelona, Spain, 559–572. https://hal.archivesouvertes. fr/hal-02185647Google Scholar
- Stuart Hallifax, Audrey Serna, Jean-Charles Marty, and Élise Lavoué. 2019. Adaptive Gamification in Education: A Literature Review of Current Trends and Developments. In Transforming Learning with Meaningful Technologies, Maren Scheffel, Julien Broisin, Viktoria Pammer-Schindler, Andri Ioannou, and Jan Schneider (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 294–307.Google Scholar
- Juho Hamari, Jonna Koivisto, Harri Sarsa, 2014. Does Gamification Work?-A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification.. In HICSS, Vol. 14. 3025–3034.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Muhammad Awais Hassan, Ume Habiba, Fiaz Majeed, and Muhammad Shoaib. 2019. Adaptive gamification in e-learning based on students’ learning styles. Interactive Learning Environments (2019), 1–21.Google Scholar
- Barryl Herbert, Darryl Charles, Adrian Moore, and Therese Charles. 2014. An investigation of gamification typologies for enhancing learner motivation. In 2014 International Conference on Interactive Technologies and Games. IEEE, 71–78.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tomislav Jagušt, Ivica Botički, and Hyo-Jeong So. 2018. Examining competitive, collaborative and adaptive gamification in young learners’ math learning. Computers & education 125 (2018), 444–457.Google Scholar
- Yuan Jia, Bin Xu, Yamini Karanam, and Stephen Voida. 2016. Personality-targeted gamification: a survey study on personality traits and motivational affordances. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2001–2013.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael D Kickmeier-Rust, Eva-C Hillemann, and Dietrich Albert. 2014. Gamification and smart feedback: Experiences with a primary school level math app. International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL) 4, 3 (2014), 35–46.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Barbara Kitchenham. 2004. Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Keele, UK, Keele University 33, 2004 (2004), 1–26.Google Scholar
- Ana Carolina Tomé Klock, Isabela Gasparini, Marcelo Soares Pimenta, and Juho Hamari. 2020. Tailored gamification: A review of literature. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 144 (2020), 102495.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ana Carolina Tomé Klock, Marcelo Soares Pimenta, and Isabela Gasparini. 2018. A systematic mapping of the customization of game elements in gamified systems. Anais do Simpósio Brasileiro de Jogos e Entretenimento Digital (2018).Google Scholar
- Antti Knutas, Jouni Ikonen, Dario Maggiorini, Laura Ripamonti, and Jari Porras. 2016. Creating student interaction profiles for adaptive collaboration gamification design. International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals (IJHCITP) 7, 3 (2016), 47–62.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jonna Koivisto and Juho Hamari. 2019. The rise of motivational information systems: A review of gamification research. International Journal of Information Management 45 (2019), 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.013Google ScholarDigital Library
- Elise Lavoué, Baptiste Monterrat, Michel Desmarais, and Sébastien George. 2018. Adaptive gamification for learning environments. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 12, 1 (2018), 16–28.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jonathan Lazar, Jinjuan Heidi Feng, and Harry Hochheiser. 2017. Research methods in human-computer interaction. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- De Liu, Radhika Santhanam, and Jane Webster. 2017. Toward Meaningful Engagement: A Framework for Design and Research of Gamified Information Systems. MIS quarterly 41, 4 (2017), 1011–1034.Google Scholar
- Andrzej Marczewski. 2018. Even Ninja Monkeys Like to Play: Unicorn Edition. Gamified UK (2018).Google Scholar
- Michael Meder, Till Plumbaum, and Sahin Albayrak. 2017. A Primer on Data-Driven Gamification Design. In Proceedings of the Data-Driven Gamification Design Workshop. CEUR-WS.org, 12–17.Google Scholar
- Baptiste Monterrat, Michel Desmarais, Elise Lavoué, and Sébastien George. 2015. A player model for adaptive gamification in learning environments. In International conference on artificial intelligence in education. Springer, 297–306.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Baptiste Monterrat, Elise Lavoué, and Sébastien George. 2014. Toward an adaptive gamification system for learning environments. In International Conference on Computer Supported Education. Springer, 115–129.Google Scholar
- Baptiste Monterrat, Elise Lavoué, and Sébastien George. 2017. Adaptation of gaming features for motivating learners. Simulation & Gaming 48, 5 (2017), 625–656.Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Mora, G. F. Tondello, L. E. Nacke, and J. Arnedo-Moreno. 2018. Effect of personalized gameful design on student engagement. In 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). 1925–1933. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363471Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lennart E Nacke, Chris Bateman, and Regan L Mandryk. 2014. BrainHex: A neurobiological gamer typology survey. Entertainment computing 5, 1 (2014), 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2013.06.002Google Scholar
- Lennart E Nacke and Christoph Sebastian Deterding. 2017. The maturing of gamification research. Computers in Human Behaviour (2017), 450–454.Google Scholar
- Fiona Fui-Hoon Nah, Qing Zeng, Venkata Rajasekhar Telaprolu, Abhishek Padmanabhuni Ayyappa, and Brenda Eschenbrenner. 2014. Gamification of education: a review of literature. In International conference on hci in business. Springer, 401–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07293-7_39Google Scholar
- Wilk Oliveira and Ig Ibert Bittencourt. 2019. Tailored Gamification to Educational Technologies. Springer Nature.Google Scholar
- Wilk Oliveira, Armando Toda, Paula Toledo, Lei Shi, Julita Vassileva, Ig Ibert Bittencourt, and Seiji Isotani. 2020. Does Tailoring Gamified Educational Systems Matter? The Impact on Students’ FlowExperience. In Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. ScholarSpace, 1226–1235.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rita Orji. 2014. Exploring the Persuasiveness of Behavior Change Support Strategies and Possible Gender Differences.. In BCSS@PERSUASIVE. 41–57.Google Scholar
- Rita Orji, Lennart E Nacke, and Chrysanne Di Marco. 2017. Towards personality-driven persuasive health games and gamified systems. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1015–1027.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rita Orji, Gustavo F Tondello, and Lennart E Nacke. 2018. Personalizing persuasive strategies in gameful systems to gamification user types. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 435. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174009Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kiemute Oyibo, Rita Orji, and Julita Vassileva. 2017. The influence of culture in the effect of age and gender on social influence in persuasive technology. In Adjunct publication of the 25th conference on user modeling, adaptation and personalization. 47–52.Google Scholar
- Kiemute Oyibo, Rita Orji, and Julita Vassileva. 2017. Investigation of the Persuasiveness of Social Influence in Persuasive Technology and the Effect of Age and Gender.. In PPT@ PERSUASIVE. 32–44.Google Scholar
- Kiemute Oyibo, Rita Orji, and Julita Vassileva. 2017. Investigation of the social predictors of competitive behavior and the moderating effect of culture. In Adjunct publication of the 25th conference on user modeling, adaptation and personalization. 419–424.Google Scholar
- Luiz Rodrigues, Robson Bonidia, and Jacques Duílio Brancher. 2020. Procedural versus human level generation: Two sides of the same coin? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 141 (2020), 102465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102465Google ScholarCross Ref
- Luiz Rodrigues, Wilk Oliveira, Armando Toda, Paula Palomino, and Seiji Isotani. 2019. Thinking Inside the Box: How to Tailor Gamified Educational Systems Based on Learning Activities Types. In Proceedings of the Brazilian Symposium of Computers on Education. SBC, 823–832. https://doi.org/10.5753/cbie.sbie.2019.823Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fatemeh Roosta, Fattaneh Taghiyareh, and Maedeh Mosharraf. 2016. Personalization of gamification-elements in an e-learning environment based on learners’ motivation. In 2016 8th International Symposium on Telecommunications (IST). IEEE, 637–642. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTEL.2016.7881899Google ScholarCross Ref
- Michael Sailer and Lisa Homner. 2020. The Gamification of Learning: a Meta-analysis. Educ Psychol Rev 32 (2020), 77–112.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Isabelle Savard and Riichiro Mizoguchi. 2019. Context or culture: what is the difference? Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning 14, 1 (2019), 1–12.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hallifax Stuart, Elise Lavoué, and Audrey Serna. 2020. To tailor or not to tailor gamification? An analysis of the impact of tailored game elements on learners’ behaviours and motivation. In 21th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education.Google Scholar
- Bahar Taspinar, Werner Schmidt, and Heidi Schuhbauer. 2016. Gamification in education: a board game approach to knowledge acquisition. Procedia Computer Science 99 (2016), 101–116.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Armando M Toda, Ana CT Klock, Wilk Oliveira, Paula T Palomino, Luiz Rodrigues, Lei Shi, Ig Bittencourt, Isabela Gasparini, Seiji Isotani, and Alexandra I Cristea. 2019. Analysing gamification elements in educational environments using an existing Gamification taxonomy. Smart Learning Environments 6, 1 (2019), 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-019-0106-1Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gustavo Fortes Tondello. 2019. Dynamic Personalization of Gameful Interactive Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Waterloo.Google Scholar
- Gustavo F Tondello, Alberto Mora, Andrzej Marczewski, and Lennart E Nacke. 2019. Empirical validation of the gamification user types hexad scale in English and Spanish. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 127 (2019), 95–111.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gustavo F Tondello, Alberto Mora, and Lennart E Nacke. 2017. Elements of gameful design emerging from user preferences. In Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play. ACM, 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1145/3116595.3116627Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gustavo F Tondello, Rita Orji, and Lennart E Nacke. 2017. Recommender systems for personalized gamification. In Adjunct Publication of the 25th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization. ACM, 425–430. https://doi.org/10.1145/3099023.3099114Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gustavo F Tondello, Rina RWehbe, Lisa Diamond, Marc Busch, Andrzej Marczewski, and Lennart E Nacke. 2016. The gamification user types hexad scale. In Proceedings of the 2016 annual symposium on computer-human interaction in play. ACM, 229–243. https://doi.org/10.1145/2967934.2968082Google ScholarDigital Library
- Andrea C Tricco, Erin Lillie, Wasifa Zarin, Kelly K O'Brien, Heather Colquhoun, Danielle Levac, David Moher, Micah DJ Peters, Tanya Horsley, Laura Weeks, 2018. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Annals of internal medicine 169, 7 (2018), 467–473.Google ScholarCross Ref
Recommendations
Recommender Systems for Personalized Gamification
UMAP '17: Adjunct Publication of the 25th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and PersonalizationGamification has been used in a variety of application domains to promote behaviour change. Nevertheless, the mechanisms behind it are still not fully understood. Recent empirical results have shown that personalized approaches can potentially achieve ...
Tailored gamification in education: A literature review and future agenda
AbstractGamification has been widely used to design better educational systems aiming to increase students’ concentration, motivation, engagement, flow experience, and others positive experiences. With advances in research on gamification in education, ...
A process for designing algorithm-based personalized gamification
Personalization is an upcoming trend in gamification research, with several researchers proposing that gamified systems should take personal characteristics into account. However, creating good gamified designs is effort intensive as it is and tailoring ...
Comments