Search

Gamification 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, over the past few years, many studies have highlighted the need to tailor the gamification design properties to match individual students' needs, characteristics and preferences. Thus, different studies have been conducted to personalize the gamification in education. However, the results are still contradictory and need to be better understood to advance this field. To provide a complete understanding of this research domain, we conducted a systematic literature review to summarize the results and discussions on studies that cover the field of tailored gamified education. Following a systematic process, we analysed 2108 studies and identified 19 studies to answer our research questions. The results indicate that most of the studies only consider students' gamer types to tailor the systems, and most of the experiments do not provide sufficient statistical evidence, especially regarding learning performance using tailored gamified systems. Based on the results, we also provided an agenda with different challenges, opportunities, and research directions to improve the literature on tailored gamification in education. Our study contributes to the field of gamification design in education.

Students face several difficulties in introductory programming courses (CS1), often leading to high dropout rates, student demotivation, and lack of interest. The literature has indicated that the adequate use of gamification might improve learning in several domains, including CS1. However, the understanding of which (and how) factors influence gamification's success, especially for CS1 education, is lacking. Thus, there is a clear need to shed light on pre-determinants of gamification's impact. To tackle this gap, we investigate how user and contextual factors influence gamification's effect on CS1 students through a quasi-experimental retrospective study (N=399), based on a between-subject design (conditions: gamified or non-gamified) in terms of final grade (academic achievement) and the number of programming assignments completed in an educational system (i.e., how much they practiced). Then, we evaluate whether and how user and contextual characteristics (e.g., age, gender, major, programming experience, working situation, internet access, and computer access/sharing) moderate that effect. Our findings indicate that gamification amplified to some extent the impact of practicing. Overall, students practicing in the gamified version presented higher academic achievement than those practicing the same amount in the non-gamified version. Intriguingly, those in the gamified version that practiced much more extensively than the average showed lower academic achievements than those who practiced comparable amounts in the non-gamified version. Furthermore, our results reveal gender as the only statistically significant moderator of gamification's effect: in our data, it was positive for females but non-significant for males. These findings suggest which (and how) personal and contextual factors moderate gamification's effects, indicate the need to further understand and examine context's role, and show that gamification must be cautiously designed to prevent students from playing instead of learning.

There are many claims that gamification (i.e., using game elements outside games) impact decreases over time (i.e., the novelty effect). Most studies analyzing this effect focused on extrinsic game elements, while fictional and collaborative competition have been recently recommended. Additionally, to the best of our knowledge, no long-term research has been carried out with STEM learners from introductory programming courses (CS1), a context that demands encouraging practice and mitigating motivation throughout the semester. Therefore, the main goal of this work is to better understand how the impact of a gamification design, featuring fictional and competitive-collaborative elements, changes over a 14-week period of time, when applied to CS1 courses taken by STEM students (N = 756). In an ecological setting, we followed a 2x7 quasi-experimental design, where Brazilian STEM students completed assignments in either a gamified or non-gamified version of the same system, which provided the measures (number of attempts, usage time, and system access) to assess user behavior at seven points in time. Results indicate changes in gamification's impact that appear to follow a U-shaped pattern. Supporting the novelty effect, the gamification's effect started to decrease after four weeks, decrease that lasted between two to six weeks. Interestingly, the gamification's impact shifted to an uptrend between six and 10 weeks after the start of the intervention, partially recovering its contribution naturally. Thus, we found empirical evidence supporting that gamification likely suffers from the novelty effect, but also benefits from the familiarization effect, which contributes to an overall positive impact on students. These findings may provide some guidelines to inform practitioners about how long the initial contributions of gamification last, and how long they take to recover after some reduction in benefits. It can also help researchers to realize when to apply/evaluate interventions that use gamification by taking into consideration the novelty effect and, thereby, better understand the real impact of gamification on students' behavior in the long run.

Gamification refers to the attempt to transform different kinds of systems to be able to better invoke positive experiences such as the flow state. However, the ability of such intervention to invoke flow state is commonly believed to depend on several moderating factors including the user's traits. Currently, there is a dearth of research on the effect of user traits on the results of gamification. Gamer types (personality traits related to gaming styles and preferences) are considered some of the most relevant factors affecting the individual's susceptibility to gamification. Therefore, in this study we investigate how gamer types from the BrainHex taxonomy (achiever, conqueror, daredevil, mastermind, seeker, socializer and survivor) moderate the effects of personalized/non-personalized gamification on users' flow experience (challenge-skill balance, merging of action and awareness, clear goals, feedback, concentration, control, loss of self-consciousness and "autotelic" experience), enjoyment, perception of gamification and motivation. We conducted a mixed factorial within-subject experiment involving 121 elementary school students comparing a personalized version against a non-personalized version of a gamified education system. There were no main effects between personalization and students' flow experience, perception of gamification and motivation, and enjoyment. Our results also indicate patterns of characteristics that can lead students to the high flow experience (e.g., those who prefer to play multiplayer have a high flow experience in both personalized and non-personalized versions). Based on our results, we provided recommendations to advance the design of gamifed educational systems.

This paper presents a case study on adopting a custom design system (DS) in a research and development project, where resistance from the development team was encountered. To address this challenge, a user-centric approach was taken, treating the development team as the primary users of the design system. Through interviews with developers, their pain points were identified and addressed, resulting in a refined development process and successful design system implementation. This approach enhanced collaboration between the UX and development teams, fostering a sense of ownership among developers. The case study highlights the importance of understanding and empathizing with the development team's needs when introducing a design system. It emphasizes the value of user research within the development team and the iterative refinement of the system based on user feedback. The insights from this experience provide valuable lessons for organizations aiming to bridge the gap between UX and development, promoting the adoption and utilization of design systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the main goals of gamification in educational settings is to increase student motivation and engagement. To facilitate the design of gamified educational systems, in recent years, studies have proposed various approaches (e.g., methodologies, frameworks and models). One of the main problems, however, is that most of these approaches are theoretical, and do not provide a "proof-of-concept." This paper advances the state of the art by providing a practical way to help implement this kind of system. In this study, we present, for the first time, how one can apply gamification elements in a learning system using the "Design Sprint" method, to guide designers and developers on replicating this process. Additionally, as starting point, we use a taxonomy composed of 21 game elements, proposed to be used within learning environments, organised into five game element categories, according to their goal/usage. Our main contribution is to present "how to systematically implement the gamification elements focused on educational ends," which is of special value to practitioners, designers and developers.

Flow experience is one of the most ambitious targets of any user interface designer. However, it has remained elusive to evaluate how well user interfaces give rise to flow experience outside conducting invasive self-reporting-based questionnaires, which remove the users from the flow experience and can't be massively applied. At the same time, otherwise, well-built systems do track the behaviour of users on the interface, and therefore, user behaviour data could act as a reliable proxy for assessing the experience of users. Currently, there is little empirical research or data about which indices of user behaviours might correspond with having a flow experience as well as the different psychological constituents of the flow experience. Therefore, facing the challenge of using users' behaviour data to model users' experience, we investigated the associations between users' behaviour data (e.g. mouse clicks, activity time in the system, and average response time) and their self-reported flow experience by using data mining (i.e. associations rules) analysing data from 204 subjects. Results demonstrate that the speed of users' actions negatively affects the flow experience antecedents while also positively affecting the loss of self-consciousness. Our study advances the literature, providing insights to identify users' flow experience through behaviour data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gamification studies in the educational domain usually focus on motivating students to increase their learning performance by enhancing their motivation. Classifications of behavioural profiles are often used for this (referred to as "gamer" or "user types"), which support the personalization of students' experiences. These classifications consider these profiles from gamers' or non-gamers' points of view. However, within education research, it is necessary to broadly inspect these behavioural profiles to create an instructional design based on learners' intrinsic drivers and motivations. The relationship between these concepts is subjective, complex, and difficult to categorize, demanding research to bridge this gap. Therefore, in this article we present the design and evaluation of an application ontology that seeks to represent relationships between Jung's archetypes (e.g., the Hero, the Outlaw and others) adapted for educational purposes, creating a new approach for modelling user profiles, a taxonomy of game elements specific for use in educational contexts, and Bloom's revised taxonomy to classify learning activities types. This ontology enables personalized and instructional designs directly related to the learning activity type for students. We demonstrate that the proposed ontology can help create better gamification designs to support learning, and we envision it to be used both to create unplugged gamification strategies and personalized gamified educational systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]