An Investigation Of Gamification Typologies For Enhancing Learner Motivation

An Investigation of Gamification Typologies for Enhancing Learner Motivation
Barryl Herbert, Darryl Charles, Adrian Moore
School of Computing and Information Engineering
University of Ulster
Coleraine, Northern Ireland
Therese Charles
SilverFish Studios
Coleraine, Northern Ireland

General Motivation for this Research: Virtual Learning Landscapes

Specific Focus of this Research: People are Different
http://www.custbase.com/portal/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/different-people.png

People’s Temperament and Psychology Varies
Keirsy Temperament
Myers-Briggs Mapping
Roles
Typical Attributes
Artisan
ESTP, ISTP, ESFP, ISFP
Promoter, Crafter, Performer, Composer
Fun-loving, Excitable, optimistic, realistic, unconventional, bold, and spontaneous.
Troubleshooting leaders.
Guardian
ESTJ, ISTJ, ESFJ, ISFJ
Supervisor, Inspector, Provider, Protector
Dependable, helpful, and hard-working, dutiful, cautious, humble. Stabilizing leaders.
Rational
INTJ, INTP, ENTP, ENTJ
Field Marshall, Mastermind, Inventor, Architect
Pragmatic, skeptical, self-contained, problem-solvers, ingenious, independent, and strong willed. Strategic leaders
Idealist
INFJ, INFP, ENFP, ENFJ
Teacher, Councellor, Champion, Healer
Enthusiastic, trust intuition, kindhearted, authentic, giving, trusting, and focused on personal journeys. Inspirational leaders.
Keirsey.com, “Keirsey Temperament Website - Overview of the Four Temperaments.” [Online]. Available: http://www.keirsey.com. [Accessed: 03-Jun-2014].

Learners are Different
http://www.jcu.edu.au/wiledpack/modules/fsl/JCU_090344.html#_Kolb's_learning_styles_1

Player’s are Different
Bartle’s Player Type
Symbol (Behavior)
Typical Attributes
Killers
Clubs (they hit people with them)
Acting / Players. Focus on rank and direct competition. Leaderboards.
Acheivers
Diamonds (they're always seeking treasure)
Acting / World. Attaining status and achieving goals. Achievements.
Explorers
Spades (they dig around for information)
World / Interacting. Discover the unknown and understand how the game works.
Socialisers
Hearts (they empathise with other players)
Players / Interacting. Motivated by developing a network of friends. Knowledge and information are important.
See http://www.gamified.co.uk/?s=types and http://mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm

Bateman’s DGD1 Model
•Conqueror: Competitive, win-at-all-costs. Players of this type are goal- oriented and enjoy feeling dominant in the game or in social circles set around the game.
•Manager: Logistical, plays to develop mastery. Such players are process-oriented and will replay completed games if they can use their newfound mastery to unearth novelty at deeper levels of detail.
•Wanderer: Desires new and fun experiences. Less challenge-oriented than the above types, these players primarily seek constant, undemanding and novel enjoyment.
•Participant: Enjoys social (living-room) play, or involvement in an alternate world.

Principles of Good Game Design
•The Games Oriented Learning Framework (GOLF) emerged through rigorous research in the areas of games design, engagement and flow.
FUN: engagement is easier if the experience is enjoyable.
SOCIAL: engagement is reinforced by the social support of others going through the same experience.
IDENTITY: engagement can be encouraged if everyone has a visible role in the learning environment.
CHALLENGE: engagement can build on human competitive drive, enhanced by social pressure.
STRUCTURE: engagement is more likely if objectives and constraints are clear and acceptable.
FEEDBACK: engagement is reinforced by making achievement explicit and timely.

Play v Game v Gameplay
•Requires a lusory attitude (and not everyone is indulgent in this way) but if you are playful you may not be a gamer:
Play is not bounded by fixed rules and doesn’t require an outcome.
Some people are averse to fixed challenges and prefer self-defined challenges. Are not particularly interested in competitive reflection.
A game is a problem-solving activity, approached with a playful attitude (Schell) and typically has an observable and measurable outcome.
Some people thrive on learning rules and overcoming challenges. Beating other people or comparing performance to others.
Gameplay is derived from the combination of pace and cognitive effort required by a game (Crawford).
 Intellectual stimulation and progress is core. Learning, doing, mastering.

What is Gamification?
•“Gamification takes inspiration from commercial game elements, design patterns and metaphors in order to improve the design of non-game systems to positively influence behaviour, enhance engagement, and motivate people to achieve their goals. Facilitate experiences with positive emotions.
•Much of the core gamification ideas are rooted in psychology and in the simplest form resembles customer reward schemes.
•At its most effective gamification harnesses inherent, intrinsic motivation of users and is built on more complex processes than just reinforcement learning.

Tale of Two Gamifications
•Influence – what we want people to do and be like
Rewards and techniques focusing on extrinsic motivation.
Tasks and processes that are deemed important but are not a particular internal desire for the user.
Getting started, being consistent. E.g. Attendance for students.
Can scaffold more important emergent behaviours.
•Support – what people want to do and be like
Rewards and techniques focusing on intrinsic motivation.
Tasks and processes lending themselves directly to outcomes that the user inherently desires.
Learning, learning how to learn. Knowing and capability of doing.
Frequently more complex and process oriented. Related to learning theories.

What Really Engages? RAMP
•Self-determinism and intrinsic motivation
Relatedness (social factors),
Autonomy (choice and freedom),
Mastery (learning/achievement) and
Purpose (meaning and knowing why)

Gamification Typology Experiment
•Investigate variation in learner gamification profiles using Marczewski’s gamification typology as a model for motivation.
•Context.
•Two 2nd year computing degree modules (68 students co-enrolled). Web and games based topics.
•We created a virtual world, Reflex, for the students to access content and receive feedback. The 3D world was important to the gamification process.
•The teaching mode for the games module was chosen with gamification in mind, whereas the web module had a very traditional format.

Reflex
Four screen shots from Reflex. From top left in clockwise order: A view of the learning
areas, starter point with group league table, achievement table, and avatar selection tool.

Motivation for a Virtual World
•Offers richer opportunities for agency (embodiment) and situated learning.
•A learners avatar and the world (over time) can become a representation of their learning state.
•Gamification features utilising aspects such as exploration and socialising are more literal in a virtual world.
•A 3D space can topographically represent the relationship between learning content (difficult, progression etc.) and visually (and physically) present a pedagogical learning process.
•Landscape provides guidance
•Landscape supplies feedback
•Learners can be tracked through virtual learning landscape and heat and trajectory maps subsequently utilised for analysis

Mixed Methods Approach - Convergent Parallel Design
Student preferences
–Ask students to complete a questionnaire designed to gauge their gamification preference on the basis of how they say they are motivated.
–Summarise and analyse student profiles.
–Perform exploratory data analysis to attempt to uncover more complex typologies based on statistical relationships between the gamification attributes of the learner profiles.
Student behaviour
–Track actual student behaviour: actions and trajectories in the virtual world.
–Summarise and analyse the effect of gamification on behaviour based on actions and trajectories.
Preferences v Behaviour
–Investigate how well student preferences map to actual behaviour.
–Outcome from this analysis has the potential the recommendation (or at guidelines on) a gamification typology model based on behaviours alone (ideally eliminating the need for a questionnaire).

Gamification Types (Marczewski’s Typology)

Marczewski’s mapping of gamification support features to user types

Gamification Features Used in Reflex
Feature
Description
Actions and Events
Badges
Awarded for performance and progress.
Monitor when awarded. How often are they checked? Do learners persue elusive badges?
Points
Accumulation of points for leaderboards etc.
Monitor when awarded. Do learners check points regularly? Do they strive to get maximum points?
Visible Status
Displaying user weekly/semester progress.
Monitor updates to progress. Do learners look at breakdown often? Provision of a target system. Do user’s discuss their visible status?
Leaderboards
Rank individual and group performance
Monitor changes in rank and correlated behaviour over time. Do learners discuss/check rank?
Unlockable Content
Prerequisite performance markers for content unlocks
Monitor award of this content. Do learners discuss or pursue such content? Do learners analyse what is required to unlock this content?
Customisation
Personalisation of world and avatar
Monitor changes to avatar and world. Frequency of changes. Discussion of changes.
Levels
Avatar/world level progress indicators
Monitor levelling up and behaviour monitoring

Gamification User Type Identification Questionnaire (GUTIQ) – Intrinsically Motivated
User Type
Main Gamification Emphasis
GUTIQ Statements
Philanthropist
Purpose
I like to help people who are struggling with progress in learning
I like to contribute to module forums to share my knowledge with others
I like to volunteer my time to help maintain online communities
I do not like sharing knowledge that may give me an edge with my classmates
Achiever
Mastery
I enjoy taking learning courses purely because I want to
I tend to work at learning activities until I perfect them
Winning is more important than taking part
I like to display rewards I receive
Socializer
Relatedness
I use social networking on a regular basis
In social media, I enjoy watching/following people as opposed to talking to others
I have more people following me than people I follow
I enjoy sharing content with my friends/followers
Free Spirit
Autonomy
I enjoy creating custom pictures for my online profiles
I prefer freedom to explore rather than a story when playing a game
I like to create and upload content to sites like Instagram, YouTube and Pinterest
If I found a bug in a game that let me win I would exploit it rather than report it

Gamification User Type Identification Questionnaire (GUTIQ) – Extrinsically Motivated
User Type
Gamification Emphasis
GUTIQ Statements
Self-Seeker
Egotistical Reward Focus
I enjoy receiving experience points and gaining new levels in games
I enjoy having badges/avatars to display as status symbols in games
I like to use leaderboards to see how I’m performing against others
I work in groups in games purely to get rewards, not to build friendships
Consumer
Attainment and Acquisition
I like to display badges I receive on my player profile
I enjoy playing sequels to games that reward me for playing previous games in the series
I prefer to only use a system when I can clearly see its benefits
I don’t enjoy learning when there are no rewards available
Networker
Social Network Building. Self- Centered World View
I enjoy playing as part of a group in gameplay
I like being identified as a member of a certain group based on its competitive reputation
I don’t enjoy playing online game modes on my own
I enjoy working on team based objectives whilst playing games
Exploiter
Short-cuts and Using Others
I like to try and find exploitable loopholes in a game
I don’t see any good reason to report a bug provided it doesn’t hamper my progress
I will engage with team based game interactions if it provides me with a reward
I like to use cheat codes to further my progress in games

Descriptive Statistics of GUTIQ Data

Descriptive Statistics of GUTIQ Data
Philanthropist
Achiever
Socialiser
Free Spirit
Self Seeker
Consumer
Networker
Exploiter
Mean
51.471
57.794
60.735
52.941
64.265
58.235
61.912
49.412
Median
50
60
60
50
70
60
60
50
Mode
40
60
60
50
80
60
60
60
Standard Deviation
23.197
19.382
18.634
22.729
25.761
22.655
20.389
24.304
Sample Variance
538.10
375.66
347.21
516.59
663.63
513.26
415.69
590.69
Kurtosis
-0.008
-0.479
0.736
-0.682
0.323
-0.010
1.539
-0.099
Skewness
0.060
0.246
-0.067
0.355
-0.733
-0.330
-0.637
-0.148
Range
100
80
100
90
100
100
100
100
Confidence Level(95%)
5.615
4.691
4.510
5.502
6.235
5.484
4.935
5.883

GUTIQ Typology Response Correlation Matrix
Philanthropist
Achiever
Socialiser
Free Spirit
Self Seeker
Consumer
Networker
Exploiter
Philanthropist
1.000
0.455
0.208
0.334
0.159
0.232
0.370
0.105
Achiever
0.455
1.000
0.343
0.310
0.354
0.494
0.468
0.023
Socialiser
0.208
0.343
1.000
0.559
0.345
0.332
0.153
0.130
Free Spirit
0.334
0.310
0.559
1.000
0.185
0.364
0.242
0.298
Self-Seeker
0.159
0.354
0.345
0.185
1.000
0.675
0.314
0.185
Consumer
0.232
0.494
0.332
0.364
0.675
1.000
0.547
0.266
Networker
0.370
0.468
0.153
0.242
0.314
0.547
1.000
0.069
Exploiter
0.105
0.023
0.130
0.298
0.185
0.266
0.069
1.000

Principal Component Analysis of Typologies
GUTIQ Typology
PC1
PC2
PC3
PC4
CP5
PC6
PC7
PC8
Philanthropist
-0.451
-0.401
-0.121
-0.298
0.723
Achiever
-0.308
-0.184
0.526
-0.374
0.504
0.412
0.168
Socialiser
-0.181
0.557
-0.277
-0.662
0.105
-0.260
0.248
Free Spirit
-0.354
0.464
0.340
-0.347
0.133
-0.575
-0.272
Self Seeker
-0.364
-0.418
-0.246
-0.628
0.171
0.390
-0.238
Consumer
-0.400
-0.313
0.206
0.189
-0.789
-0.162
Networker
-0.369
-0.534
0.240
0.411
0.303
-0.503
Exploiter
-0.338
0.396
0.206
0.544
0.595
0.193

Exploratory Factor Analysis of GUTIQ
GUTIQ Attribute
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Philanthropist
0.60
Achiever
0.32
0.72
Socialiser
0.49
Free Spirit
0.96
Self-Seeker
0.65
Consumer
0.93
Networker
0.44
0.47
Exploiter
0.32

3D Scatterplot of Exploratory Factor Analysis Projections

K-Means Clustering of GUTIQ Responses
CLUSTER
MEMBERS
MEMBER IDS
PHILANTHROPIST
ACHIEVER
SOCIALISER
FREE SPIRIT
SELF SEEKER
CONSUMER
NETWORKER
EXPLOITER
1
19
2,12,17,29,30,40, 41,50,55,61,65,71,85,87,93,101,102,110,111
50.53
61.05
60.00
47.37
74.74
65.79
64.74
48.95
2
2
44,81
10.00
35.00
60.00
40.00
5.00
5.00
0.00
5.00
3
2
94,106
85.00
90.00
75.00
60.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
0.00
4
2
10,18
70.00
70.00
50.00
45.00
30.00
25.00
70.00
0.00
5
1
31
60.00
60.00
40.00
50.00
0.00
30.00
60.00
100.00
6
3
23,27,63
16.67
53.33
50.00
40.00
30.00
56.67
63.33
30.00
7
6
19,59,62,80,105, 115
48.33
65.00
75.00
90.00
90.00
80.00
56.67
75.00
8
15
4,11,22,24,42,54,57,68,69,70,88, 107,109,114,116
43.33
38.00
56.00
43.33
60.67
45.33
52.00
50.00
9
3
25,26,82
46.67
36.67
26.67
20.00
46.67
30.00
56.67
36.67
10
2
76,84
85.00
90.00
65.00
65.00
100.00
95.00
100.00
90.00
11
3
37,60,72
33.33
76.67
83.33
56.67
93.33
73.33
86.67
33.33
12
1
67
40.00
30.00
30.00
80.00
30.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
13
7
3,49,73,74,78,92,98
84.29
70.00
80.00
81.43
52.86
58.57
70.00
58.57
14
2
39,112
60.00
80.00
45.00
20.00
60.00
50.00
30.00
65.00

Relationship between Gamification Profile and Behaviour
•We are still working on the analysis of the tracking but initial indications are that most clusters are reasonably well correlated between GUTIQ responses and behavior.
•An exception are the 16 learners in clusters 11 and 12 displayed unexpected levels of activity.

Average Number of Resources used Per Area
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Number of Resources Used
Web Prepare
Web Learn
Web Test
Games Prepare
Games Learn
Games Test
Cluster Number

Conclusion
•We have used Marczewski’s Typology as the basis for investigating variation in motivating factors between learners with a virtual world.
•We have proposed the use of a questionnaire, GUTIQ, to acquire the gamification type of learners
•There is some evidence of interesting variation between learner gamification type and good correlation with behavior.
•It was also found that behavior of each gamification type was consistent between two separate learning modules.
•Further investigation is required to analyse tracked behaviour and to examine the relationship between gamification attributes, and to build a more robust typology.

An Investigation Of Gamification Typologies For Enhancing Learner Motivation

More Related Content

Similar to An Investigation Of Gamification Typologies For Enhancing Learner Motivation

More from Interactive Technologies and Games: Education, Health and Disability

Recently uploaded

An Investigation Of Gamification Typologies For Enhancing Learner Motivation