Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bedeutung von Präferenzen für Spielelemente – Analyse und Empfehlungen für die Anpassung von Spielelementen durch Nutzerpräferenzen

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Chancen und Herausforderungen des digitalen Lernens

Part of the book series: Kompetenzmanagement in Organisationen ((KOOR))

  • 11k Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Gamification gehört zu einer der bekanntesten Methoden, um Nutzer/-innen von Informationssystemen zu einer regelmäßigeren Nutzung zu motivieren. Dieses wird oftmals auch für Lernmanagementsysteme (LMS) eingesetzt, um Nutzer/-innen durch die Integration von Spielelementen zu einer regelmäßigen Systemnutzung zu motivieren. Auch wenn die Methode oft Anklang findet, werden besonders Nutzer/-innen nicht bei der Gestaltung von Gamification-Ansätzen berücksichtigt. Häufig werden Spielelemente in Informationssysteme integriert, ohne zu berücksichtigen, ob die identifizierten und kombinierten Spielelemente zu der anvisierten Zielgruppe und dem Kontext passen. In diesem Kapitel wird eine Möglichkeit vorgestellt, mit der Nutzerpräferenzen bei Spielelementen erfasst werden können. Dazu wird das sogenannte „Best-Worst-Scaling“ in Verbindung mit einer Kombinationsanalyse genutzt, um Erkenntnisse über Nutzerpräferenzen von Lernenden in Bezug auf Spielelemente zu erhalten.

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 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 49.99
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

Literatur

  1. Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Research commentary: Technology-mediated learning – A call for greater depth and breadth of research. Information Systems Research, 12(1), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Attali, Y., & Areli-Attali, M. (2015). Gamification in assessment: Do points affect test performance. Computers & Education, 83, 57–63.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bacon, D. R. (2003). A comparison of approaches to importance-performance analysis. International Journal of Market Research, 45(1), 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bedwell, W. L., Pavlas, D., Heyne, K., Lazzara, E. H., & Salas, E. (2012). Toward a taxonomy linking game attributes to Learning: An empirical study. Simulation & Gaming, 43(6), 729–760.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Blohm, I., & Leimeister, J. M. (2013). Gamification: Design of IT-based enhancing services for motivational support and behavioral change. Business & Information Systems Engineering (BISE), 5(4), 275–278.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bunchball, I. (2010). Gamification 101: An introduction to the use of game dynamics to influence behavior. Des Moines: White Paper, Bunchball Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Burgers, C., Eden, A., van Engelenburg, M. D., & Buningh, S. (2015). How feedback boosts motivation in play in a brain-training game. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 94–103.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Christy, K. R., & Fox, J. (2014). Leaderboards in a virtual classroom: A test of stereotype threat and social comparison explanations for women’s math performance. Computers & Education, 78, 66–77.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cohen, S. H. (2003). Maximum difference scaling: Improved measures of importance and preferences for segmentation. Sawtooth Research Paper Series, S. 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cruz, C., Hanus, M. D., & Fox, J. (2015). The need to achieve: Players’ perceptions and uses of extrinsic meta-game reward systems for video game consoles. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Davis, K., & Singh, S. (2015). Digital badges in afterschool learning: Documenting the perspectives and experiences of students and educators. Computers & Education, 88, 72–83.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.

    Google Scholar 

  13. de-Marcos, L., Garcia-Lopez, E., & Garcia-Cabot, A. (2016). On the effectiveness of game-like and social approaches in learning: Comparing educational gaming, gamification & social networking. Computers & Education, 95, 99–113.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Demetrovics, Z., Urbán, R., Nagygyörgy, K., Farkas, J., Zilahy, D., Mervó, B., et al. (2011). Why do you play? The development of the motives for online gaming questionnaire (MOGQ). Behavior research methods, 43(3), 814–825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining “Gamification”. In Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference envisioning future media environments (S. 9–15).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., de-Marcos, L., Fernández-Sanz, L., Páges, C., & Martínez-Herráiz, J.-J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers & Education, 63, 380–392.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fernandes, J., Duarte, D., Ribeiro, C., Farinha, C., Madeiras Pereira, J., & Mira da Silva, M. (2012). iThink: A game-based approach towards improving collaboration and participation in requirement elicitation. Procedia Computer Science, 15, 66–77.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Finn, A., & Louviere, J. J. (1992). Determining the Appropriate Response to Evidence of Public Concern: The Case of Food Safety. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 11(1), 12–25.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fleming, N. (2014). Gamification: Is it game over? http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20121204-can-gaming-transform-your-life.

  20. Flynn, T. N., Louviere, J. J., Peters, T. J., & Coast, J. (2007). Best-worst scaling: What it can do for health care research and how to do it. Journal of Health Economics, 26(1), 171–189.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fogel, G. (2015). Will 80% of gamification projects fail? Giving credit to Gartner’s 2012 gamification forecast. http://www.gameffective.com/gamification-basics/will-80-of-gamification-projects-fail/.

  22. Gartner. (2012). Gartner says by 2014, 80 percent of current gamified applications will fail to meet business objectives primarily due to poor design. http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2251015.

  23. Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1990). Conjoint analysis in marketing: New developments with implications for research and practice. The Journal of Marketing, 54, 3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gupta, S., & Bostrom, R. P. (2009). Technology-mediated learning: A comprehensive theoretical model. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(9), 686–714.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Haaranen, L., Ihantola, P., Hakulinen, L., & Korhonen, A. (2014). How (not) to introduce badges to online exercises. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical symposium on computer science education (ACM) (S. 33–38).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Harlow: Pearson College Division.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis. A Global Perspective. New Jersey: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hamari, J. (2013). Transforming homo economicus into homo ludens: A field experiment on gamification in a utilitarian peer-to-peer trading service. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 12(4), 236–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hanus, M. D., & Fox, J. (2015). Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort and academic performance. Computers & Education, 80, 152–161.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ibánez, M.-B., Di-Serio, Á., & Delgado-Kloos, C. (2014). Gamification for engaging computer science students in learning activities: A case study. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 7(3), 291–301.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Jones, B. A., Madden, G. J., Wengreen, M., & Heidi J. (2014). The FIT Game: Preliminary evaluation of a gamification approach to increasing fruit and vegetable consumption in school. Preventive Medicine, 68, 76–79.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2014). Demographic differences in perceived benefits from gamification. Computer in Human behavior, 35, 179–188.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lansing, J., Schneider, S., & Sunyaev, A. (2013). Cloud service certification: Measuring consumers’ preferences for assurances european conference on information systems (S. 1–12).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lee, J. J., Ceyhan, P., Jordan-Cooley, W., & Sung, W. (2013). GREENIFY: A real-world action game for climate change education. Simulation & Gaming, 44(2–3), 349–365.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Liu, D., Li, X., & Santhanam, R. (2013). Digital games and beyond: What happens when players compete. MIS Quarterly, 37(1), 111–124.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Louviere, J. J., Lings, I., Islam, T., Gudergan, S., & Flynn, T. (2013). An introduction to the application of (case 1) best-worst scaling in marketing research. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 30, 292–303.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Marley, A. A. J., & Louviere, J. J. (2005). Some probabilistic models of best, worst, and best–worst choices. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 49(6), 464–480.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Matzner, M., Hoffen, M. von, Heide, T., Plenter, F., & Chasin, F. (2015). A method for measuring user preferences in information systems design choices. In European conference on information systems (S. 1–16).

    Google Scholar 

  39. McKernan, B., Martey, R. M., Stromer-Galley, J., Kenski, K., Clegg, B. A., Folkestad, J. E., et al. (2015). We don’t need no stinkin’badges: The impact of reward features and feeling rewarded in educational games. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 299–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Mekler, E. D., Brühlmann, F., Tuch, A. N., & Opwis, K. (2015). Towards understanding the effects of individual gamification elements on intrinsic motivation and performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Melero, J., Hernándes-Leo, D., & Manatunga, K. (2015). Group-based mobile learning: Do group size and sharing mobile devices matter? Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 377–385.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mummendey, H. D. (1990). Psychologie der Selbstdarstellung, Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Orme, B. (2005). Accuracy of HB estimation in MaxDiff experiments. Sawtooth Research Paper Series, S. 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Passos, E. B., Medeiros, D. B., Neto, P. A. S., & Clua, E. W. G. (2011). Turning real-world software development into a game. In Proceedings of SBGames (S. 260–269).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Pedro, L., Santos, Carlos, Aresta, Mónica, & Almeida, S. (2015). Peer-supported badge attribution in a collaborative learning platform: A SAPO campus case. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 562–567.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Peham, M., Breitfuss, G., & Michalczuk, R. (2014). The “ecoGator” app: Gamification for enhanced energy efficiency in Europe. In Proceedings of the second international conference on technological ecosystems for enhancing multiculturality. ACM (S. 179–183).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Santhanam, R., Liu, D., & Wei-Cheng, M. S. (2016). Gamification of technology-mediated training: Not all competitions are the same. Information Systems Research, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Schlagenhaufer, C., & Amberg, M. (2015). A descriptive literature review and classification framework for gamification in information systems. In European Conference on Information Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Schöbel, S., & Söllner, M. (2016). How to gamify information systems – Adapting gamification to individual user preferences. In European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Seaborn, K., & Fels, D. I. (2015). Gamification in theory and action: A survey. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 74, 14–31.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Severin, F., Schmidtke, J., Mühlbacher, A., & Rogowski, W. H. (2013). Eliciting preferences for priority setting in genetic testing: A pilot study comparing best-worst scaling and discrete-choice experiment. European Journal of Human Genetics, 21(11), 1202–1208.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Sims, R. (2003). Promises of interactivity: Aligning learner perceptions and expectations with strategies for flexible and online learning. Distance Education, 24(1), 87–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Thiebes, S., Lins, S., & Basten, D. (2014). Gamifying information systems: A synthesis of gamification mechanics and dynamics. In European Conference on Information Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Urh, M., Vukovic, G., & Jereb, E. (2015). The model for introduction of gamification into e-learning in higher education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 388–397.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Wang, A. I. (2015). The wear out effect of a game-based student response system. Computers & Education, 82, 217–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fachgebiet Wirtschaftsinformatik, Universität Kassel, Kassel, Deutschland

    Sofia Schöbel

  2. Fachgebiet Wirtschaftsinformatik und Systementwicklung, Universität Kassel, Kassel, Deutschland

    Matthias Söllner

Authors
  1. Sofia Schöbel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthias Söllner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sofia Schöbel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Fachgebiet Wirtschaftsinformatik, Universität Kassel, Kassel, Hessen, Germany

    Jan Marco Leimeister

  2. Fachgebiet Kommunikationstechnik, Universität Kassel, Kassel, Hessen, Germany

    Klaus David

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Schöbel, S., Söllner, M. (2019). Bedeutung von Präferenzen für Spielelemente – Analyse und Empfehlungen für die Anpassung von Spielelementen durch Nutzerpräferenzen. In: Leimeister, J., David, K. (eds) Chancen und Herausforderungen des digitalen Lernens. Kompetenzmanagement in Organisationen. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-59390-5_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-59390-5_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-59389-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-59390-5

  • eBook Packages: Psychology (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation