Including Non-gamers: A Case Study Comparing Touch and Motion Input in a 3D Game for Research

  • Isabelle KniestedtEmail author
  • Elizabeth Camilleri
  • Marcello A. Gómez Maureira
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10714)


While digital games are becoming increasingly popular as a choice for research stimuli, their complex nature brings about challenges. The design of the games and designers’ reliance on established conventions may hinder their use in research, particularly with ‘non-gaming’ test subjects. In this study, we explored how players performed using a 1-to-1 motion control scheme using a tablet’s gyroscope to control the camera as compared to a traditional touch-based joystick in a 3D first-person game. Results showed that players – particularly those less experienced with games – found the game more enjoyable and exciting with motion controls than with joystick controls. Additionally, while experienced players performed better than inexperienced ones when using the joystick, this difference was not present when using the motion controls. We therefore believe motion-based control schemes can be beneficial in making research using games more accessible to a wider range of participants, and to limit influence of prior gaming experience on gathered data.


Digital games Input controls Research stimulus 



We would like to thank all test participants that took part in both the pre-tests and the final experiment for their time and feedback. We also want to thank Francesca Borg Taylor-East for her contribution to the initial development of the game. Last, but not least, we are very grateful to Prof. Ian Thornton for his continued enthusiasm and support as we developed this game for his research and continued to improve it into a universal tool to be released to the academic community.


  1. 1.
    Calvillo-Gámez, E., Gow, J., Cairns, P.: Introduction to special issue: video games as research instruments. Entertain. Comput. 2(1), 1–2 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Casual Games Association: Casual games market report 2007 (2007).
  3. 3.
    Casual Games Association: Towards the global games market in 2017: a broad look at market growth by screen and region (2014).
  4. 4.
    Chu, K., Wong, C.Y.: Mobile input devices for gaming experience. In: 2011 International Conference on User Science and Engineering (i-USEr), pp. 83–88. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Donchin, E.: Video games as research tools: the space fortress game. Behav. Res. Methods 27(2), 217–223 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Elson, M., Quandt, T.: Digital games in laboratory experiments: controlling a complex stimulus through modding. Psychol. Popul. Media Cult. 5(1), 52 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Harteveld, C., Sutherland, S.C.: Personalized gaming for motivating social and behavioral science participation. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Workshop on Theory-Informed User Modeling for Tailoring and Personalizing Interfaces, pp. 31–38. ACM (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Holmgård, C., Togelius, J., Henriksen, L.: Computational intelligence and cognitive performance assessment games. In: 2016 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence and Games (CIG), pp. 1–8. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hynninen, T.: First-person shooter controls on touchscreen devices: a heuristic evaluation of three games on the iPod touch. Master thesis (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Järvelä, S.: Measuring digital game experience: response coherence of psychophysiology and self-reports. Master thesis (2017)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Järvelä, S., Ekman, I., Kivikangas, J.M., Ravaja, N.: Digital games as experiment stimulus. In: Proceedings of DiGRA Nordic 2012, pp. 6–8 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Järvelä, S., Ekman, I., Kivikangas, J.M., Ravaja, N.: A practical guide to using digital games as an experiment stimulus. Trans. Digit. Games Res. Assoc. 1(2), 85–115 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jones, M.B., Kennedy, R.S., Bittner Jr., A.C.: A video game for performance testing. Am. J. Psychol. 94, 143–152 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Juul, J.: A Casual Revolution: Reinventing Video Games and Their Players. MIT Press, Cambridge (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kivikangas, J.M., Chanel, G., Cowley, B., Ekman, I., Salminen, M., Järvelä, S., Ravaja, N.: A review of the use of psychophysiological methods in game research. J. Gaming Virtual Worlds 3(3), 181–199 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leys, C., Ley, C., Klein, O., Bernard, P., Licata, L.: Detecting outliers: do not use standard deviation around the mean, use absolute deviation around the median. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49(4), 764–766 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Love, J., Selker, R., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Dropmann, D., et al.: JASP (v.0.7) (2015). Computer softwareGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McCarthy, C., Pradhan, N., Redpath, C., Adler, A.: Validation of the Empatica E4 wristband. In: 2016 IEEE EMBS International Student Conference (ISC), pp. 1–4. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    McMahan, R.P., Alon, A.J.D., Lazem, S., Beaton, R.J., Machaj, D., Schaefer, M., Silva, M.G., Leal, A., Hagan, R., Bowman, D.A.: Evaluating natural interaction techniques in video games. In: 2010 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI), pp. 11–14. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    McMahan, R.P., Ragan, E.D., Leal, A., Beaton, R.J., Bowman, D.A.: Considerations for the use of commercial video games in controlled experiments. Entertain. Comput. 2(1), 3–9 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Metallinou, A., Narayanan, S.: Annotation and processing of continuous emotional attributes: challenges and opportunities. In: 2013 10th IEEE International Conference and Workshops on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition (FG), pp. 1–8, April 2013Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nintendo: Mario Kart Wii. Published by Nintendo (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Raffert, A., Zaharia, M., Griffiths, T.: Optimally designing games for cognitive science research. In: Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society, vol. 34 (2012)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ragot, M., Martin, N., Em, S., Pallamin, N., Diverrez, J.-M.: Emotion recognition using physiological signals: laboratory vs. wearable sensors. In: Ahram, T., Falcão, C. (eds.) AHFE 2017. AISC, vol. 608, pp. 15–22. Springer, Cham (2018). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rouder, J.N., Speckman, P.L., Sun, D., Morey, R.D., Iverson, G.: Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 16(2), 225–237 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Teather, R.J., MacKenzie, I.S.: Comparing order of control for tilt and touch games. In: Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Interactive Entertainment, pp. 1–10. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Thornton, I.M., Kniestedt, I., Camilleri, E., Gòmez Maureira, M., Kristjánsson, Á., Prpic, V.: Simulating foraging in the wild using an ipad. Presented at ECVP 2017 (2017)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wagenmakers, E.J., Love, J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J., Selker, R., Gronau, Q.F., Dropmann, D., Boutin, B., et al.: Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: example applications with JASP. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 24, 1–19 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Washburn, D.A.: The games psychologists play (and the data they provide). Behav. Res. Methods 35(2), 185–193 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yannakakis, G.N.: Preference learning for affective modeling. In: 2009 3rd International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction and Workshops, pp. 1–6, September 2009Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yannakakis, G.N., Martínez, H.P.: Ratings are overrated!. Front. ICT 2, 13 (2015). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yannakakis, G.N., Paiva, A.: Emotion in games. In: Calvo, R.A., D’Mello, S., Gratch, J., Kappas, A. (eds.) Handbook on Affective Computing, pp. 459–471. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isabelle Kniestedt
    • 1
    Email author
  • Elizabeth Camilleri
    • 1
  • Marcello A. Gómez Maureira
    • 1
  1. 1.University of MaltaMsidaMalta

Personalised recommendations