Gamification and Family Housework Applications

  • Anne Berit Kigen BjeringEmail author
  • Marikken Høiseth
  • Ole Andreas Alsos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9353)


This conceptual work represents an initial exploration into a little researched area, namely app design for families. We explore how gamification is incorporated in applications that target family housework, also known as chores. During the last five years an increasing number of apps aim to transform routine based housework into entertaining activities. Many parents think it is important that children, at an early age, learn about family values and responsibilities that comes with the role as a family member. However, a gamified approach towards housework can influence family interaction in both positive and negative ways. We analyze a selection of so-called chore apps by building on an existing classification framework for educational apps and applying concepts of game design elements. Our findings show (1) that existing apps tend to be mostly instructive and partly manipulable, (2) that they tend to focus on external rather than intrinsic motivation, (3) that they target family members individually, rather than the family as a whole. We discuss the results from a motivation perspective by drawing attention to three concepts that relate to intrinsic motivation: Competence, autonomy and relatedness.


Gamification housework family motivation children parents 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Deterding, S., et al.: From game design elements to gamefulness: defining gamification. In: Pro. MindTrek 2011, pp. 9–15. ACM Press (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hook, J.L.: Gender Inequality in the Welfare State: Sex Segregation in Housework, 1965–2003. American Journal of Sociology 115(5), 1480–1523 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bernhardt, E., Noack, T., Lyngstad, T.H.: Shared housework in Norway and Sweden: advancing the gender revolution. Journal of European Social Policy 18(3), 275–288 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Solberg, A.: Negotiating childhood: Changing constructions of age for Norwegian children. In: James, A., Prout, A. (eds.) Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood: Contemporary Issues in the Sociological Study of Childhood, pp. 126–144. Falmer Press, London (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Miller, P., Bowd, J.: Family time economies and democratic division of work. Journal of Family Studies 20(2), 128–147 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cunningham, M.: Parental Influences on the Gendered Division of Housework. American Sociological Review 66(2), 184–203 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bjering, A.B.: Design of a digital application to motivate families to do domestic chores together (Master thesis), Department of Product Design. Norwegian University of Science and Technology (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bringsværd, T.Å., Soli, T.: Når to skal rydde. Gyldendal, Oslo (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wolde, G., Birke, E.: Emma støvsuger. Aschehoug, Oslo (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M.: Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human Behavior. Springer Science & Business Media (1985)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Werbach, K., Hunter, D.: For the win: how game thinking can revolutionize your business. Wharton Digital Press, Philadelphia (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Skinner, B.F.: The behavior of organisms: an experimental analysis. Appleton-Century, Oxford (1938)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bandura, A.: Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50(2), 248–287 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L.: Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55(1), 68–78 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L.: Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25(1), 54–67 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McGrath, J., Bates, B.: The little book of big management theories... and how to use them. Pearson, Harlow (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hackman, J.R., Oldham, G.R.: Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 16(2), 250–279 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Herzberg, F.I.: Work and the nature of man. World Pub. Co., Cleveland (1966)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Skaalvik, E.M., Skaalvik, S.: Skolens læringsmiljø: selvopfattelse, motivasjon og læringsstrategier. Akademisk Forlag, København (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bandura, A.: Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 84(2), 191–215 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Covington, M.V.: The Self-Worth Theory of Achievement Motivation: Findings and Implications. The Elementary School Journal 85(1), 5–20 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Holloway, D., Green, L., Livingstone, S.: Zero to eight. Young children and their internet use. EU Kids Online, London (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zichermann, G., Cunningham, C.: Gamification by Design: implementing game mechanics in web and mobile apps. O’Reilly Media, Sabastobol (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Xu, F., Weber, J., Buhalis, D.: Gamification in tourism. In: Xiang, Z., Tussyadiah, I. (eds.) Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2014, pp. 525–537. Springer (2013)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Juul, J.: The game, the player, the world: Looking for a heart of gameness. PLURAIS-Revista Multidisciplinar da UNEB 1(2) (2010)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Salen, K., Zimmerman, E.: Rules of play: game design fundamentals. MIT Press, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    McGonigal, J.: Reality is broken: why games make us better and how they can change the world. Vintage books, London (2012)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Reeves, B., Read, J.L.: Total engagement: using games and virtual worlds to change the way people work and businesses compete. Harvard Business Press, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schell, J.: The Pleasure Revolution: Why games Will Lead the Way. [Video]. November 2011.
  31. 31.
    Reimer, C., Play to order: what huizinga has to say about gamification. In: Pro. Games + Learning + Society Conference, pp. 272–274. ETC Press (2011)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Huizinga, J.: Homo ludens: a study of the play-element in culture. Beacon Press, Boston (1955)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Robertson, M. Can’t play, won’t play, October 2010 [cited 2015 05.05.].
  34. 34.
    Goodwin, K., Highfield, K.: iTouch and iLearn: an examination of “educational” apps. In: Early Education and Technology for Children Conference (2012)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Goodwin, K., Highfield, K.: A framework for examining technologies and early mathematics learning. In: Reconceptualizing Early Mathematics Learning, pp. 205–226. Springer (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne Berit Kigen Bjering
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marikken Høiseth
    • 1
  • Ole Andreas Alsos
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Product DesignNorwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)TrondheimNorway
  2. 2.Department of Computer and Information ScienceNorwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)TrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations