PTD: Player Type Design to Foster Engaging and Playful Learning Experiences

  • Johanna Pirker
  • Christian Gütl
  • Johannes Löffler
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 715)


In this paper we present a design model, PTD (Player Type Design), to create engaging gaming and non-gaming experiences for attracting different types of players to learning settings. Based on Bartle’s four player types, elements grounded on game design theory are introduced to design collaborative, competitive, explorative, and rewarding learning experiences. We illustrate the use of the framework on two different experiences. The main contribution of this paper is the design model “PTD”, which can be used to create and also analyse engaging experiences in different contexts (gaming and non-gaming) based on different player types as known from game design theory. The model is evaluated with two different experiences: (1) a blended learning experience, (2) a mobile game with purpose.


Game-based learning Design guidelines Engagement Player types Education Computer games 


  1. 1.
    Annetta, L.A.: The “I’s” have it: a framework for serious educational game design. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 14(2), 105–112 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bartle, R.: Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: players who suit MUDs. J. MUD Res. 1(1), 19 (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bartle, R.: Designing Virtual Worlds. New Riders, Indianapolis (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Beyond Boredom and Anxiety: Experiencing Flow in Work and Play. Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco (1975)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Csikiszentmihalyi, M.: Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper & Row, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., Nacke, L.: From game design elements to gamefulness: defining gamification. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, pp. 9–15. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dixon, D.: Player types and gamification. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2011 Workshop on Gamification (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Felder, R.M., Silverman, L.K.: Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Eng. Educ. 78(7), 674–681 (1988)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gee, J.P.: What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy. Palgrave Macmillan, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johnson, R.T., Johnson, D.W., Stanne, M.B.: Comparison of computer-assisted cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Am. Educ. Res. J. 23(3), 382–392 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kapp, K.M.: The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-Based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education. Wiley, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kolb, D.A.: Learning Styles Inventory. McBer and Company, Boston (1976)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kotini, I., Tzelepi, S.: A gamification-based framework for developing learning activities of computational thinking. In: Gamification in Education and Business, pp. 219–252. Springer, Cham (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kumar, J.: Gamification at work: designing engaging business software. In: International Conference of Design, User Experience, and Usability, pp. 528–537. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Linehan, C., Kirman, B., Lawson, S., Chan, G.: Practical, appropriate, empirically-validated guidelines for designing educational games. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1979–1988 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pirker, J., Gütl, C.: Educational gamified science simulations. In: Gamification in Education and Business, pp. 253–275. Springer, Cham (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pirker, J., Riffnaller-Schiefer, M., Gütl, C.: Motivational active learning: engaging university students in computer science education. In: Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education, pp. 297–302. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pirker, J., Riffnaller-Schiefer, M., Tomes, L.M., Gütl, C.: Motivational active learning in blended and virtual learning scenarios: engaging students in digital learning. In: Handbook of Research on Engaging Digital Natives in Higher Education Settings, vol. 416 (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stewart, B.: Personality and play styles: a unified model. Gamasutra, 1 September 2011.
  20. 20.
    Yee, N.: Motivations of play in MMORPGs. In: Proceedings of DiGRA (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zichermann, G., Cunningham, C.: Gamification by Design: Implementing Game Mechanics in Web and Mobile Apps. O’Reilly Media, Inc., Sebastopol (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johanna Pirker
    • 1
  • Christian Gütl
    • 1
    • 2
  • Johannes Löffler
    • 1
  1. 1.Graz University of TechnologyGrazAustria
  2. 2.Curtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations