How Multidisciplinary is Gamification Research? : Results from a Scoping Review

Gamification has been repeatedly framed as an emerging multidisciplinary research field. However, it is unclear how multidisciplinary the field actually is. To answer this question, this paper presents initial results of a broader scoping review of gamification research published between 2010 and 2016. Close to 2,000 peer-reviewed English-language journal and conference papers were identified across 11 databases and categorized by discipline. Results indicate an explosive growth of literature peaking in 2015. Early on, Information and Computing Science dominated the field, to be overtaken by the sum of other disciplines in 2013, education, economics and tourism in specific. This indicates that gamification was initially a field within computer science and HCI and has only recently become truly multi-disciplinary

Wearables at work:preferences from an employee’s perspective

This exploratory study aims to obtain a first impression of the wishes and needs of employees on the use of wearables at work for health promotion. 76 employ-ees with a mean age of 40 years old (SD ±11.7) filled in a survey after trying out a wearable. Most employees see the potential of using wearable devices for workplace health promotion. However, according to employees, some negative aspects should be overcome before wearables can effectively contribute to health promotion. The most mentioned negative aspects were poor visualization and un-pleasantness of wearing. Specifically for the workplace, employees were con-cerned about the privacy of data collection

Pulling Back the Curtain on the Wizards of Oz

The Wizard of Oz method is an increasingly common practice in HCI and CSCW studies as part of iterative design processes for interactive systems. Instead of designing a fully-fledged system, the ‘technical work’ of key system components is completed by human operators yet presented to study participants as if computed by a machine. However, little is known about how Wizard of Oz studies are interactionally and collaboratively achieved in situ by researchers and participants. By adopting an ethnomethodological perspective, we analyse our use of the method in studies with a voice-controlled vacuum robot and two researchers present. We present data that reveals how such studies are organised and presented to participants and unpack the coordinated orchestration work that unfolds ‘behind the scenes’ to complete the study. We examine how the researchers attend to participant requests and technical breakdowns, and discuss the performative, collaborative, and methodological nature of their work. We conclude by offering insights from our application of the approach to others in the HCI and CSCW communities for using the method

Positive Gaming: Workshop on Gamification and Games for Wellbeing

© Owners/Authors, 2017. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here for your personal use. Not for redistribution. The definitive Version of Record was published in CHI PLAY '17 Extended Abstracts - Extended Abstracts Publication of the Annual Symposium on Computer- Human Interaction in Play. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3130859.3131442Gamification and games have been used and studied in a variety of applications related with health and wellbeing. Nevertheless, there are very few studies aimed at designing games (whether serious games or recreational games) or gameful applications for improving wellbeing or flourishing – the pursuit of a happy and meaningful life, rather than the avoidance of illness. Therefore, this full-day Workshop aims to form a community, discuss theoretical and practical considerations, and promote the development of research projects focused on “Positive Gaming” – the use of gamification and games as tools for realizing Positive Computing objectives. This will create the opportunities for interested researchers to form a common understanding, develop methods and procedures, and establish a roadmap for future research in Positive Gaming

Beyond Genre: Classifying Virtual Reality Experiences

12 pagesBecause virtual reality (VR) shares common features with video games, consumer content is usually classified according to traditional game genres and standards. However, VR offers different experiences based on the medium’s unique affordances. To account for this disparity, the paper presents a comparative analysis of titles from the Steam digital store across three platform types: VR only, VR supported, and non-VR. We analyzed data from a subset of the most popular applications within each category (N=141, 93, and 1217, respectively). The three classification types we analyzed were academic game genres, developer defined categories, and user-denoted tags. Results identify the most common content classifications (e.g., Action and Shooter within VR only applications), the relative availability of each between platforms (e.g., Casual is more common in VR only than VR supported or non-VR), general platform popularity (e.g., VR only received less positive ratings than VR supported and nonVR), and which content types are associated with higher user ratings across platforms (e.g., Action and Music/Rhythm are most positively rated in VR only). Our findings ultimately provide a foundational framework for future theoretical constructions of classification systems based on content, market, interactivity, sociality, and service dependencies, which underlay how consumer VR is currently categorized