gMOOCs – Flow and Persuasion to Gamify MOOCs

Gamification has gained great interest recently in several fields. However, while the literature reports that a gamification design relying on external motivation only can lead users to cognitive dissonance, most gamification approaches use points, badges and leaderboards as dominant game elements. We present our developed testable predictions with the aim of investigating additional motivational theories (flow and persuasion) to argue for a deeper integration of gamification and the learning content at hand. Relying on expert selected game elements, we consequently derive design considerations to create gMOOCs, gamified massive online open courses, designed according to the principles of flow and persuasion. Our findings are the basis of our experiment and a contribution to the development of a new theoretical design for gamificatio

Revisiting consistency with random utility maximisation: theory and implications for practical work

While the paradigm of utility maximisation has formed the basis of the majority of applications in discrete choice modelling for over 40 years, its core assumptions have been questioned by work in both behavioural economics and mathematical psychology as well as more recently by developments in the RUM-oriented choice modelling community. This paper reviews the basic properties with a view to explaining the historical pre-eminence of utility maximisation and addresses the question of what departures from the paradigm may be necessary or wise in order to accommodate richer behavioural patterns. We find that many, though not all, of the behavioural traits discussed in the literature can be approximated sufficiently closely by a random utility framework, allowing analysts to retain the many advantages that such an approach possesses

Sorry, Your Order Has a Substitution : The Effects of Substitution Policy in Online Grocery Retailing

Post-purchase out-of-stock (OOS) often happens in an online store context, where products appear to be available at the time a consumer makes an order and checks out, but then become OOS when the order is to be dispatched. To mitigate negative responses from consumers, online grocery retailers often provide consumers a substitution alternative to the OOS item. This paper investigates the effects of two substitution policies where we focus on different matching strategies of the substitution with the OOS item. In policy one, we measure the effect of matching on the dominant attribute (brand vs. flavour). In policy two, we test the effect of matching with a product from the consumers’ past purchase portfolio. We investigate these two substitution policies and their interaction in two categories that differ on the level of differentiation (i.e., the degree to which distinctions are objectively measurable – vertical differentiation/VD vs. not easy to evaluate – horizontal differentiation/HD). Our dependent variable is the probability to accept the substitute. The study employs a computer-simulated purchase experiment, using two product categories: margarine (VD) and cereals (HD). 2,113 UK consumers representative of general UK shopper profile participated. Findings show that in the margarine category where brand is the dominant attribute, the same brand substitution is more likely to be accepted than the same flavour substitution. In contrast, in the cereal category where flavour is more likely to be the dominant attribute, same flavour substitution is more likely to be accepted than same brand substitution. The results also show that, in both categories, matching the substitution product with a product from consumers’ past purchase portfolio is more likely to be accepted than offering a substitute that consumers have not bought before. We also found a significant interaction between the two policy types but for cereals only. The effects of two substitution policies are mediated by perceived fairness of the substitution. The paper discusses contributions and implication for future research

Neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience:contributions to neurology

Background: 'Neuromarketing' is a term that has often been used in the media in recent years. These public discussions have generally centered around potential ethical aspects and the public fear of negative consequences for society in general, and consumers in particular. However, positive contributions to the scientific discourse from developing a biological model that tries to explain context-situated human behavior such as consumption have often been neglected. We argue for a differentiated terminology, naming commercial applications of neuroscientific methods 'neuromarketing' and scientific ones 'consumer neuroscience'. While marketing scholars have eagerly integrated neuroscientific evidence into their theoretical framework, neurology has only recently started to draw its attention to the results of consumer neuroscience.Discussion: In this paper we address key research topics of consumer neuroscience that we think are of interest for neurologists; namely the reward system, trust and ethical issues. We argue that there are overlapping research topics in neurology and consumer neuroscience where both sides can profit from collaboration. Further, neurologists joining the public discussion of ethical issues surrounding neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience could contribute standards and experience gained in clinical research.Summary: We identify the following areas where consumer neuroscience could contribute to the field of neurology:. First, studies using game paradigms could help to gain further insights into the underlying pathophysiology of pathological gambling in Parkinson's disease, frontotemporal dementia, epilepsy, and Huntington's disease.Second, we identify compulsive buying as a common interest in neurology and consumer neuroscience. Paradigms commonly used in consumer neuroscience could be applied to patients suffering from Parkinson's disease and frontotemporal dementia to advance knowledge of this important behavioral symptom.Third, trust research in the medical context lacks empirical behavioral and neuroscientific evidence. Neurologists entering this field of research could profit from the extensive knowledge of the biological foundation of trust that scientists in economically-orientated neurosciences have gained.Fourth, neurologists could contribute significantly to the ethical debate about invasive methods in neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience. Further, neurologists should investigate biological and behavioral reactions of neurological patients to marketing and advertising measures, as they could show special consumer vulnerability and be subject to target marketing

The risks of eating and drinking

Consumer perceptions and 'reality