Luiz Rodrigues, Paula T Palomino, Armando M Toda, Ana C T Klock, Marcela Pessoa, Filipe D Pereira, Elaine H T Oliveira, David F Oliveira, Alexandra I Cristea, Isabela Gasparini, Seiji Isotani
{"title":"How Personalization Affects Motivation in Gamified Review Assessments.","authors":"Luiz Rodrigues, Paula T Palomino, Armando M Toda, Ana C T Klock, Marcela Pessoa, Filipe D Pereira, Elaine H T Oliveira, David F Oliveira, Alexandra I Cristea, Isabela Gasparini, Seiji Isotani","doi":"10.1007/s40593-022-00326-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Personalized gamification aims to address shortcomings of the one-size-fits-all (OSFA) approach in improving students' motivations throughout the learning process. However, studies still focus on personalizing to a single user dimension, ignoring multiple individual and contextual factors that affect user motivation. Unlike prior research, we address this issue by exploring multidimensional personalization compared to OSFA based on a multi-institution sample. Thus, we conducted a controlled experiment in three institutions, comparing gamification designs (<i>OSFA</i> and <i>Personalized</i> to the learning task and users' gaming habits/preferences and demographics) in terms of 58 students' motivations to complete assessments for learning. Our results suggest no significant differences among OSFA and Personalized designs, despite suggesting user motivation depended on fewer user characteristics when using personalization. Additionally, exploratory analyses suggest personalization was positive for females and those holding a technical degree, but negative for those who prefer adventure games and those who prefer single-playing. Our contribution benefits designers, suggesting how personalization works; practitioners, demonstrating to whom the personalization strategy was more or less suitable; and researchers, providing future research directions.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40593-022-00326-x.</p>","PeriodicalId":46637,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9838401/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-022-00326-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Personalized gamification aims to address shortcomings of the one-size-fits-all (OSFA) approach in improving students' motivations throughout the learning process. However, studies still focus on personalizing to a single user dimension, ignoring multiple individual and contextual factors that affect user motivation. Unlike prior research, we address this issue by exploring multidimensional personalization compared to OSFA based on a multi-institution sample. Thus, we conducted a controlled experiment in three institutions, comparing gamification designs (OSFA and Personalized to the learning task and users' gaming habits/preferences and demographics) in terms of 58 students' motivations to complete assessments for learning. Our results suggest no significant differences among OSFA and Personalized designs, despite suggesting user motivation depended on fewer user characteristics when using personalization. Additionally, exploratory analyses suggest personalization was positive for females and those holding a technical degree, but negative for those who prefer adventure games and those who prefer single-playing. Our contribution benefits designers, suggesting how personalization works; practitioners, demonstrating to whom the personalization strategy was more or less suitable; and researchers, providing future research directions.
Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40593-022-00326-x.
期刊介绍:
IJAIED publishes papers concerned with the application of AI to education. It aims to help the development of principles for the design of computer-based learning systems. Its premise is that such principles involve the modelling and representation of relevant aspects of knowledge, before implementation or during execution, and hence require the application of AI techniques and concepts. IJAIED has a very broad notion of the scope of AI and of a ''computer-based learning system'', as indicated by the following list of topics considered to be within the scope of IJAIED: adaptive and intelligent multimedia and hypermedia systemsagent-based learning environmentsAIED and teacher educationarchitectures for AIED systemsassessment and testing of learning outcomesauthoring systems and shells for AIED systemsbayesian and statistical methodscase-based systemscognitive developmentcognitive models of problem-solvingcognitive tools for learningcomputer-assisted language learningcomputer-supported collaborative learningdialogue (argumentation, explanation, negotiation, etc.) discovery environments and microworldsdistributed learning environmentseducational roboticsembedded training systemsempirical studies to inform the design of learning environmentsenvironments to support the learning of programmingevaluation of AIED systemsformal models of components of AIED systemshelp and advice systemshuman factors and interface designinstructional design principlesinstructional planningintelligent agents on the internetintelligent courseware for computer-based trainingintelligent tutoring systemsknowledge and skill acquisitionknowledge representation for instructionmodelling metacognitive skillsmodelling pedagogical interactionsmotivationnatural language interfaces for instructional systemsnetworked learning and teaching systemsneural models applied to AIED systemsperformance support systemspractical, real-world applications of AIED systemsqualitative reasoning in simulationssituated learning and cognitive apprenticeshipsocial and cultural aspects of learningstudent modelling and cognitive diagnosissupport for knowledge building communitiessupport for networked communicationtheories of learning and conceptual changetools for administration and curriculum integrationtools for the guided exploration of information resources