Gamification is not Working: Why?

• 发表在: GAMES AND CULTURE
• Main Authors: Dah, John; Hussin, Norhayati; Zaini, Muhamad Khairulnizam; Isaac Helda, Linda; Senanu Ametefe, Divine; Adozuka Aliu, Abdulmalik
• 格式: Review; Early Access
• 语言: English
• 出版: SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC 2024
• 主题: Cultural Studies; Communication
• 在线阅读: https://www-webofscience-com.uitm.idm.oclc.org/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001153544800001
• ISSN: 1555-4120; 1555-4139
• DOI: 10.1177/15554120241228125

Gamification is a trending topic in the scientific community. It is the art of incorporating game elements and game design principles into non-game context. The phenomenon has garnered tremendous attention especially in the field of education and academics. Yet, since it appeared a decade ago, its ascension both in education and other domains hasn't been uniform, with several failed and inconclusive results. Consequently, scholars have, over the years, made several efforts to probe why gamification isn't succeeding as hoped. We attempt, therefore, to contribute to this effort by reviewing and discussing some of the core reasons why gamification seems to be faltering in the field of learning and education. Our findings revealed four (4) factors why gamification could be failing. Shallow gamification which is the simplistic and surficial application of game elements on a learning system or activity without transforming the core experience is one determinant. Overjustification effect, the excessive and arbitral use of rewards (extrinsic motivators), which hampers intrinsic motivation is another success determinant. The 'badges, points, and leaderboards (BPL) gamification' (or BPL triad) which refers to the use of basic game elements such as the badges, points, and leaderboards is also one reason gamification is still struggling. Lastly, the overreliance on narrow models and theories to explain or design gamified experiences is identified as a factor for gamification haziness. Our study suggests several antidotes to these highlighted challenges, such as deep intentional designs that transcend surface-level implementation of game elements (what is called 'deep gamification'). Amidst the spree of excessive extrinsic rewards anyhow, we propose a careful consideration of implementing reward-based game elements, especially in multiple learning settings. Again, a move-away from the narrow and overly used models such as the self-determination theory, and flow theory could open success pathways. As we believe, narrow theoretical lens through which gamification is often viewed serves as a limiting factor, impeding the field's progression and obscuring the full potential of gamification as an approach.