Tailored gamification: A review of literature

By Ana Carolina Tomé Klock, Isabela Gasparini, Marcelo Soares Pimenta, Juho Hamari. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud., 2020

325 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract Gamification is increasingly becoming a pertinent aspect of any UI and UX design. However, a canonical dearth in research and application of gamification has been related to the role of individual differences in susceptibility to gamification and its varied designs. To address this gap, this study reviews the extant corpus of research on tailored gamification (42 studies). The findings of the review indicate that most studies on the field are mostly focused on user modeling for a future personalization, adaptation, or recommendation of game elements. This user model usually contains the users’ preferences of play (i.e., player types), and is mostly applied in educational settings. The main contributions of this paper are a standardized terminology of the game elements used in tailored gamification, the discussion on the most suitable game elements for each users’ characteristic, and a research agenda including dynamic modeling, exploring multiple characteristics simultaneously, and understanding the effects of other aspects of the interaction on user experience.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Sociology and Political Science, Human-Computer Interaction

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0aad92c1e05e8586f850f76e47c0a922d62472e9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

In Human-Computer Interaction

Juho Hamari

Citations in the corpus

Tailored gamification in education: A literature review and future agenda (2022, methodology): “Following the Kitchenham (2004) protocol, we defined our search string based on the recent studies on gamification and educational technologies (e.g., Bitten-court et al., 2016; Hamari et al., 2014, 2016; Santos et al., 2018; Koivisto and Hamari2019; Klock et al., 2020).”