Ah if it's just semantics that's fine, as long as someone is actually
researching that part of it. :-) In my area (which is actually games
research), 'gamification' usually means something more specific,
although the definition keeps shifting admittedly. But more often the
trend of adopting explicitly 'game-mechanic' type elements such as
points, level progression, competition, etc. into non-game tasks, which
are seen as having a motivational quality (with somewhat mixed research
results, obscured by a whole mass of charalatan gamification consultants
pushing it). What you describe I'd associate more with concepts like
'microtasks', 'dashboards', and generally UX, which can be pared with
gamification but are a separate cluster of ideas.
Best,
Mark
Andre Engels <andreengels(a)gmail.com> writes:
That really depends on how you define
'gamification'. To me, the
gamification is not the leaderboards, but exactly the elements you
mention - the splitting of the whole into simple microtasks plus
giving out those microtasks to users for a large part at random. In
fact, I usually play the 'distributed' version of the wikidata game,
and as far as I know there is no scoring or leaderboard there at all,
but I would still say the whole is gamified.
Andre Engels
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Mark J. Nelson <mjn(a)anadrome.org> wrote:
>
> Dario Taraborelli <dtaraborelli(a)wikimedia.org> writes:
>
>> *Gamified interfaces for microcontributions à la Wikidata game*.
>> (per GerardM) there's absolutely no doubt this model is effective at
>> creating a large volume of high-quality edits, and value to the project and
>> communities.
>
> I agree on these interfaces, but at least in my use of them, and that of
> the other people I know who use them, the 'gamification' part is a red
> herring and not why we use them: the important part is the interface and
> its functionality. The confusing point/leaderboard system (which I never
> check) isn't really a draw, but the tools are actually useful to do
> things that are tedious otherwise, and at least somewhat enjoyable to
> use. It's useful that it tries to find e.g. new articles that might
> match an existing Wikidata topic but are unlinked, and presents
> side-by-side information that helps quickly eliminate some false
> positives, with a fast interface where you just press '1', '2', or
'3'
> on the keyboard to move on.
>
> So a different way of looking at this category is: interfaces to make
> microcontributions non-tedious, and easy to curate in a
> "dashboard-style" way. Those interfaces might or might not have some
> gamification layer too, but I don't think that's the important part.
>
> Best,
> Mark
>
> --
> Mark J. Nelson
> The MetaMakers Institute
> Falmouth University
>
http://www.kmjn.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
--
Mark J. Nelson
The MetaMakers Institute
Falmouth University
http://www.kmjn.org