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 <andreeng...@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 <m...@anadrome.org> wrote: >> >> Dario Taraborelli <dtarabore...@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@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l -- Mark J. Nelson The MetaMakers Institute Falmouth University http://www.kmjn.org _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
