Gamification Based on User Types: When and Where It Is Worth Applying

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is interesting because it addresses the same problem in two very different countries, however, I think that this fact should have been exploited more and clearer when presenting the results of both countries, so I suggest using a more comparative narrative when addressing the results. On the other hand, during the discussion there is no reference to the literature to compare or contrast results. I believe that this should be included in order to give greater strength to the work. Finally, I suggest that, in the abstract, the introduction and conclusions address the benefits of knowing the styles of players. Additionally, during the manuscript the word Table is written with lowercase, being a proper name like the Figures, all of them, must begin with a capital letter.

Author Response

"The manuscript is interesting because it addresses the same problem in two very different countries, however, I think that this fact should have been exploited more and clearer when presenting the results of both countries, so I suggest using a more comparative narrative when addressing the results."

In Results section, we have compared results for both countries and discuss the reasons why we found differences. It is something explicitly shown also in Tables 2 and 3. The very beginning of the discussion is also related to the differences found between countries. We did not mention it in the conclusions sections, however. In the present version of the manuscript, we have added some content in the conclusions section that links to the results presented before.

"On the other hand, during the discussion there is no reference to the literature to compare or contrast results. I believe that this should be included in order to give greater strength to the work."

Thank you for your comment, we added some literature references to compare the results.

"Finally, I suggest that, in the abstract, the introduction and conclusions address the benefits of knowing the styles of players."

Thank you, we have added that to both the abstract, introduction and conclusions.

"Additionally, during the manuscript the word Table is written with lowercase, being a proper name like the Figures, all of them, must begin with a capital letter."

Thank you for your suggestion, we have modified it accordingly.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Thank you for this manuscript. I appreciate your research and its relevance to understanding possible relevant elements such as student engagement, choice, and motivation in using gamification through distance education in higher education.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments.

Reviewer 3 Report

I think the paper is not a great contribution but it is well written, the topic is interesting in the field of gamification and it is correct from a methodological point of view. I would have used other types of competitive tasks and would have used forum-type tasks where it was necessary to help, criticise, debate, etc. to better assess the socialising and philanthropic component, but that would mean repeating the study experiment.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. We have added your suggestions as a potential and very interesting future study in this topic.

Reviewer 4 Report

The article presents pilot studies developed in 2 countries, where the impact of user type-based gamification was analysed. They aim to establish when and where it is worth applying.

For Marczewski and the Hexad model, the identification of user types is essential to the design of the gamified activity. From the article's description, it is unclear whether the user types identified influenced the design of the gamified experience.

It is in the discussion and conclusion sections that are found the major need for improvement. There is a lack of comparison with results in other studies. i.e. the authors do not mention other studies in the discussion and conclusion, and that is the big flaw in this paper.  We recommend reviewing these two sections, and as a starting point, we suggest studies that may assist in this review (see below). Also, we consider that the effect of rewards and the impact of extrinsic motivation should also be taken into account during this review.

Please, verify the references: 

- To many spaces on L382-383

- Learn- ing (L399)

-  Comput.-Hum (L409)

- Spaces on L412,  L415, L422, L423

[X] A. Marczewski, Even Ninja Monkeys Like to Play: Unicorn Edition. United Kingdom: Gamified UK, 2018.

[X] E. D. Mekler, F. Brühlmann, A. N. Tuch, and K. Opwis, “Towards understanding the effects of individual gamification elements on intrinsic motivation and performance,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 71, pp. 525–534, Jun. 2017, doi: 10.1016/J.CHB.2015.08.048.

[X] E. L. Deci, R. Koestner, and R. M. Ryan, “Extrinsic Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation in Education: Reconsidered Once Again,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 1–27, Mar. 2001, doi: 10.3102/00346543071001001.

[X] C. Garaus, G. Furtmüller, and W. H. Güttel, “The hidden power of small rewards: The effects of insufficient external rewards on autonomous motivation to learn,” Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 45–59, 2016, doi: 10.5465/amle.2012.0284.

[X] A. Antonaci, R. Klemke, and M. Specht, “The effects of gamification in online learning environments: A systematic literature review,” Informatics, vol. 6, no. 3, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.3390/informatics6030032.

Author Response

"The article presents pilot studies developed in 2 countries, where the impact of user type-based gamification was analysed. They aim to establish when and where it is worth applying.

For Marczewski and the Hexad model, the identification of user types is essential to the design of the gamified activity. From the article's description, it is unclear whether the user types identified influenced the design of the gamified experience."

The reviewer’s comment is very relevant because we did not make clear this point in the article. Actually, in this pilot experience we wanted to analyze the influence of the user types in the priority of students when choosing different gamified tasks. For that reason, we did not base our designs in user types. Instead, we designed activities that could fit with different user types with the objective of giving students the opportunity of selecting by themselves the activities that they wanted the most. In other words, instead of designing some activities directly related to the user types identified as predominant among our students, we designed a higher amount of activities with different designs and gave the students the chance of choosing between them. By doing so, we can demonstrate that different user types prefer different kind of activities.

In the present version of the manuscript, we have made this point clearer.

"It is in the discussion and conclusion sections that are found the major need for improvement. There is a lack of comparison with results in other studies. i.e. the authors do not mention other studies in the discussion and conclusion, and that is the big flaw in this paper.  We recommend reviewing these two sections, and as a starting point, we suggest studies that may assist in this review (see below). Also, we consider that the effect of rewards and the impact of extrinsic motivation should also be taken into account during this review."

Thank you for your suggestions. All the suggested studies have been compared with the existing study and added in the discussion and conclusion sections.

"Please, verify the references:

- To many spaces on L382-383"

Removed

"- Learn- ing (L399)"

Corrected

"-  Comput.-Hum (L409)"

Corrected

"- Spaces on L412,  L415, L422, L423"

 Corrected

"[X] A. Marczewski, Even Ninja Monkeys Like to Play: Unicorn Edition. United Kingdom: Gamified UK, 2018.

[X] E. D. Mekler, F. Brühlmann, A. N. Tuch, and K. Opwis, “Towards understanding the effects of individual gamification elements on intrinsic motivation and performance,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 71, pp. 525–534, Jun. 2017, doi: 10.1016/J.CHB.2015.08.048.

[X] E. L. Deci, R. Koestner, and R. M. Ryan, “Extrinsic Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation in Education: Reconsidered Once Again,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 1–27, Mar. 2001, doi: 10.3102/00346543071001001.

[X] C. Garaus, G. Furtmüller, and W. H. Güttel, “The hidden power of small rewards: The effects of insufficient external rewards on autonomous motivation to learn,” Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 45–59, 2016, doi: 10.5465/amle.2012.0284."