research-article

Open access

The Gamification User Types Hexad Scale

Authors:

Gustavo F. Tondello,

Andrzej Marczewski,

Lennart E. NackeAuthors Info & Claims

CHI PLAY '16: Proceedings of the 2016 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play

Pages 229 - 243

https://doi.org/10.1145/2967934.2968082

Published: 15 October 2016 Publication History

Abstract

Several studies have indicated the need for personalizing gamified systems to users' personalities. However, mapping user personality onto design elements is difficult. Hexad is a gamification user types model that attempts this mapping but lacks a standard procedure to assess user preferences. Therefore, we created a 24-items survey response scale to score users' preferences towards the six different motivations in the Hexad framework. We used internal and test-retest reliability analysis, as well as factor analysis, to validate this new scale. Further analysis revealed significant associations of the Hexad user types with the Big Five personality traits. In addition, a correlation analysis confirmed the framework's validity as a measure of user preference towards different game design elements. This scale instrument contributes to games user research because it enables accurate measures of user preference in gamification.

Supplementary Material

suppl.mov (fp123.mp4)

Supplemental video

Download
57.46 MB

References

[1]

Sander Bakkes, Chek Tien Tan, and Yusuf Pisan. 2012. Personalised gaming. Proceedings of The 8th Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment Playing the System IE '12, ACM, 1--10. http://doi.org/10.1145/2336727.2336731

Digital Library

[2]

Gabriel Barata, Sandra Gama, Joaquim A.P. Jorge, and Daniel J.V. Gonçalves. 2014. Relating gaming habits with student performance in a gamified learning experience. Proceedings of the first ACM SIGCHI Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play CHI PLAY '14, ACM, 17--25. http://doi.org/10.1145/2658537.2658692

Digital Library

[3]

Richard Bartle. 1996. Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players who suit MUDs. Journal of MUD Research 1, 1.

[4]

Richard Bartle. 2005. Virtual Worlds: Why People Play. Massively Multiplayer Game Development 2, 1.

[5]

Chris Bateman, Rebecca Lowenhaupt, and Lennart E Nacke. 2011. Player Typology in Theory and Practice. Proceedings of DiGRA 2011.

[6]

Chris Mark. Bateman and Richard Boon. 2006. 21st Century Game Design (Game Development Series). Charles River Media.

[7]

Max V. Birk, Dereck Toker, Regan L. Mandryk, and Cristina Conati. 2015. Modeling Motivation in a Social Network Game Using Player-Centric Traits and Personality Traits. Proceedings of User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization, Springer, 18--30. http://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--319--20267--9_2

[8]

Marc Busch, Elke Mattheiss, Rita Orji, Peter Fröhlich, Michael Lankes, and Manfred Tscheligi. 2016. Player Type Models -- Towards Empirical Validation. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI EA '16, ACM, 1835--1841. http://doi.org/10.1145/2851581.2892399

Digital Library

[9]

Marc Busch, Elke Mattheiss, Rita Orji, et al. 2015. Personalization in Serious and Persuasive Games and Gamified Interactions. Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play CHI PLAY '15, ACM, 811--816. http://doi.org/10.1145/2793107.2810260

Digital Library

[10]

Edward L Deci and Richard M Ryan. 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. Plenum, New York and London.

[11]

Edward L. Deci, Haleh Eghrari, Brian C. Patrick, and Dean R. Leone. 1994. Facilitating Internalization: The Self-Determination Theory Perspective. Journal of Personality 62, 1: 119--142. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467--6494.1994.tb00797.x

[12]

Sebastian Deterding, Dan Dixon, Rilla Khaled, and Lennart E Nacke. 2011. From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining "Gamification." Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments -- MindTrek '11, ACM, 9--15. http://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040

Digital Library

[13]

Lisa Diamond, Gustavo F. Tondello, Andrzej Marczewski, Lennart E. Nacke, and Manfred Tscheligi. 2015. The HEXAD Gamification User Types Questionnaire?: Background and Development Process. Workshop on Personalization in Serious and Persuasive Games and Gamified Interactions.

[14]

Dan Dixon. 2011. Player Types and Gamification. CHI 2011 Workshop Gamification Using Game Design Elements in NonGame Contexts, 12--15.

[15]

Lauren S. Ferro, Steffen P. Walz, and Stefan Greuter. 2013. Towards personalised, gamified systems: an investigation into game design, personality and player typologies. Proceedings of the 9th Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment: Matters of Life and Death IE '13, 1--6. http://doi.org/10.1145/2513002.2513024

Digital Library

[16]

Andrew R. Gilpin. 1993. Table for Conversion of Kendall's Tau to Spearman's Rho Within the Context of Measures of Magnitude of Effect for MetaAnalysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement 53, 1: 87--92. http://doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053001007

[17]

Juho Hamari, Jonna Koivisto, and Harri Sarsa. 2014. Does gamification work? - A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. Proceedings of the 47th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 3025--3034. http://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377

Digital Library

[18]

Juho Hamari and Janne Tuunanen. 2014. Player types: A meta-synthesis. Transactions of the Digital Games Research 1, 2. Retrieved April 10, 2016 from http://todigra.org/index.php/todigra/article/view/13

[19]

David Howell. 2012. Statistical Methods for Psychology. Cengage Learning.

[20]

Veronika Huta and Alan S. Waterman. 2014. Eudaimonia and Its Distinction from Hedonia: Developing a Classification and Terminology for Understanding Conceptual and Operational Definitions. Journal of Happiness Studies 15, 6: 1425--1456. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013--9485-0

[21]

Yuan Jia, Bin Xu, Yamini Karanam, and Stephen Voida. 2016. Personality-targeted Gamification: A Survey Study on Personality Traits and Motivational Affordances. Proceedings of the 34th Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI '16. http://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858515

Digital Library

[22]

Daniel Johnson and John Gardner. 2010. Personality, Motivation and Video Games. Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group of Australia on ComputerHuman Interaction - OZCHI '10, 276. http://doi.org/10.1145/1952222.1952281

Digital Library

[23]

Daniel Johnson, Peta Wyeth, Penny Sweetser, and John Gardner. 2012. Personality, genre and videogame play experience. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Fun and Games - FnG '12, ACM, 117--120. http://doi.org/10.1145/2367616.2367633

Digital Library

[24]

Maurits Kaptein, Panos Markopoulos, Boris De Ruyter, and Emile Aarts. 2015. Personalizing persuasive technologies: Explicit and implicit personalization using persuasion profiles. International Journal of Human Computer Studies 77: 38--51. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2015.01.004

Digital Library

[25]

Maurits Kaptein, Boris De Ruyter, Panos Markopoulos, and Emile Aarts. 2012. Adaptive Persuasive Systems: A Study of Tailored Persuasive Text Messages to Reduce Snacking. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems 2, 2: 1--25. http://doi.org/10.1145/2209310.2209313

Digital Library

[26]

Silvia Erika Kober and Christa Neuper. 2013. Personality and Presence in Virtual Reality: Does Their Relationship Depend on the Used Presence Measure? International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 29, 1: 13--25. http://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2012.668131

[27]

Andrzej Marczewski. 2015. User Types. In Even Ninja Monkeys Like to Play: Gamification, Game Thinking & Motivational Design. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 69--84.

[28]

Andrzej Marczewski. 2015. Gamification Mechanics and Elements. In Even Ninja Monkeys Like to Play: Gamification, Game Thinking & Motivational Design. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 165--177.

[29]

Andrzej Marczewski. 2015. Marczewski's User Type Test. Gamified UK. Retrieved July 20, 2016 from http://gamified.uk/UserTypeTest2015/user-typetest.php

[30]

Isabel Briggs Myers. 1962. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.

[31]

Lennart E Nacke, Chris Bateman, and Regan L Mandryk. 2011. BrainHex: Preliminary Results from a Neurobiological Gamer Typology Survey. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Entertainment Computing ICEC 2011. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 288--293. http://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--642--24500--8_31

Digital Library

[32]

Lennart E Nacke, Chris Bateman, and Regan L Mandryk. 2014. BrainHex: A Neurobiological Gamer Typology Survey. Entertainment Computing 5, 1: 55--62. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2013.06.002

[33]

Oded Nov and Ofer Arazy. 2013. Personality-targeted design: theory, experimental procedure, and preliminary results. Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work CSCW '13, ACM, 977--984. http://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.2441887

Digital Library

[34]

Rita Orji, Regan L. Mandryk, Julita Vassileva, and Kathrin M. Gerling. 2013. Tailoring persuasive health games to gamer type. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI '13, 2467--2476. http://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2481341

Digital Library

[35]

Rita Orji, Julita Vassileva, and Regan L. Mandryk. 2014. Modeling the efficacy of persuasive strategies for different gamer types in serious games for health. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 24, 5: 453--498. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-014--9149--8

Digital Library

[36]

Delroy L. Paulhus. 1984. Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46, 3: 598--609. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022--3514.46.3.598

[37]

Christopher Peterson, Nansook Park, and Martin E. P. Seligman. 2005. Orientations to happiness and life satisfaction: the full life versus the empty life. Journal of Happiness Studies 6, 1: 25--41. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-004--1278-z

[38]

Beatrice Rammstedt and Oliver P. John. 2007. Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality 41, 1: 203--212. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001

[39]

Richard M. Ryan, Edward L. Deci, and Maarten Vansteenkiste. 2016. Autonomy and Autonomy Disturbances in Self-Development and Psychopathology: Research on Motivation, Attachment, and Clinical Process. In Developmental Psychopathology, Dante Cicchetti (ed.). Wiley, 1--54. http://doi.org/10.1002/9781119125556.devpsy109

[40]

Richard M. Ryan and Edward L. Deci. 2000. Selfdetermination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. The American Psychologist 55, 1: 68--78. http://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

[41]

Richard M. Ryan and Edward L. Deci. 2000. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25, 1: 54--67. http://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020

[42]

Richard M. Ryan, C. Scott Rigby, and Andrew Przybylski. 2006. The motivational pull of video games: A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion 30, 4: 347--363. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006--9051--8

[43]

Niels Winkler, Martin Kroh, and Martin Spiess. 2006. Entwicklung einer deutschen Kurzskala zur zweidimensionalen Messung von sozialer Erwünschtheit. DIW-Diskussionspapiere 579. Retrieved April 10, 2016 from http://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/18472

[44]

Yan Xu, Erika Shehan Poole, Andrew D. Miller, et al. 2012. This is not a one-horse race: understanding player types in multiplayer pervasive health games for youth. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work CSCW '12, ACM, 843--852. http://doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145330

Digital Library

[45]

Nick Yee, Nicolas Ducheneaut, Les Nelson, and Peter Likarish. 2011. Introverted Elves & Conscientious Gnomes: The Expression of Personality in World of Warcraft. Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI '11, ACM, 753--762. http://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979052

Digital Library

[46]

Nick Yee, Nicolas Ducheneaut, and Les Nelson. 2012. Online gaming motivations scale: development and validation. Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI '12, ACM, 2803--2806. http://doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208681

Digital Library

[47]

Nick Yee. 2006. Motivations for Play in Online Games. CyberPsychology & Behavior 9, 6: 772--775. http://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.772

[48]

Virgil Zeigler-Hill and Sean Monica. 2015. The HEXACO model of personality and video game preferences. Entertainment Computing 11: 21--26. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2015.08.001

Cited By

Baia DMaués L(2024)3P gamification framework: um guia para a construção da gamificaçãoCaderno Pedagógico10.54033/cadpedv21n9-07321:9(e7630)Online publication date: 11-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.54033/cadpedv21n9-073
Brandl LSchrader A(2024)Student Player Types in Higher Education—Trial and Clustering AnalysesEducation Sciences10.3390/educsci1404035214:4(352)Online publication date: 27-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14040352
Amer NShohieb SEladrosy WLiu SNam YAbdelrazek S(2024)A gamified cognitive behavioral therapy for Arabs to reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety: A case study researchDIGITAL HEALTH10.1177/2055207624126331710Online publication date: 14-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241263317
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

The Gamification User Types Hexad Scale
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)

Recommendations

Empirical validation of the Gamification User Types Hexad scale in English and Spanish
Highlights
- We tested the reliability of the Gamification User Types Hexad scale.
- Empirical ...
Abstract
Gamification, the use of game elements in non-game systems, is now established as a relevant research field in human-computer interaction (HCI). Several empirical studies have shown that gameful interventions can increase engagement ...
Player Types and Game Element Preferences: Investigating the Relationship with the Gamification User Types HEXAD Scale
HCI in Games: Experience Design and Game Mechanics
Abstract
Gamification has gained scientific attention as a motivational tool for behavior change in various contexts. When designing gamification, several scholars emphasize the importance of tailoring content to the needs of different users, e.g. by using ...
Hexad-12: Developing and Validating a Short Version of the Gamification User Types Hexad Scale
CHI '23: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

The Hexad scale is a crucial tool for personalized gamification in user experience (UX) design. However, completing a 24-item questionnaire can increase dropout rates and screen fatigue within online surveys. When included in larger surveys, scale ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CHI PLAY '16: Proceedings of the 2016 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play

October 2016

424 pages

ISBN:9781450344562

DOI:10.1145/2967934

General Chairs:
Anna Cox
University College London, UK
,
Phoebe O. Toups Dugas
New Mexico State University, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Regan L. Mandryk
University of Saskatchewan, Canada
,
Paul Cairns
University of York, UK

Copyright © 2016 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 15 October 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Österreichische Forschungsförderungsgesellschaft

Conference

CHI PLAY '16

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CHI PLAY '16: The annual symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play

October 16 - 19, 2016

Texas, Austin, USA

Acceptance Rates

CHI PLAY '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 36 of 124 submissions, 29%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 421 of 1,386 submissions, 30%

Upcoming Conference

CHI PLAY '24

Sponsor:
sigchi

The Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play

October 14 - 17, 2024

Tampere , Finland

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

280
Total Citations
View Citations
12,616
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)2,174
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)227

Reflects downloads up to 01 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Baia DMaués L(2024)3P gamification framework: um guia para a construção da gamificaçãoCaderno Pedagógico10.54033/cadpedv21n9-07321:9(e7630)Online publication date: 11-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.54033/cadpedv21n9-073
Brandl LSchrader A(2024)Student Player Types in Higher Education—Trial and Clustering AnalysesEducation Sciences10.3390/educsci1404035214:4(352)Online publication date: 27-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14040352
Amer NShohieb SEladrosy WLiu SNam YAbdelrazek S(2024)A gamified cognitive behavioral therapy for Arabs to reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety: A case study researchDIGITAL HEALTH10.1177/2055207624126331710Online publication date: 14-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241263317
Berger MJung C(2024)Gamification preferences in nutrition apps: Toward healthier diets and food choicesDIGITAL HEALTH10.1177/2055207624126048210Online publication date: 11-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241260482
Henry JLi FArnab S(2024)On the Pre-Perception of Gamification and Game-Based Learning in Higher Education Students: A Systematic Mapping StudySimulation & Gaming10.1177/10468781241271082Online publication date: 19-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781241271082
de Carvalho Barros Bezerra GOliveira WGuimarães Santos AHamari J(2024)Exploring the Use of Unplugged Gamification on Programming Learners’ ExperienceACM Transactions on Computing Education10.1145/368616524:3(1-25)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3686165
Cerioli MLeotta MRibaudo MCoppola RArdito LFraser GLeotta M(2024)Enlisting Students in Gamifying Software Testing Education: Results and Key InsightsProceedings of the 3rd ACM International Workshop on Gamification in Software Development, Verification, and Validation10.1145/3678869.3685685(18-25)Online publication date: 13-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3678869.3685685
Tyack AMekler E(2024)Self-Determination Theory and HCI Games Research: Unfulfilled Promises and Unquestioned ParadigmsACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction10.1145/367323031:3(1-74)Online publication date: 15-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3673230
Poeller SBaumann NMandryk R(2024)Intimidating or Friendly? How Players Represent Themselves With Character Appearances That Reflect Their Social MotivationsProceedings of the 19th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games10.1145/3649921.3650007(1-16)Online publication date: 21-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649921.3650007
Lavoué ÉVillenave SSerna ADidier CBaert PLavoué G(2024)Influence of Scenarios and Player Traits on Flow in Virtual RealityIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics10.1109/TVCG.2023.333226130:9(6208-6221)Online publication date: Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2023.3332261
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents