Publication: Kappen, D. L., Mirza-Babaei, P., & Nacke, L. E. (2017). Gamification through the Application of Motivational Affordances for Physical Activity Technology. In Proc. of CHIPLAY ’17 (pp. 5–18). https://doi.org/10.1145/3116595.3116604
Motivational affordances are attributes of interactive technologies or game elements that promote participation in physical activity (PA) routines. Although these affordances have been previously integrated into technologies in non-tailored approaches, the motivations of adults for PA are specific (e.g., to improve one’s health, wellness, or fitness). There are no previous comparisons of either the motivation to participate in PA or motivational affordances that facilitate PA in different age groups. Therefore, we conducted an online survey with 150 participants using the Exercise Motivations Inventory-2 scale (EMI-2) together with long-form questions to explore motivational affordances and PA technology preferences in four age groups. Our results suggest health-related pressures are significant motivations for PA in different age groups. Additionally, a content analysis of preferences allowed us to distinguish between gamified motivational affordances and feedback elements. These results provide age-group-specific gamification design guidelines for incorporating motivational elements in PA technology.
Behaviour-Change and Motivational Affordances
While gamification relies on intrinsic and extrinsic motivations provided by a gamified application, Larsen found a user’s external motivation could increase their internal motivation over time (Larsson, 2013). The fact that human behavior can be influenced using game design principles in decision-making applications and services (Kappen & Nacke, 2013) suggests that it may be possible to identify behaviour-change elements to foster intrinsic motivation. Customization of these gamification elements based on demographics or age groups may contribute to the personalization of playful technologies. This customization of playful technologies necessitates the understanding of specific preferences of triggers that motivate gameful PA (Kari, Piippo, Frank, Makkonen, & Moilanen, 2016). The association of different skill atoms with different age groups—based on preferences, needs, and wants—is critical for the design of technology artifacts. The exploration of physical activities through gamification (Gerling, 2011) could help provide access to activities that would otherwise be precluded by age-related challenges. Therefore, the investigation of motivational affordances based on demographic characteristics such as age groups should promote our understanding of how to implement game design elements in technological artifacts. Although a few research projects have studied behaviour change in fitness and health apps (see below), there has not been a detailed comparison of motivational affordances facilitating PA technology based on age groups.
While Lister et al. reported how gamification can change health behaviours by using game elements in fitness and health apps (Lister, West, Cannon, Sax, & Brodegard, 2014), their study did not compare age group-specific preferences. King et al. reported strategies to influence health behaviours, which led to the collective aim to develop digital ‘games with a purpose’ (King, Greaves, Exeter, & Darzi, 2013). However, they did not address any demographic-specific strategies. Other researchers have applied motivational affordances to help maintain adherence to mundane and boring activities such as exercise and daily physical activities (Hamari & Koivisto, 2015), but that study focused on a demographic comprised of younger adults. Commercial devices and websites (such as Fitbit (“FitBit,” 2015), Nike+ FuelBand (“Nike+ FuelBand,” 2014), Fitocracy (“Fitocracy,” 2015) and FitOrbit (“FitOrbit,” 2015)) have leveraged the quantification of achievements to motivate users. However, little research has been done on the motives for using these technologies among adults in different age groups.
A study of exercise habits in younger participants (mean age = 21) revealed that adherence (continued participation in PA or exercise routines) was associated with motives focused on enjoyment, competence, and social interaction rather than personal fitness or appearance (Ryan, Frederick, Lepes, Rubio, & Sheldon, 1997). Health benefits resulting from the observation of fitness routines (Nied & Franklin, 2002) are linked to the motivation of older adults (mean age = 78) to initiate and maintain fitness activities (Phillips, Schneider, & Mercer, 2004). Research on intrinsic and extrinsic motivations in older adults (mean age = 63.8 years) (Dacey, Baltzell, & Zaichkowsky, 2008) explored their activity levels (inactives, actives, sustained maintainers) against dimensions of health and fitness, weight management, appearance, stress management, enjoyment, emotion, and sociality. For younger adults (mean age = 18.6 years) who were actively involved in PA, studies have shown that intrinsic motivation has a greater effect than extrinsic motivation (Buckworth, Lee, Regan, Schneider, & DiClemente, 2007). None of the studies mentioned above compared age groups and they all specifically focused on either a young population or an older population. In contrast, our study offers a comparison of different age groups, preferences for motivational affordances in PA technology and PA.
Age-group-specific Design Guidelines
We conducted a survey study using a questionnaire in both online and printed formats. A recruitment drive for participants was carried out through email and blog posts, by posting the survey link through social media channels such as Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook, and through recruitment at community centres and fitness centres.
Our survey study focused on comparing the motivation to participate in PA between four age groups and investigating preferences for motivational affordances in PA facilitated by technology. While the motivation to participate in PA differed significantly in the health pressures and ill health dimensions of the EMI-2, a content analysis of long-form survey questions provided design guidelines for tailoring motivational affordances by age group.
| Age Cat | Design Guidelines for PA Technology |
| 18-29 | Motivation for PA: While fostering intrinsic motivation through affordances like goals and progression, it is also critical to integrate extrinsic motivational affordances like badges and rewards. |
| Facilitating goals for PA: Incorporate accomplishment affordances while fostering challenge within the context of PA | |
| Continuance of PA: Provide the opportunity to earn badges and rewards while working towards goals | |
| 30-49 | Motivation for PA: Incorporate feedback elements like calories and distance travelled while providing daily progression and comparisons with a social circle. |
| Facilitating goals for PA: While integrating a combination of short-term goals/long-term goals, and challenges, provide progression affordance in the form of reaching milestones | |
| Continuance of PA: Integrate progression in the form of visual graphs to show progress over time and achievement of goals | |
| 50-64 | Motivation for PA: While integrating feedback elements like calories and distance travelled to facilitate walking, incorporate weekly progression elements to foster intrinsic motivation. |
| Facilitating goals for PA: Provide the opportunity to achieve goals with provisions for comparison with benchmarked PA markers | |
| Continuance of PA: Provide the opportunity to set up goals with feedback on progression | |
| 65+ | Motivation for PA: Provide monitoring of activities to encourage walking using feedback elements like step-counters and distance metrics while indicating progress or improvement as affordances from a feel-good perspective. |
| Facilitating goals for PA: Integrate simple routines and challenges while providing opportunities to earn badges | |
| Continuance of PA: Integrate feedback elements to provide involuntary feedback, praise and improvement |
Table 1: Design guidelines to integrate motivational affordances for PA technology
We categorised these age-group-specific design guidelines based on our long-form survey responses into three types: (1) motivation to participate in PA, (2) facilitating goals for PA, and (3) continuance of PA. Our suggested design guidelines are shown in Table 2. These guidelines are important for designers because it helps to customize and personalize motivational affordances for the design of age-centric PA technology. As an example, based on these guidelines, fitness applications like Fitbit or Nike Fuelband could deliver goals and progressive challenges with a mix of rewards and badges while fostering challenges and promoting the feeling of accomplishment among potential customers in G1. In contrast, customers in G4 could be provided with simple routines intermingled with praise for the completion of simple tasks to enable a feeling of validation for their efforts.
Motivational Affordances and Feedback/Tracking Metrics
| Motivational Elements | |
| Gamified motivational affordances
(Intrinsic elements) |
Goals
Challenges Progression Achievements Choice/options Quests Social sharing |
| Gamified motivational affordances
(Extrinsic elements) |
Badges
Rewards Points Incentives Leaderboards |
| Feedback elements | Calorie tracker
Step-counters Distance travelled Daily notifications Time spent Heart rate Breathing rate Sleep cycle Sound inputs Weight loss indicator Physical form-checker Gait/posture-checker |
Table 2: Differentiating gamified motivational affordances and feedback elements
From a technology-facilitated PA solution perspective, it is important to distinguish between gamification elements and feedback/tracking metrics (Table 9). Our content analysis findings indicate gamification elements are important as motivational affordances. A few of these intrinsic elements that could play a role in fostering motivational participation in PA are goals, challenges, progression, achievements, choice quests, and social sharing leading to a feel-good context. Extrinsic elements such as badges, rewards, incentives, points, and leaderboards were also key findings in this survey study. As indicated in the related literature, many of these extrinsic elements may also support intrinsic motivation to different degrees of intensity (Dacey et al., 2008; Hamari & Koivisto, 2015; Mekler, Br, Opwis, & Tuch, 2013). Many levels of feedback elements or tracking metrics of PA activities can also serve as motivational affordances in technology-facilitated PA, including calorie tracking, step counters, distance travelled, daily notifications, time spent, heart rate, breathing rate, speed, sleep cycle, sound inputs and weight loss indicators. Additional attributes such as physical form-checking, posture correction and gait-checking were also desirable attributes. However, it is important to consider the target demographic when designing PA technology. As our study showed, strong differences in preferences for feedback types and key motivators exist between the millennial generation and older generations. To ensure that PA technology is adopted within the target demographic group, different design decisions must be made early on in the technology design process. We hope that our design guidelines provide a helpful starting point for the development of successful PA technology for different demographics.
References
Buckworth, J., Lee, R. E., Regan, G., Schneider, L. K., & DiClemente, C. C. (2007). Decomposing intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for exercise: Application to stages of motivational readiness. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8(4), 441–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2006.06.007
Dacey, M., Baltzell, A., & Zaichkowsky, L. (2008). Older adults’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation toward physical activity. American Journal of Health Behavior, 32(6), 570–582. https://doi.org/10.5555/ajhb.2008.32.6.570
FitBit. (2015). Retrieved November 5, 2015, from www.fitbit.com
Fitocracy. (2015). Retrieved November 10, 2015, from www.fitocracy.com
FitOrbit. (2015). Retrieved October 12, 2015, from www.fitorbit.com
Gerling, K. M. (2011). Exploring the Potential of Gamification Among Frail Elderly Persons. In Ext Abs CHI 2011 (pp. 1–4).
Hamari, J., & Koivisto, J. (2015). “Working out for likes”: An empirical study on social influence in exercise gamification. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 333–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.018
Kappen, D. L., & Nacke, L. E. (2013). The Kaleidoscope of Effective Gamification: Deconstructing Gamification in Business Applications. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Gameful Design, Research, and Applications – Gamification ’13 (pp. 119–122). https://doi.org/10.1145/2583008.2583029
Kari, T., Piippo, J., Frank, L., Makkonen, M., & Moilanen, P. (2016). To Gamify or Not to Gamify? Gamification in Exercise Applications and Its Role in Impacting Exercise Motivation. 29th Bled eConference, (July), 393–405. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304899543_To_Gamify_or_Not_to_Gamify_Gamification_in_Exercise_Applications_and_Its_Role_in_Impacting_Exercise_Motivation
King, D., Greaves, F., Exeter, C., & Darzi, A. (2013). “Gamification”: Influencing Health Behaviours with Games. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 106(3), 76–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/0141076813480996
Larsson, R. S. (2013). Motivations in Sports and Fitness Gamification. Umea University.
Lister, C., West, J. H., Cannon, B., Sax, T., & Brodegard, D. (2014). Just a Fad? Gamification in Health and Fitness Apps. JMIR Serious Games, 2(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.2196/games.3413
Mekler, E. D., Br, F., Opwis, K., & Tuch, A. N. (2013). Do Points , Levels and Leaderboards Harm Intrinsic Motivation ? An Empirical Analysis of Common Gamification Elements. In Gamification 2013 (pp. 66–73).
Nied, R. J., & Franklin, B. (2002). Promoting and prescribing exercise for the elderly. American Family Physician, 65(3), 419–26. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11858624
Nike+ FuelBand. (2014). Retrieved November 5, 2015, from http://www.nike.com/ca/en_gb/c/running/nikeplus/gps-app
Phillips, E. M., Schneider, J. C., & Mercer, G. R. (2004). Motivating Elders to Initiate and Maintain Exercise. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 85(July), 52–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2004.03.012
Ryan, R. M., Frederick, C. M., Lepes, D., Rubio, N., & Sheldon, K. M. (1997). Intrinsic Motivation and Exercise Adherence. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 28(4), 335–354.