The Effects of Gamification on Computerized Cognitive Training: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
cognition
gamification
health
meta-analysis
systematic review
Journal
JMIR serious games
ISSN: 2291-9279
Titre abrégé: JMIR Serious Games
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101645255
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Aug 2020
10 Aug 2020
Historique:
received:
10
03
2020
accepted:
22
04
2020
revised:
21
04
2020
entrez:
11
8
2020
pubmed:
11
8
2020
medline:
11
8
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There has been a growing interest in the application of gamification (ie, the use of game elements) to computerized cognitive training. The introduction of targeted gamification features to such tasks may increase motivation and engagement as well as improve intervention effects. However, it is possible that game elements can also have adverse effects on cognitive training (eg, be a distraction), which can outweigh their potential motivational benefits. So far, little is known about the effectiveness of such applications. This study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of gamification on process outcomes (eg, motivation) and on changes in the training domain (eg, cognition), as well as to explore the role of potential moderators. We searched PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest Psychology, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Science Direct, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore, Association for Computing Machinery, and a range of gray-area literature databases. The searches included papers published between 2008 and 2018. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. The systematic review identified 49 studies, of which 9 randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the review indicated that research in this context is still developing and lacks well-controlled empirical studies. Gamification in cognitive training is applied to a large range of age groups and audiences and is mostly delivered at a research site through computers. Rewards and feedback continue to dominate the gamification landscape, whereas social-oriented features (eg, competition) are underused. The meta-analyses showed that gamified training tasks were more motivating/engaging (Hedges g=0.72) and more demanding/difficult (Hedges g=-0.52) than non- or less-gamified tasks, whereas no effects on the training domain were found. Furthermore, no variables moderated the impact of gamified training tasks. However, meta-analytic findings were limited due to a small number of studies. Overall, this review provides an overview of the existing research in the domain and provides evidence for the effectiveness of gamification in improving motivation/engagement in the context of cognitive training. We discuss the shortcomings in the current literature and provide recommendations for future research.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There has been a growing interest in the application of gamification (ie, the use of game elements) to computerized cognitive training. The introduction of targeted gamification features to such tasks may increase motivation and engagement as well as improve intervention effects. However, it is possible that game elements can also have adverse effects on cognitive training (eg, be a distraction), which can outweigh their potential motivational benefits. So far, little is known about the effectiveness of such applications.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of gamification on process outcomes (eg, motivation) and on changes in the training domain (eg, cognition), as well as to explore the role of potential moderators.
METHODS
METHODS
We searched PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest Psychology, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Science Direct, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore, Association for Computing Machinery, and a range of gray-area literature databases. The searches included papers published between 2008 and 2018. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The systematic review identified 49 studies, of which 9 randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the review indicated that research in this context is still developing and lacks well-controlled empirical studies. Gamification in cognitive training is applied to a large range of age groups and audiences and is mostly delivered at a research site through computers. Rewards and feedback continue to dominate the gamification landscape, whereas social-oriented features (eg, competition) are underused. The meta-analyses showed that gamified training tasks were more motivating/engaging (Hedges g=0.72) and more demanding/difficult (Hedges g=-0.52) than non- or less-gamified tasks, whereas no effects on the training domain were found. Furthermore, no variables moderated the impact of gamified training tasks. However, meta-analytic findings were limited due to a small number of studies.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, this review provides an overview of the existing research in the domain and provides evidence for the effectiveness of gamification in improving motivation/engagement in the context of cognitive training. We discuss the shortcomings in the current literature and provide recommendations for future research.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32773374
pii: v8i3e18644
doi: 10.2196/18644
pmc: PMC7445616
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e18644Informations de copyright
©Julie F Vermeir, Melanie J White, Daniel Johnson, Geert Crombez, Dimitri M L Van Ryckeghem. Originally published in JMIR Serious Games (http://games.jmir.org), 10.08.2020.
Références
JMIR Serious Games. 2013 Dec 12;1(1):e3
pubmed: 25658754
Clin Psychol Sci. 2014 Sep 1;2(5):576-590
pubmed: 26029490
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
BMC Med. 2010 Mar 24;8:18
pubmed: 20334633
Behav Cogn Psychother. 2012 Oct;40(5):618-33
pubmed: 22127022
BMJ. 1997 Sep 13;315(7109):629-34
pubmed: 9310563
J Biomed Inform. 2019 Oct;98:103287
pubmed: 31518700
Appetite. 2018 May 1;124:89-98
pubmed: 28479405
PLoS One. 2013 Nov 18;8(11):e79419
pubmed: 24260218
J Atten Disord. 2014 Nov;18(8):699-712
pubmed: 22879577
Mem Cognit. 2014 Apr;42(3):464-80
pubmed: 24081919
JMIR Ment Health. 2019 Jun 26;6(6):e13717
pubmed: 31244479
J Cogn Enhanc. 2017 Dec;1(4):491-507
pubmed: 30221244
JMIR Ment Health. 2016 Aug 24;3(3):e39
pubmed: 27558893
PLoS Med. 2014 Nov 18;11(11):e1001756
pubmed: 25405755
Games Health J. 2017 Dec;6(6):351-357
pubmed: 28926286
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2015 Dec;49(Pt A):13-20
pubmed: 25843611
JMIR Serious Games. 2016 Jul 15;4(2):e11
pubmed: 27421244
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655
pubmed: 18824488
Front Psychol. 2014 Nov 13;5:1275
pubmed: 25431564
Behav Cogn Psychother. 2012 Oct;40(5):529-41
pubmed: 22137185
Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Apr 24;8:242
pubmed: 24795603
Am J Psychiatry. 2017 Apr 1;174(4):329-340
pubmed: 27838936
Biometrics. 2000 Jun;56(2):455-63
pubmed: 10877304
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2011 Mar;14(3):115-22
pubmed: 20649448
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 May 13;105(19):6829-33
pubmed: 18443283
Sci Data. 2016 Mar 15;3:160018
pubmed: 26978244
Behav Res Ther. 2015 Feb;65:93-100
pubmed: 25594940
Behav Cogn Psychother. 2019 Jan;47(1):16-38
pubmed: 29729676
Stat Med. 2002 Jun 15;21(11):1559-73
pubmed: 12111920
BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 18;9(8):e027062
pubmed: 31427316
Biol Psychol. 2017 Jul;127:148-156
pubmed: 28478138
JMIR Serious Games. 2016 Dec 06;4(2):e20
pubmed: 27923780
Games Health J. 2015 Dec;4(6):434-43
pubmed: 26421349
Behav Res Ther. 2016 Feb;77:105-17
pubmed: 26745621
Schizophr Res. 2010 May;118(1-3):12-9
pubmed: 19716270
J Biomed Inform. 2017 Jul;71:31-48
pubmed: 28536062
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2015 May;56(5):566-76
pubmed: 25256627
BMC Psychiatry. 2013 Jul 09;13:184
pubmed: 23837673
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Jun 21;108(25):10081-6
pubmed: 21670271
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2013 May;142(2):359-79
pubmed: 22708717
Internet Interv. 2017 Jul 06;12:83-90
pubmed: 30135772
BMJ. 2000 Sep 16;321(7262):694-6
pubmed: 10987780
Clin Psychol Rev. 2018 Feb;59:16-29
pubmed: 29126746
PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e40588
pubmed: 22792378
Contemp Educ Psychol. 2000 Jan;25(1):54-67
pubmed: 10620381
Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2018 Nov;3(11):907-915
pubmed: 30197048
Internet Interv. 2016 Nov 02;6:89-106
pubmed: 30135818