To Nudge or to Gamify – How to Repair Reality?

Abstract

We may say that reality these days is broken. According to Jane McGonigal, that is no news, as that was the title of her groundbreaking and a must-read book back in 2011 (McGonigal, 2011). Jane extensively elaborated on escapism from reality, why games may make us better and succeed in life, and how games can change the world. A book a decade old, but is relevant to date as ever. As gaming may inspire us to cooperate and collaborate to repair what reality has broken, and gameplay may become a way of thinking and solving problems, rather than tinkering with a gadget. Now how to get people into a flow-zone, freely thinking how to solve everyday problems? Many theories about that, and in our thinking, we may find different games to play. Moving from playing a game, towards gamification and then shifting into nudging may be a very interesting concept. But little is to be found about the delicate, but important differences between gamification and nudging. Indeed, it is relevant to understand what sets them apart to maximize benefits. Gamification is a concept that has largely arisen from marketing. Behavior is believed to be the outcome from direct or indirect interaction with one’s surroundings, resulting from feedback in the form of rewards and/or punishments. Behavior is thus largely conditioned, having the player choose between options that are set out by the architect of the game. Setting out a game using game mechanics such as competition, rewards, accomplishments and often also punishments may activate people, engage theme and when well done, help people make better informed decisions for better outcomes in reality. Nudging, on the other hand, is all about free choice architecture. The master of the game, the game architect, provides players (aren’t we all?) in real life with framed options, providing choice. And s/he can make one option more appealing than the other