Exploring the Psychological Effects and Physical Exertion of Using Different Movement Interactions in Casual Exergames That Promote Active Microbreaks: Quasi-Experimental Study.

Background: Prolonged sedentary behavior, such as sitting or reclining, has consistently been identified as a stand-alone risk factor for heightened cardiometabolic risk and overall mortality. Conversely, interrupting sedentary periods by incorporating short, active microbreaks has been shown to mitigate the negative effects of sedentary behavior. Casual exergames, which mix elements of casual gaming with physical activity, are one prospective intervention to reduce sedentary behavior because they require physical exertion. Casual exergames have shown promise in fostering emotional and physical advantages when played in specific circumstances. However, little research exists on how different types of movement interactions impact the psychological effects as well as the physical exertion of playing casual exergames.

Objective: The primary aim of this work was to explore the psychological effects and physical exertion of playing casual exergames lasting 2 minutes. More precisely, the investigation focused on comparing upper body and full body movement interactions. In addition, the work examined variations in body positions, considering both standing and seated positions during upper body movement interactions.

Methods: Two casual exergames were developed and investigated through 2 quasi-experimental studies. In study 1, we investigated how players' perceptions of control, exertion, and immersion were affected by using upper body as opposed to full body exergame controllers when playing casual exergames. In study 2, we investigated differences in positive affect, performance, enjoyment, and exertion when playing casual exergames with upper body movement interactions in seated and standing positions.

Results: Study 1 showed that perceived control was significantly higher for upper body movement interactions than for full body movement interactions (P=.04), but there were no significant differences regarding perceived exertion (P=.15) or immersion (P=.66). Study 2 showed that positive affect increased significantly for both standing (P=.003) and seated (P=.001) gameplay. The participants in the standing gameplay group showed slightly higher actual exertion; however, there were no differences between the groups in terms of positive affect, perceived exertion, enjoyment, or performance.

Conclusions: Casual exergames controlled by upper body movement interactions in seated gameplay can produce similar psychological effects and physical exertion as upper body movement interactions in standing gameplay and full body movement interactions. Therefore, upper body and seated casual exergames should not be overlooked as a suitable microbreak activity.