游戏化目标设定:积分排行榜的效果在定量、定性和感知表现上有所不同

IF 3.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Tomas Kratochvil , Michaela Šaradín Lebedíková , Martin Vaculik , Jakub Prochazka , Andreas Lieberoth
{"title":"游戏化目标设定:积分排行榜的效果在定量、定性和感知表现上有所不同","authors":"Tomas Kratochvil ,&nbsp;Michaela Šaradín Lebedíková ,&nbsp;Martin Vaculik ,&nbsp;Jakub Prochazka ,&nbsp;Andreas Lieberoth","doi":"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102708","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Leaderboards are commonly used in gamification to enhance performance outcomes. While their impact on quantitative performance is well-established, their effects on other performance indicators and moderators remain underexplored. We replicated and extended Landers et al.'s (2017) study of the gamified goal-setting effect on task performance to examine the effect on quantitative (e.g., task speed), qualitative (e.g., accuracy), and self-reported performance across two studies using 12-minute tasks. While leaderboards improved quantitative performance, qualitative performance remained unaffected. Moreover, leaderboards led to higher and more accurate self-reported performance than an impossible goal and lower and more accurate than an easy goal. This effect was more pronounced among experienced learners. This suggests that leaderboards balance the advantages of simple and challenging goals, making them particularly effective for experienced learners compared to traditional goal setting. Future gamification research should focus on self-assessment as it may shape future objective performance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48336,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Individual Differences","volume":"121 ","pages":"Article 102708"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gamified goal-setting: leaderboards effects differs across quantitative, qualitative, and perceived performance\",\"authors\":\"Tomas Kratochvil ,&nbsp;Michaela Šaradín Lebedíková ,&nbsp;Martin Vaculik ,&nbsp;Jakub Prochazka ,&nbsp;Andreas Lieberoth\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102708\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Leaderboards are commonly used in gamification to enhance performance outcomes. While their impact on quantitative performance is well-established, their effects on other performance indicators and moderators remain underexplored. We replicated and extended Landers et al.'s (2017) study of the gamified goal-setting effect on task performance to examine the effect on quantitative (e.g., task speed), qualitative (e.g., accuracy), and self-reported performance across two studies using 12-minute tasks. While leaderboards improved quantitative performance, qualitative performance remained unaffected. Moreover, leaderboards led to higher and more accurate self-reported performance than an impossible goal and lower and more accurate than an easy goal. This effect was more pronounced among experienced learners. This suggests that leaderboards balance the advantages of simple and challenging goals, making them particularly effective for experienced learners compared to traditional goal setting. Future gamification research should focus on self-assessment as it may shape future objective performance.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48336,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning and Individual Differences\",\"volume\":\"121 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102708\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning and Individual Differences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608025000846\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608025000846","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

排行榜通常用于游戏化中,以提高表现结果。虽然它们对定量绩效的影响已经确立,但它们对其他绩效指标和调节因素的影响仍未得到充分探讨。我们复制并扩展了Landers等人(2017)关于游戏化目标设定对任务绩效影响的研究,以检验两项使用12分钟任务的研究对定量(例如任务速度)、定性(例如准确性)和自我报告绩效的影响。虽然排行榜能够改善定量表现,但定性表现却未受到影响。此外,比起一个不可能实现的目标,积分排行榜能够带来更高更准确的自我报告表现,而比起一个容易实现的目标,积分排行榜能够带来更低更准确的自我报告表现。这种效果在有经验的学习者中更为明显。这表明积分排行榜平衡了简单和具有挑战性的目标的优势,与传统的目标设置相比,它对有经验的学习者特别有效。未来的游戏化研究应该关注自我评估,因为它可能会影响未来的客观表现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Gamified goal-setting: leaderboards effects differs across quantitative, qualitative, and perceived performance
Leaderboards are commonly used in gamification to enhance performance outcomes. While their impact on quantitative performance is well-established, their effects on other performance indicators and moderators remain underexplored. We replicated and extended Landers et al.'s (2017) study of the gamified goal-setting effect on task performance to examine the effect on quantitative (e.g., task speed), qualitative (e.g., accuracy), and self-reported performance across two studies using 12-minute tasks. While leaderboards improved quantitative performance, qualitative performance remained unaffected. Moreover, leaderboards led to higher and more accurate self-reported performance than an impossible goal and lower and more accurate than an easy goal. This effect was more pronounced among experienced learners. This suggests that leaderboards balance the advantages of simple and challenging goals, making them particularly effective for experienced learners compared to traditional goal setting. Future gamification research should focus on self-assessment as it may shape future objective performance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Learning and Individual Differences
Learning and Individual Differences PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
2.80%
发文量
86
期刊介绍: Learning and Individual Differences is a research journal devoted to publishing articles of individual differences as they relate to learning within an educational context. The Journal focuses on original empirical studies of high theoretical and methodological rigor that that make a substantial scientific contribution. Learning and Individual Differences publishes original research. Manuscripts should be no longer than 7500 words of primary text (not including tables, figures, references).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信