Gamification and Evidence-Based Practice

Our training and performance profession is often sidetrackedwith charismatic yet unproven fads, such as learning styles. What aboutgamification? What do we know about its effectiveness?

First, the term gamificationis too broad to support valid generalizations, as there is a wide range ofgames—such as puzzle games, arcade-style games, adventure games, and actiongames, to name a few. Furthermore, evidence shows that the effectiveness ofeven basic instructional methods such as graphics will depend on severalfactors, including:

• The nature of the graphic (such as still oranimated)
• The rendering of the graphic (such as detailed 2-Dor simple line)
• The background of the learner (such as novice orexperienced with the content)
• The instructional goal (such as applying factsor procedures automatically or solving problems in the workplace)

Research has shown that these factors in concert can affectthe learning benefits of a graphic. For example: A graphic that is effectivefor a novice learner often offers no benefit to learners with more experience,who can form their own images based on the words they read.

There is no reason to believe that games are any different. Theireffectiveness will depend on the type and design of the game, the instructionalgoal, and the learner’s background. Instead of asking, “Is gamificationeffective?” a better question to ask might be: “What features of games promotelearning?”

In a series of experiments summarized in chapter 17 of the new fourth edition of e-Learning and the Scienceof Instruction (of which this writer is a co-author), Richard Mayeridentified a number of factors that led to better learning from games.

He did a series of studies using a simple game called theCircuit Game. The research team compared playing the basic game (see Figure 1) withseveral enhanced versions that included feedback or elicited learner rationaleafter each choice (see Figure 2). Their research showed that learning fromgames could be improved by adding instructional methods such as these, which haveproved to be effective in other learning settings.

Figure 1: Base version of the Circuit Game (Source: Clark and Mayer,2016)

Figure 2: The Circuit Game with self-explanation question added(Source: Clark and Mayer, 2016)

As of now, there is more we don’t know about games than wedo know about them. If you are thinking about integrating games into yourprograms, consider the following.

• Ask yourself: Does the type of game promote yourinstructional goal?
• Design the game using instructional methods provento work in other learning materials, such as feedback and self-explanations.
• Create a small prototype, and measure learnerresponse and learning from the game.

References