Leaderbords and the Gamification Gurus

This month I reached the top 12 of the Gamification Gurus (I don't know exactly how, but that's ok). A big climb since last month ranking. And in good company.

Leaderboards are a powerful game element that can have different flavors: single player or multiplayer, relative or absolute. To be more exact:

• Single player, that compare the players latest score to previous scores;
• Multiplayer that display rankings of near performing peers;
• Multiplayer that display rankings of high performing peers;
• Multiplayer that display rankings of near performing friends

Single player leaderboards are simple individual lists of scores, showing the performance of one player. Multiplayer leaderboards displaying rankings of near performing peers are a usual approach in social games. In rankings of high performing peers, players with a lower score may not be present. That may lead to demotivation, which is a drawback for this kind of leaderboards. Multiplayer near performing peers leaderboards are recommended for use in learning contexts.

In education, leaderboards can be an important social game element if correctly used to foster social interactions and avoid the downfalls of competition in this context. Competition is probably the reason explaining why gamified systems in the education sector do not use leaderboards so often. Alternatively, the leaderboard can be anonymous, where each player can only see other players’ scores, but not their names, reducing competition among players.

See also Leaderboards: A Social Game Element and Leaderboards: A Social Game Element (Part II).

Leaderboards: A Social Game Element (Part II)

 http://csi.softwareadvice.com/gamification-preventing-support-agent-burnout-1022112/

Another paper presented at Gamification 2013 shows how to use a leaderboard to improve behaviour change (see this previous post Leaderboards: A Social Game Element). 

The paper, Time's Up: Studying Leaderboards For Engaging Punctual Behaviour (João Costa, Rina Renee Wehbe, James Robb and Lennart E. Nacke) studies the use of a leaderboard for improving punctuality of participants to regular work meetings. Again, the authors conclude that leaderboards are more effective if they are used as a social game mechanic. They conducted an experiment where data were collected from 28 participants, members of the Laboratory of Games And Media Entertainment Research (GAMERLab). The arrival times to meetings of laboratory members were recorded for nine meetings.

Concerning the different kinds of leaderboads, discussed in the previous post, the leaderboard in this experiment was a multiplayer leaderboard, ranking high performance peers.

These are the authors' main conclusions:

"Our study showed that leaderboards do give way to positive social behaviours like social comparisons, which were of great importance to the majority of the participants, in particular to assess their improvement or standing in comparison to those who were of their interest, as opposed to assessing themselves in the global panorama of punctuality.
In conclusion, our study shows the possibility of gamifying meetings to improve the punctuality of the work group. This can help individuals project a better self-image, keep on task and increase their productivity."

The paper is available in the conference proceedings.

Leaderboards: A Social Game Element

Leaderboards are one of the most popular game elements that are used in gamified systems, along with points, badges or achievements (see How Gamification Can Drive Behavioural Change). Essentially they appeal to extrinsic motivation and are a means to give feedback to the players. Badges are probably at the top of this list. They are used in many systems and recently, Moodle's latest version also includes badges (see All About Badges and Open Badges). There is a lot of information, blog posts and academic papers about how to use badges and there are even MOOCs on badges.

On the other hand, leaderboards are less mentioned although they are also common in gamified systems. Applications like Leaderboarded can be used to easily create leaderbords. Gamified systems in the education sector do not use leaderboards so often, probably because they appeal to competition.

A recent paper presented at Gamification 2013 (see this other post), Reimagining Leaderboards: Towards Gamifying Competency Models through Social Game Mechanics, discusses how to use leaderboards as social game mechanic. Leaderboards are game elements that can be collaborative and qualitative and not only quantitative and competetive. In this way, leaderboards are a social game element. The paper proposes a framework that uses a prosocial leaderboards. Prosocial interactions occur when individuals act in the interest of others.

The paper defines social gamification as "... an emerging subgenre of gamified systems that use game mechanics and elements from social games, which feature interactions designed for close peers and direct ties to social networking systems , in which they are often embedded". It then cites one of our previous works, A Social Gamification Framework for a K-6 Learning Platform, mentioning that in our proposal, game elements were taken directly from social games. We also have our own definition of social gamification: the use of design elements from social games in non-game contexts to drive game like engagement in order to promote desired behaviours. 

In the Gamification 2013 paper, leaderbords are defined as "... a performance comparison game element". They can be single or mutiplayer. Single player leaderboards compare the players latest score to the previous scores. Multiplayer leaderboards can display rankings of near performing peers (a usual approach in social games) or rankings of high performing peers (where players with lower score may not be present, leading to demotivation, which is a drawback for this kind of leaderboards).

An example of a multiplayer leaderboard of high performing peers is the Gamification Gurus Leaderboard built with Leaderboarded:

The prosocial learderboard approach uses elements like status, scarcity, karma points and group leaderboard. These elements are used to encourage prosocial behaviours. In this prosocial approach all users must benefit and social interaction is achieved through altruism, sharing, reciprocity and gratitude. The concept is being applied in a competency-based assessment system for medical education.

Leaderboards, that at first are nothing more than an extrinsic motivator can, in this approach, be used to promote social interaction and to foster intrinsic motivation. It appeals to relatedeness and to a feeling of doing something not just for our own sake but for the sake of our group or community.

References

Seaborn, K., Pennefather, P., Fels, D. (2013). Reimagining Leaderboards: Towards Gamifying Competency Models through Social Game Mechanics, Proceedings of Gamification 2013, Stratford, Ontario, Canada, 107-110

Simões, J., Redondo, R. D., Vilas, A. F. (2013). A Social Gamification Framework for a K-6 Learning Platform. Advanced Human-Computer Interaction 29, 2, 345–353.

Leaderboards & Educação

A propósito do caso de estudo para o GamFed sobre uma aplicação do Leaderboarded - TechHub Google Campus Noise Meter - ficam aqui algumas considerações sobre o uso deste tipo de mecânica/elemento de jogo no contexto da educação. O primeiro problema tem a ver com o objetivo de usar tabelas de liderança (uma tradução possível para leaderboards). Este elemento de jogo apela sobretudo à competição entre os jogadores (e também ao status individual) mostrando a posição de cada um face a um qualquer critério. A competição entre alunos (que existe mesmo que não se apele a ela diretamente) não é normalmente bem aceite, sobretudo nos primeiros anos de escolaridade. Mas há formas de usar as tabelas de liderança. Em Leaderboards in Education: What are its applications? são dados alguns exemplos que vale a pena analisar.

Como exemplos de aplicação são referidos a angariação de fundos para uma qualquer iniciativa da escola (não implica nenhum tipo de competição em contexto académico) ou atividades de grupo (dilui a possibilidade de competição individual). Os outros exemplos implicam a associação a um sistema de pontos, nomeadamente, para premiar comportamentos desejados (p.e. assiduidade).

Sobre a associação de tabelas de liderança a um sistema de pontos fiz já uma experiência mencionada aqui e que juntou uma aplicação do Leaderboarded com o ClassDojo (ver o blogue criado para o efeito). A tabela de liderança foi baseada em dados armazenados numa folha de cálculo do GoogleDocs, uma das fontes de dados possível para o Leaderboarded). Os dados consistiam em pontos obtidos individualmente (a partir dos resultados do ClassDojo, premiando comportamentos desejados e penalizando os indesejados) e pontos obtidos em tarefas de grupo.

Relativamente a forma de aplicar as tabelas de liderança, estas podem ser absolutas ou relativas (ver Gamification a Little on Leaderboards). Estas últimas têm como objetivo evitar a desmotivação dos jogadores pior classificados (apenas se comparam relativamente a outros no mesmo nível).

Sobre a contribuição para o caso de estudo do TechHub Google Campus Noise Meter destacou-se a importância deste tipo de ferramentas de gamification deverem ser usadas em conjunto com outras ferramentas. A aplicação de um único elemento de jogo (a tabela de liderança) não conduz a uma experiência de gamification completa, como é óbvio. Este elemento de jogo integra o que Kevin Werbach designa por PBL Gamification (PBL de Points, Badges e Leaderboards) ou BLAP Gamification (BLAP - Badges, Levels and Leaderbords, Achievements and Points) por Scott Nicholson (ver referências aqui). Este tipo de elementos de jogos apelam sobretudo para a motivação extrínseca e portanto devem ser aplicados numa estratégia de curto prazo e tendo em conta que podem reduzir a motivação intrínseca. De qualquer forma, o apelo à motivação extrínseca pode ser usado de forma positiva e o Leaderboarded é sem dúvida uma ferramenta de gamification a ter em conta.

A apresentação abaixo descreve bem as diferenças entre motivação intrínseca e motivação extrínseca e o seu impacto em aplicações de gamification:

Gamification - Extrinsic vs. Intrinsic Rewards from Playful Wingmen