Uma análise dos tipos de jogadores em uma plataforma de gamificação incorporada a um sistema juiz on-line
Resumo
Pesquisas buscam entender o comportamento de diferentes perfis de usuários em jogos e ambientes gamificados. Nesse sentido, o objetivo deste artigo é identificar e analisar as preferências e comportamentos dos usuários de diferentes perfis dentro de uma plataforma de gamificação criada em torno de um jogo RPG multiplayer, desenvolvido e implantado em turmas reais de introdução à programação. Os perfis dos usuários foram identificados por meio da taxonomia Hexad, e as interações dos usuários de cada tipo com os elementos de jogos da plataforma foram armazenadas em registros de logs. Através de uma análise dos logs dos alunos, percebeu-se que cada perfil possui diferenças em seus comportamentos, que são discutidas neste estudo. Acredita-se que os resultados desta pesquisa trazem insights importantes para o desenvolvimento e aprimoramento de ambientes gamificados personalizados.
Palavras-chave:
Gamificação, Tipos de jogadores, Hexad
Referências
Amado, C. M. and Roleda, L. S. (2020). Game element preferences and engagement of different hexad player types in a gamified physics course. In Proceedings of the 2020 11th International Conference on E-Education, E-Business, E-Management, and E-Learning, pages 261–267.
Bartle, R. (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit muds. Journal of MUD research, 1(1):19.
Bez, J. L., Tonin, N. A., and Rodegheri, P. R. (2014). Uri online judge academic: A tool for algorithms and programming classes. In 2014 9th International Conference on Computer Science & Education, pages 149–152. IEEE.
Bovermann, K. and Bastiaens, T. J. (2020). Towards a motivational design? connecting gamification user types and online learning activities. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(1):1.
Galvão, L., Fernandes, D., and Gadelha, B. (2016). Juiz online como ferramenta de apoio a uma metodologia de ensino híbrido em programação. In Brazilian Symposium on Computers in Education (Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação-SBIE), volume 27, page 140.
Hallifax, S., Serna, A., Marty, J.-C., and Lavoué, E. (2019). Adaptive gamification in education: A literature review of current trends and developments. In European conference on technology enhanced learning, pages 294–307. Springer.
Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., and Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(3):184–192.
Hassan, M. A., Habiba, U., Majeed, F., and Shoaib, M. (2019). Adaptive gamificationin e-learning based on students’ learning styles. Interactive Learning Environments, pages 1–21.
Jia, Y., Xu, B., Karanam, Y., and Voida, S. (2016). Personality-targeted gamification: a survey study on personality traits and motivational affordances. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 2001–2013.
Kasahara, R., Sakamoto, K., Washizaki, H., and Fukazawa, Y. (2019). Applying gamification to motivate students to write high-quality code in programming assignments. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pages 92–98.
Klock, A. C. T., Gasparini, I., Pimenta, M. S., and Hamari, J. (2020). Tailored gamification: A review of literature. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, page102495.
Kurnia, A., Lim, A., and Cheang, B. (2001). Online judge. Computers Education, 36(4):299–315.
Lopez, C. E. and Tucker, C. S. (2019). The effects of player type on performance: A gamification case study. Computers in Human Behavior, 91:333–345.
Lowry, P. B., Gaskin, J., Twyman, N., Hammer, B., and Roberts, T. (2012). Taking‘ fun and games’ seriously: Proposing the hedonic-motivation system adoption model (hmsam). Journal of the association for information systems, 14(11):617–671.
Marczewski, A. (2015). Even ninja monkeys like to play. Create Space Indep. Publish Platform, Charleston, Chapter User Types, pages 69–84.
Melo, R., Pessoa, M., Haydar, G., de Oliveira, D. B. F., de Oliveira, E. H. T., de Carvalho, L. S. G., Conte, T., and Pereira, F. D. (2021). Um estudo sobre a relação entre os elementos de jogos e os tipos de usuários de sistemas gamificados. In Anais Estendidos do Simpósio Brasileiro de Educação em Computação, pages 35–36. SBC.
Nacke, L. E., Bateman, C., and Mandryk, R. L. (2014). Brainhex: A neurobiologicalgamer typology survey. Entertainment computing, 5(1):55–62.
Oyibo, K. and Vassileva, J. (2019). Investigation of persuasive system design predictors of competitive behavior in fitness application: A mixed-method approach. Digital health,5:2055207619878601.
Pereira, F. D., Oliveira, E. H., Oliveira, D. B., Cristea, A. I., Carvalho, L. S., Fonseca, S. C., Toda, A., and Isotani, S. (2020). Using learning analytics in the amazonas: understanding students’ behaviour in introductory programming. British Journal of Educational Technology.
Pessoa, M., Fernandes, D., de Carvalho, L. S. G., Oliveira, E., Nakamura, W., and Conte,T. (2019). Codeplay: Uma plataforma de gamificação baseada em jogos de rpg multiplayer. In Brazilian Symposium on Computers in Education (Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação-SBIE), volume 30, page 843.
Petit, J., Roura, S., Carmona, J., Cortadella, J., Duch, J., Gimnez, O., Mani, A., Mas, J., Rodrguez-Carbonell, E., Rubio, E., et al. (2017). Jutge. org: Characteristics and experiences. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 11(3):321–333.
Qian, Y. and Lehman, J. (2017). Students’ misconceptions and other difficulties in introductory programming: A literature review. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 18(1):1–24.
Rodrigues, L., Toda, A. M., Palomino, P. T., Oliveira, W., and Isotani, S. (2020). Personalized gamification: A literature review of outcomes, experiments, and approaches. In Eighth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, pages 699–706.
Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1):54–67.
Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist, 55(1):68.
Sinly, C., Rusli, A., and Winarno, P. (2018). Utilizing gamification to improve user participation in online judge. In 2018 Joint 10th International Conference on Soft Computing and Intelligent Systems (SCIS) and 19th International Symposium on Advanced Intelligent Systems (ISIS), pages 543–547. IEEE.
Tondello, G. F., Arrambide, K., Ribeiro, G., Cen, A. J.-l., and Nacke, L. E. (2019a). "i don’t fit into a single type": A trait model and scale of game playing preferences. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pages 375–395. Springer.
Tondello, G. F., Mora, A., Marczewski, A., and Nacke, L. E. (2019b). Empirical validation of the gamification user types Hexad scale in English and Spanish. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 127:95–111.
Tondello, G. F., Wehbe, R. R., Diamond, L., Busch, M., Marczewski, A., and Nacke, L. E.(2016). The gamification user types hexad scale. In Proceedings of the 2016 annual symposium on computer-human interaction in play, pages 229–243.
Bartle, R. (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit muds. Journal of MUD research, 1(1):19.
Bez, J. L., Tonin, N. A., and Rodegheri, P. R. (2014). Uri online judge academic: A tool for algorithms and programming classes. In 2014 9th International Conference on Computer Science & Education, pages 149–152. IEEE.
Bovermann, K. and Bastiaens, T. J. (2020). Towards a motivational design? connecting gamification user types and online learning activities. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(1):1.
Galvão, L., Fernandes, D., and Gadelha, B. (2016). Juiz online como ferramenta de apoio a uma metodologia de ensino híbrido em programação. In Brazilian Symposium on Computers in Education (Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação-SBIE), volume 27, page 140.
Hallifax, S., Serna, A., Marty, J.-C., and Lavoué, E. (2019). Adaptive gamification in education: A literature review of current trends and developments. In European conference on technology enhanced learning, pages 294–307. Springer.
Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., and Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(3):184–192.
Hassan, M. A., Habiba, U., Majeed, F., and Shoaib, M. (2019). Adaptive gamificationin e-learning based on students’ learning styles. Interactive Learning Environments, pages 1–21.
Jia, Y., Xu, B., Karanam, Y., and Voida, S. (2016). Personality-targeted gamification: a survey study on personality traits and motivational affordances. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 2001–2013.
Kasahara, R., Sakamoto, K., Washizaki, H., and Fukazawa, Y. (2019). Applying gamification to motivate students to write high-quality code in programming assignments. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pages 92–98.
Klock, A. C. T., Gasparini, I., Pimenta, M. S., and Hamari, J. (2020). Tailored gamification: A review of literature. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, page102495.
Kurnia, A., Lim, A., and Cheang, B. (2001). Online judge. Computers Education, 36(4):299–315.
Lopez, C. E. and Tucker, C. S. (2019). The effects of player type on performance: A gamification case study. Computers in Human Behavior, 91:333–345.
Lowry, P. B., Gaskin, J., Twyman, N., Hammer, B., and Roberts, T. (2012). Taking‘ fun and games’ seriously: Proposing the hedonic-motivation system adoption model (hmsam). Journal of the association for information systems, 14(11):617–671.
Marczewski, A. (2015). Even ninja monkeys like to play. Create Space Indep. Publish Platform, Charleston, Chapter User Types, pages 69–84.
Melo, R., Pessoa, M., Haydar, G., de Oliveira, D. B. F., de Oliveira, E. H. T., de Carvalho, L. S. G., Conte, T., and Pereira, F. D. (2021). Um estudo sobre a relação entre os elementos de jogos e os tipos de usuários de sistemas gamificados. In Anais Estendidos do Simpósio Brasileiro de Educação em Computação, pages 35–36. SBC.
Nacke, L. E., Bateman, C., and Mandryk, R. L. (2014). Brainhex: A neurobiologicalgamer typology survey. Entertainment computing, 5(1):55–62.
Oyibo, K. and Vassileva, J. (2019). Investigation of persuasive system design predictors of competitive behavior in fitness application: A mixed-method approach. Digital health,5:2055207619878601.
Pereira, F. D., Oliveira, E. H., Oliveira, D. B., Cristea, A. I., Carvalho, L. S., Fonseca, S. C., Toda, A., and Isotani, S. (2020). Using learning analytics in the amazonas: understanding students’ behaviour in introductory programming. British Journal of Educational Technology.
Pessoa, M., Fernandes, D., de Carvalho, L. S. G., Oliveira, E., Nakamura, W., and Conte,T. (2019). Codeplay: Uma plataforma de gamificação baseada em jogos de rpg multiplayer. In Brazilian Symposium on Computers in Education (Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação-SBIE), volume 30, page 843.
Petit, J., Roura, S., Carmona, J., Cortadella, J., Duch, J., Gimnez, O., Mani, A., Mas, J., Rodrguez-Carbonell, E., Rubio, E., et al. (2017). Jutge. org: Characteristics and experiences. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 11(3):321–333.
Qian, Y. and Lehman, J. (2017). Students’ misconceptions and other difficulties in introductory programming: A literature review. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 18(1):1–24.
Rodrigues, L., Toda, A. M., Palomino, P. T., Oliveira, W., and Isotani, S. (2020). Personalized gamification: A literature review of outcomes, experiments, and approaches. In Eighth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, pages 699–706.
Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1):54–67.
Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist, 55(1):68.
Sinly, C., Rusli, A., and Winarno, P. (2018). Utilizing gamification to improve user participation in online judge. In 2018 Joint 10th International Conference on Soft Computing and Intelligent Systems (SCIS) and 19th International Symposium on Advanced Intelligent Systems (ISIS), pages 543–547. IEEE.
Tondello, G. F., Arrambide, K., Ribeiro, G., Cen, A. J.-l., and Nacke, L. E. (2019a). "i don’t fit into a single type": A trait model and scale of game playing preferences. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pages 375–395. Springer.
Tondello, G. F., Mora, A., Marczewski, A., and Nacke, L. E. (2019b). Empirical validation of the gamification user types Hexad scale in English and Spanish. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 127:95–111.
Tondello, G. F., Wehbe, R. R., Diamond, L., Busch, M., Marczewski, A., and Nacke, L. E.(2016). The gamification user types hexad scale. In Proceedings of the 2016 annual symposium on computer-human interaction in play, pages 229–243.
Publicado
22/11/2021
Como Citar
PESSOA, Marcela et al.
Uma análise dos tipos de jogadores em uma plataforma de gamificação incorporada a um sistema juiz on-line. In: SIMPÓSIO BRASILEIRO DE INFORMÁTICA NA EDUCAÇÃO (SBIE), 32. , 2021, Online.
Anais [...].
Porto Alegre: Sociedade Brasileira de Computação,
2021
.
p. 474-486.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/sbie.2021.218600.
