Is gamification a suitable tool for increasing participant engagement with cognitive tests

Over the past decade, gamification – the use of game design elements in non-game contexts – has rapidly grown in popularity, piquing the interest of researchers in many fields, including cognitive psychology. Computerised cognitive tasks are a vital data capture tool for these researchers, but participants often view these tasks as effortful and frustrating. Gamification offers a possible solution: if game elements can be incorporated into cognitive tasks without undermining their scientific validity, then data quality, intervention effects and participant retention might be improved. The purpose of this thesis was to establish whether gamification is a suitable tool for increasing participant engagement with cognitive tasks. A systematic review revealed a literature of variable quality: findings were tentatively positive but hampered by heterogenous study designs, poor experimental controls and little attempt to methodically understand the effect of introducing game elements to a cognitive task. I therefore conducted a series of three online experiments. Each study investigated the effects of two common game design elements, points and theme, on cognitive data and participant engagement with the task. I found that adding points to a cognitive test did not negatively impact the data collected, and improved participants’ self-reported engagement with the task. In contrast, I found that graphically themed tests had a negative impact on cognitive data and did not clearly improve participant enjoyment compared to a non-game control. I found no evidence of an effect of gamification on behavioural measures of engagement (i.e., task usage); rather it seems that motivation to engage was often driven by financial incentive. In summary, the evidence presented in this thesis suggests that gamification is not an effective method of increasing engagement with cognitive tasks. However, carefully implemented game elements can enhance participants’ subjective experience while not impacting the data collected. Authors Declaration I declare that the work in this dissertation was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the University's Regulations and Code of Practice for Research Degree Programmes and that it has not been submitted for any other academic award. Except where indicated by specific reference in the text, the work is the candidate's own work. Work done in collaboration with, or with the assistance of, others, is indicated as such. Any views expressed in the dissertation are those of the author. Signed: . Date: . 26/07/2018. Conflicts of Interest During the final year of work on this thesis, I was employed by Prolific on a part time basis. Several weeks before thesis submission, my contract became permanent, and I had begun a full-time position as Data Analyst at Prolific by the time of the PhD viva. Note that all experiments were designed, preregistered and conducted before any professional engagement with Prolific occurred. Chapters based on Publications Three chapters in this thesis are based on my previously published works. Chapter 2: Lumsden J, Edwards EA, Lawrence NS, Coyle D, Munafò MR. Gamification of Cognitive Assessment and Cognitive Training: A Systematic Review of Applications and Efficacy. JMIR Serious Games 2016 Jul 15;4(2):e11. [doi: 10.2196/games.5888] Chapter 3: Lumsden J, Skinner A, Woods AT, Lawrence NS, Munafò M. The effects of gamelike features and test location on cognitive test performance and participant enjoyment. PeerJ 2016;4:e2184. [doi: 10.7717/peerj.2184] Chapter 5: Lumsden J, Skinner A, Coyle D, Lawrence N, Munafo M. Attrition from Web-Based Cognitive Testing: A Repeated Measures Comparison of Gamification Techniques. J Med Internet Res 2017;19(11):e395. [doi: 10.2196/jmir.8473] Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisors and advisors. The feedback, guidance and support I have received from Marcus Munafò and Andy Skinner has been invaluable. Not to mention the encouragement and advice of Natalia Lawrence, David Coyle, Jenny Barnett, Charlotte Housden, Kirsten Cater and Colin Dalton. This thesis would have been very different without their input. I’d also like to thank all my colleagues in TARG and 5 Priory Road. Together they have created such a warm and loving environment, where researchers support each other, and good science and good fun go hand in hand. I’d particularly like to thank Adele Wang, Abi Mottershaw, Andy Gordon, Charlotte Buckley, David Troy, Duncan McCaig, Eleanor Kennedy, Jen Ferrar, Jane Cowen, Jasmine Khouja, Meg Fluharty, Miriam Cohen, Robyn Wootton and Stephen Hinde for being such good friends. I’d like to thank the co-authors of my papers cited in this thesis: Chung Yen Looi, Steph Suddell, Sarah Peters, Olga Perski and Elizabeth Edwards. It has been an honour to work with them, and they have taught me so much about the importance of doing science in a team. I’d also like to acknowledge the artistic contribution of Melissa Groves, who created all the theme variant’s stimuli and backgrounds in Experiments 2 and 3. I gratefully acknowledge the joint scholarship I received from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and Cambridge Cognition. Their funding made this project possible. I’d also like to thank Prolific, who have been extremely accommodating in allowing me to finish my thesis while in their employ. Thank you to my parents and my sister for providing such brilliant emotional and financial support. Thank you to my friends from orchestra and elsewhere, who have provided much needed distraction and ears to freak-out at. Finally, I must thank my rock, my righteousness, my adventuring companion Florence Emond. Sorry Flo, I’m still going to be obsessed with games despite this being over. Table of