<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Introducing a Gami cation Approach for Enhancing Web Search Literacy</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Ioannis Karatassis</string-name>
          <email>karatassis@is.inf.uni-due.de</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Sebastian Dungs</string-name>
          <email>dungs@is.inf.uni-due.de</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>University of Duisburg-Essen</institution>
          ,
          <country country="DE">Germany</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <fpage>340</fpage>
      <lpage>347</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Web search engines provide a rich feature set to users that allows e cient satisfaction of information needs. Nevertheless, recent studies show that Internet users do not know how to use Web search engines e ectively for satisfying information needs. The overall level of Web search literacy leaves a lot to be desired and most users tend to overestimate their abilities in the domain of Web search. In this paper, we introduce a gami cation approach with the aim of promoting search literacy as well as the current state of our prototype application. We present plans for future work to answer whether gami cation is a viable means to improve Web search literacy. Our goals include nding indicators to di erentiate between low and high literacy users and running long-term user studies to investigate the sustainability of search literacy improvements.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>gami cation</kwd>
        <kwd>search literacy</kwd>
        <kwd>Web search</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>Search literacy denotes the ability to locate and access desired information with
e ciency and e ectiveness. It is, therefore, a subset of the much broader concept
information literacy which also encompasses evaluation, reuse of information,
and information synthesis. Instead of putting Web search on a level with
information retrieval, we look upon it as a lifelong learning process that we aim to
support in order to enable users orienting themselves in modern societies. Users
employ Web search engines not only for answering trivial information needs
but also trust in the machines and their own abilities when it comes to serious
decisions, e.g., health related issues or nancial concerns.</p>
      <p>In this paper, we draw attention to the problems arising from de ciencies in
aforementioned Web search literacy and introduce a potential means that aims at
increasing Web search literacy beyond traditional training methods like courses
or tutorials. Only few approaches exist in this regard. One notable exception
being A Google a Day 1 which features a fact nding search quiz. Users are
encouraged to employ advanced features of the search engine to solve the tasks.
While the system includes a scoring system and rewards fast task completion, it
lacks key gami cation elements like levels, achievement badges, or leaderboards.
Users solve tasks themselves and can not compete with other users.</p>
      <p>We developed a gami cation framework that features di erent types of tasks
(e.g., search and educational) to give users a deeper understanding of the
functioning of Web search engines. At the same time, our users are to learn and
develop skills that should help them in mastering their daily search tasks e
ciently. Furthermore, we plan to use the presented system as a basis for long-term
studies. The goal of these studies will be 1) to identify key factors that make
a user actually Web search literate, 2) to measure whether Web search literacy
was improved and by how much, and 3) to evaluate how sustainable these e ects
are.</p>
      <p>The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: First, we take a closer
look at related work regarding search literacy and gami cation in Section 2.
The gami ed application is presented in Section 3, covering game modes and
later focusing on the employed game design elements. In Section 4, we draw a
conclusion and provide an outlook for future work.
2
2.1</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Related Work</title>
      <sec id="sec-2-1">
        <title>Web Search Literacy</title>
        <p>
          A recent study by Stark et al. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
          ] revealed that Internet users tend to overestimate
their capabilities in the domain of Web search. In fact, the overall Web search
literacy leaves a lot to be desired and common Web search engine users even
have problems with nding answers to yes-no questions [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
          ]. Kogadoga et al.
[
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
          ] refer to the problems that arise from being low literate based on a study:
Participants with de cient Web search skills used to spend signi cantly more
time to complete a search task in comparison to high literate users and were
signi cantly less accurate. The main problem is that users do not know how
to use Web search engines e ectively for satisfying their information needs [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ].
Referring to this, Web search engines o er no feedback for users beyond query
completion or expansion that would help them in improving their skills.
        </p>
        <p>
          In his recent talk at GamifIR'15 [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
          ], Azzopardi raised the idea to make a
nature-nurture distinction when it comes to search behaviour. While this is an
interesting research approach, we expect nurture to a play considerable role in
users' behaviour, allowing for potential improvements by promoting key search
skills.
        </p>
        <p>
          According to Fuhr [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
          ], a Web search literate user needs to know appropriate
search tactics and strategies in order to satisfy information needs e ectively.
Users should be aware of the basic functioning of Web search engines as well as
the following key aspects:
Searchability In some cases where users try to nd a speci c open document
in the browser through Web search engines, they fail since not all online
resources are indexed. The language used in the search query, Website owner
restrictions (e.g., the robots.txt), the document type, and the recency of Web
pages are some of the reasons why resources can not be found.
        </p>
        <p>Linguistic Functions A crucial problem in information retrieval is the
language itself since every natural language is both vague and ambiguous. To
deal with that problem and to represent a user's information needs as best
as possible, Web search engines apply linguistic functions such as word
normalization, lemmatization, and phrase identi cation to search queries and
take composites and synonyms into account.</p>
        <p>Query Language A specially designed language allows users to express
complex information needs and leads to more speci c results since the latter are
restricted to a limited set. Search operators (e.g., Boolean operators,
number ranges, facets, elds, and URL predicates) and search options (e.g., for
restricting the time, place, language, and document type of result items) are
commonly employed search features.</p>
        <p>
          Ranking One search query leads to a set of results where the ranking is of
utmost importance. Hochstotter et al. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
          ] found out that users tend to look at
items on the rst search result page and especially click on the rst or second
item. Result items below the fold are seldom clicked on. Hence, users have
to formulate precise search queries to let search engines produce result sets
where the most relevant items are located on the rst page and preferably
are visible without the need to scroll.
        </p>
        <p>
          Strategies and Tactics The main goal of Web search engine users is to
satisfy their current information need. Complex information needs require a
series of search queries. Strategies are plans for performing a complex search
whereas tactics denote single operations to advance searches. Bates [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
          ]
distinguishes between the following types of tactics: monitoring, le structure,
search formulation, and term.
2.2
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-2">
        <title>Gami cation</title>
        <p>
          In the book by Zichermann et al. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
          ] the term gami cation is de ned as the
process of game-thinking and game mechanics to engage users and solve problems.
The integration of game mechanics into non-game contexts invokes gameful and
ludic experiences to motivate users in solving monotonous tasks or for training
users in complex systems. Beyond that, the concept is a viable means to shape
users' behavior and to enhance online services with motivational a ordances [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
          ].
At its worst, gami cation is a \mindless slapping of points, badges and
leaderboards [. . . ] onto any boring and irrelevant activity in vain attempt to increase
the corporate bottom-line" [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
          ]. When a person performs activities driven by
internal rewards, we say she is intrinsically motivated due to the enjoyment of
the activity itself. In contrast, users acting based upon extrinsic motivation aim
to earn external rewards or to avoid punishments. We focus on enhancing the
intrinsic motivation of users since it is known to be associated with the quality
of e ort that people put into activities [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
          ].
        </p>
        <p>
          In [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref11">10, 11</xref>
          ] university courses were gami ed with great success. Gami cation
helped in improving lecture attendance, content understanding, problem solving
skills, and general engagement of students. Achievement badges have been used
by Hulinen et al. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
          ] to reward students for solving interactive tasks. Results
show that the students' motivation has been enhanced even when the badges
have had no impact on grading. Although there is still a lack of empirical
evidence on the side e ects of the employed game elements, these ndings lead to
the conclusion that gami cation does not harm the intrinsic motivation at all
if gami cation is meaningful enough to the user and applied in a user-centered
fashion [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
          ]. Nevertheless, gami cation designers should take social and
contextual factors into account as they may determine whether the employed game
elements diminish [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
          ] or even suppress intrinsic motivation.
3
3.1
        </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>The Gami cation Framework</title>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Game Modes</title>
        <p>Following the insights gained by literature review, we developed an application
for improving search skills which appears to the user in the form of a game. We
introduce the notion of game mode which emphasizes the playful character of
the framework and summarizes a set of tasks of a speci c nature. In total, we
developed three game modes each of which aiming at a di erent aspect of Web
search literacy: Quiz, Search Hunt, and Query Tuning.</p>
        <p>Quiz The quiz mode features single and multiple choice question answering
tasks (see Fig. 1). They allow for a deeper understanding of the functioning
of search engines. The main goal of this game mode is to familiarize a user
with advanced search engine functionality in a series of tasks. Furthermore,
the quiz acts as a means to measure a priori search knowledge.</p>
        <p>Search Hunt This mode comprises typical fact nding tasks (see Fig. 2). Users
are asked to complete a task by issuing queries to one of the world's leading
search engines which is directly included in the game by a proxy solution in
order to nd the solution being sought. Search hunt primarily trains users to
formulate precise search queries, to identify relevant results, and to nd the
desired content within the document. Furthermore, it promotes the ability
to judge accuracy of results. We exploit the search engine's rich feature set
to provide a complete interface that contains all commonly employed search
functions to our users. The interface allows us to train users on how to use
speci c features and can have more or less importance depending on the
task. In addition, tasks will be designed in a way to familiarize users with
commonly neglected search engine features and search strategies.
Query Tuning is comprised of precision oriented tasks (see Fig. 3). Users are
again required to interact with the search engine but this time to produce a
result set that contains a speci c site at a top position. Along with the target
site and a summary of the content comes a small set of search terms that are
not allowed to be used in the query to avoid trivial solutions (e.g., querying
for the URL of the site). Users formulate and reformulate queries until either
the given site is ranked at the top position or the search performance can not
be improved further. Hence, required skills for formulating precise queries
are enhanced within a step-by-step re ning process. The main goal of this
mode is to form the understanding of ranking and to get a feeling how small
changes in the query can yield to major di erences in the result set.
3.2</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Game Design Elements</title>
        <p>The core game mechanics of the application consist of points, levels, badges, and
leaderboards. Points are received for (partial) successful completion of tasks. The
amount is determined by the degree of correctness, the current user level as well
as the time needed to complete a task. Points act as the main performance
indicator in the application. Levels are used to de ne the user's current state
and represent a task's complexity. The next level up can be reached by exceeding
the corresponding point threshold. Badges are special rewards that are acquired
either for reaching a certain state or for various actions. They may come as
a surprise and with varying frequency and act as a motivator to explore the
application. Furthermore, badges can be used to \show o " individual user skills
to other users via a pro le page (see Figure 4).</p>
        <p>Leaderboards are overviews of the top performing players in each game mode
and are represented as ordered lists with a points score beside each name to allow
simple comparisons and to engage users in competition. Again, these boards act
as a motivational means for continuing as well as an instrument along with levels
to indicate that users have more or less status or achievement in the game.
Besides the core mechanics, the application features di erent sound e ects to
guide users and to introduce events, e.g., the beginning/completion of tasks and
the receipt of awards. A comprehensive logging system collects user data in the
background. The log data gives an insight into a user's behavior and thus can
be used to create user pro les that reveal strategies and techniques being used
to solve tasks.
4</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Conclusion and Future Work</title>
      <p>In this paper, we presented a gami cation framework for Web search. The system
in its current state features key gami cation elements like points, badges, and
leaderboards. Furthermore, three di erent game modes, i.e., types of tasks, are
included. The system was tested regarding usability in a small user study (N =
15) with great success. The main goal of the system is to improve Web search
literacy among general Web search users. We believe that this will allow for
more time e cient and e ective search sessions, which will lead to a higher task
completion rate. To accomplish this goal, we will address various challenges that
we are still facing with our prototype:
1. The actual search tasks and quizzes need to be tailored for the goal of
improving literacy. Therefore, tasks will be created that are challenging for an
average search engine user. Ideally, tasks should promote speci c learning
goals, e.g., search strategies or search engine features.
2. After a larger collection of tasks has been created, we will run a long-term
study with a larger user base. This will not only allow us to tune game
balance. The results will also act as a ground truth for future experiments.
Observing many users completing the same tasks will allow us to \pool"
solution attempts and to generate an ideal solution for every task. Individual
users will then be scored by the closeness of their solution to the ideal one.
3. In the end, we will isolate key factors that make a user Web search literate
and nd means to speci cally promote these skills in a gami ed environment.
The secondary goal of the long-term study will be to test the sustainability
of literacy improvements. Therefore, we will invite participants to reuse the
application with new tasks of similar complexity after a speci c time period
and compare the outcomes of their endeavors.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stark</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Dorr,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Aufenanger</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>S.:</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The Googleization of information search - Search engines in the eld of tension between usage and regulation</article-title>
          .
          <source>Management Summary (in German)</source>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          . Available online at http://www.ifp.uni-mainz.de/Bilder_ allgemein/Suchmaschinen_Management_Summary.pdf; accessed 15-June-2015.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>White</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Beliefs and biases in web search</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 36th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR '13</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>312</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2013</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kodagoda</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wong</surname>
            .,
            <given-names>B.L.W.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>E ects of low &amp; high literacy on user performance in information search and retrieval</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 22Nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture</source>
          , Creativity, Interaction - Volume
          <volume>1</volume>
          , BCS-HCI '
          <volume>08</volume>
          , pages
          <fpage>173181</fpage>
          , Swinton, UK, UK,
          <year>2008</year>
          . British Computer Society.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bateman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Teevan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>White</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.W.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The search dashboard: How re ection and comparison impact search behavior</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '12</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>17851794</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2012</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fuhr</surname>
          </string-name>
          , N.:
          <article-title>Internet search engines - Lecture script for the course in SS 2014 (in German)</article-title>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          . Available online at http://www.is.inf.uni-due.de/courses/ir_ ss14/ISMs_1-
          <fpage>7</fpage>
          .pdf; accessed 15-June-2015.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6. Hochstotter, N.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lewandowski</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>What users see { structures in search engine results pages</article-title>
          .
          <source>Inf. Sci.</source>
          ,
          <volume>179</volume>
          (
          <issue>12</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>17961812</fpage>
          , May
          <year>2009</year>
          . ISSN 0020-0255.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bates</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.J.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Information search tactics</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of the American Society for Information Science</source>
          ,
          <volume>30</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>205214</fpage>
          ,
          <year>1979</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zichermann</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cunningham</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Gami cation by Design: Implementing Game Mechanics in Web</article-title>
          and Mobile
          <string-name>
            <surname>Apps. O'Reilly Media</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Inc.,
          <source>1st edition</source>
          ,
          <year>2011</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Deterding</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dixon</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Khaled</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nacke</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>From game design elements to gamefulness: De ning gami cation</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, MindTrek '11</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>915</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2011</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Iosup</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Epema</surname>
            .,
            <given-names>D.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>An experience report on using gami cation in technical higher education</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, SIGCSE '14</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>2732</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2014</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>O</given-names>
            <surname>'Donovan</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Gain</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Marais</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>P.:</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A case study in the gami cation of a universitylevel games development course</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the South African Institute for Computer Scientists and Information Technologists Conference</source>
          ,
          <source>SAICSIT '13</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>242251</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2013</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hakulinen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Auvinen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Korhonen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Empirical study on the e ect of achievement badges in trakla2 online learning environment</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 2013 Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering</source>
          , LATICE '
          <volume>13</volume>
          , pages
          <fpage>4754</fpage>
          , Washington, DC, USA,
          <year>2013</year>
          . IEEE Computer Society.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nicholson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A User-Centered Theoretical Framework for Meaningful Gami cation</article-title>
          .
          <source>Paper Presented at Games+Learning+Society 8</source>
          .0,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Madison</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>WI</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>June 2012</year>
          . Available online at http://scottnicholson.com/pubs/meaningfulframework.pdf; accessed 15-June-2015.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mekler</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Bruhlmann,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Opwis</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Tuch</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>A.N.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Do points, levels and leaderboards harm intrinsic motivation?: An empirical analysis of common gami cation elements</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Gameful Design</source>
          , Research, and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Applications</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Gami cation '
          <volume>13</volume>
          , pages
          <fpage>6673</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2013</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Shovman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The game of search: What is the fun in that?</article-title>
          <source>In Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Gami cation for Information Retrieval</source>
          ,
          <source>GamifIR '14</source>
          , pages
          <fpage>4648</fpage>
          , New York, NY, USA,
          <year>2014</year>
          . ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ryan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Deci</surname>
          </string-name>
          , E.:
          <article-title>Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic de nitions and new directions</article-title>
          .
          <source>Contemporary educational psychology 25</source>
          ,
          <issue>1</issue>
          (
          <year>2000</year>
          ),
          <fpage>5467</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kazai</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hopfgartner</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kruschwitz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>U.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Meder</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>ECIR 2015 Workshop on Gami cation for Information Retrieval (GamifIR'15)</article-title>
          .
          <source>SIGIR Forum</source>
          <volume>49</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>41</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>49</lpage>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>