Jeanine Kratha and Harald F. O. von Korflescha a University of Koblenz-Landau, Universitaetsstrasse 1, Koblenz, 56070, Germany Gamification design has been an important issue for practitioners and researchers since the beginning of research on gamification. With the increasing divergence of gamification in diverse areas, various design principles have been proposed. Yet, existing reviews focus on the synthesis of scientific knowledge about the design process and specific design elements, neglecting the importance of guidelines and principles to make appropriate design choices in order to achieve the desired outcomes. Therefore, this systematic review identifies, analyzes, and categorizes 30 articles that propose design guidelines for gamification and persuasive systems from various application contexts to provide scholars and practitioners with an overview in designing gamified interventions. More than 60 different principles have been identified, which can be divided into user-oriented principles to achieve the intended behavior, system-oriented principles to ensure a hedonic user experience, and context principles. Since the results are primarily conceptual, further research is invited to investigate the effectiveness of different principles based on the context of application to further refine the recommendations for specific use cases of gamification. Gamification, Design, Persuasive Systems, Literature Review, Gamification Design gamification design [7]. However, their use needs to be guided by design principles [7], which specify the overall game model Over the last decade, gamification has developed by the use of particular game design evolved as an effective tool for creating positive methods [7]. experiences such as engagement and enjoyment Recent systematic reviews have analyzed [1]. Gamification is based on psychological design methods [8, 9, 10] and conceptual effects of games, such as autonomy, models [9] of game design. However, a competence and flow [2], and promotes comprehensive overview is still missing intrinsic motivation for human behavior in non- concerning design principles, where existing game contexts [3]. syntheses remain narrowed to the contexts of The design of gamification has gained education [4, 5, 11] and energy games [12]. scientific attention in several disciplines, Design principles represent an important bridge particularly education [4, 5]. But academic between the two other levels of abstraction research remains still largely focused on listing design methods and models on the one hand and and cataloging design patterns [6] or design patterns and motivational affordances on motivational affordances [1, 2]. These are the other. They help practitioners, such as elements such as badges and leaderboards [7] teachers, physicians or managers, to choose and represent the lowest level of abstraction in 5th International GamiFIN Conference 2021 (GamiFIN 2021), April 7-10, 2021, Finland EMAIL: jkrath@uni-koblenz.de (A. 1); harald.vonkorflesch@uni- koblenz.de (A. 2) ORCID: 0000-0003-4996-1147 (A. 1); 0000-0003-2087-471X (A. 2) 2021 Copyright for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org) appropriate game design patterns [7] that lead evaluative guidelines to approach a design to the desired outcomes. problem or analyze an existing solution [7] and A variety of design principles for form the bridge between low-level motivational gamification and persuasive systems, which is affordances and the high-level game models a related concept [6, 13], have been proposed and game design methods. While the game by scientists from different disciplines, such as models refer to the conceptual framework of the healthcare [14, 15, 16], education [17, 18], game components [7], game design methods sustainability [12, 19] and fitness [20]. This describe the practices and processes or steps of increasing diversity reinforces the need for a game design [7]. systematic overview that enables practitioners to successfully decide on an appropriate gamification design. To address this issue, this systematic review aims at identifying and analyzing existing research on design principles for gamification and persuasive systems. We present more than 60 different design principles and conceptually link the principles with exemplary design patterns and motivational affordances. The resulting framework bridges the gap between existing reviews of design processes and design patterns and contributes to comprehensive guidance for scientists and practitioners in designing gamification. While existing academic research still mostly focuses on game interface design patterns and design patterns [6], recent reviews have also analyzed design methods or processes Gamification can be defined as the [8, 9, 10] and conceptual game models [9] used elements for a gameful in gamification design. However, a experience of non- comprehensive overview of game design [22, p. 17]. These game elements include principles, representing the important bridge patterns, objects, principles, models and between the two other levels of abstraction, is methods inspired by games [21]. In an attempt still lacking. to distinguish these concepts, Deterding et al. Gamified systems are not the only categorized them as different levels of game technology aimed at influencing motivation, design abstraction [7], as shown in Figure 1. attitudes and behavior in non-game contexts. Game interface design patterns [7] include Rather, gamified systems represent a subset of concrete design solutions such as badges, persuasive systems [6, 13]. Persuasion or leaderboards or levels [7]. Closely related, persuasive systems as a broader concept game design patterns refer to the gameplay describes technology attempting to reinforce, mechanics, such as time constraints and turns change or shape attitudes or behaviors or both [7]. Both interface design patterns and design [23], which includes the use of gameful design patterns can also be described as motivational [6, 24]. In addition to this general relationship affordances which, as a more experience- between gamification and persuasion [25], oriented rather than a system-oriented some studies specifically examine the use of perspective, include game components that gamification in persuasive systems [26, 27], support the user towards the desired behavioral indicating the potential of gameful design for outcome [22]. Game interface design patterns persuasion. Conversely, gamification design and design patterns or motivational affordances principles that aim to shape attitudes or represent a low level of abstraction in behaviors should not be limited to gameful gamification design. The selection of design instead, a more holistic perspective motivational affordances is guided by design that includes insights from non-gameful principles. Design principles are defined as persuasive systems is required to design gamification in such a way as to achieve the English articles were included. Furthermore, desired motivational and behavioral outcomes the studies were included if they developed [6]. design principles for the design of a gamified or Thus, we argue that consideration of design persuasive application either in general or in a principles from both gamification and specific field of application, but excluded if persuasive systems research is necessary to they only used or investigated existing design provide a comprehensive overview for deriving principles, or if they focused on the design successful design principles. process, game model, game elements or functional requirements. For the critical appraisal of the quality of the reviewed articles, it was checked whether the authors formulated at least one clear research question or goal, if The systematic literature review was the research method was described and if the conducted in line with the recommendations of stated questions or goals were answered Paré et. al. [28] and Webster and Watson [29] properly. Figure 2 illustrates the result of the for theoretical reviews. The Reporting search strategy and the screening process. In standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses summary, 30 articles remained for data (ROSES) [30] provided detailed guidance on extraction and synthesis. the specific steps of the screening and selection process. For the identification of relevant literature, seven scientific databases were searched (Web of Science Core Collection, EBSCO Host (APA PsychArticles, APA PsychInfo, Business Source Premier), Wiley Online, ScienceDirect, SagePub, IEEE Explore and Taylor & Francis). These multidisciplinary databases were selected because they index a wide range of journals, supplemented by IEEE Explore as a specific database for the information systems research area. To include as many relevant results as possible, we searched for articles that refer to design principles of either gamification or persuasive systems, using various terms such as principle, guideline, framework, strategy, or recommendation. The search was therefore conducted using the following search string in September 2020: TITLE-ABS-KEY ("Gamif*" OR "Persuasive system*" OR "Persuasive technology") AND ("design guideline*" OR According to the guidelines of Webster and "design framework*" OR "design principle*" Watson [29], author-centric qualitative data OR "design strateg*" OR "design extraction involved coding the domain and recommendation*"). methodological approach of the investigation, To ensure research quality, only empirical as well as the topic focus (gamification or and conceptual studies from peer-reviewed persuasion) and the design principles, journal articles and peer-reviewed conference suggested in the respective articles. In the papers were included in the final sample. The subsequent concept-centric phase, the coded reasons why the conference papers were results were analyzed and organized into considered important are that they account for a frequency matrices. significant proportion of citations in computer science and research on human-computer interaction [31] and that the identification of studies from conference proceedings in systematic reviews is generally recognized as In our analysis, we first examine the good practice [32]. As language criterion, only research areas and methods of the reviewed articles, followed by the qualitative analysis of the design principles presented. Overall, scientists suggest 63 different design principles that should be considered when designing gamification and persuasive The earliest design recommendations systems in general (Table 2). Half of the articles consist of the general persuasive strategies agree on the importance of informational proposed by Oinas-Kukkonen and Harjumaa in content, i.e., supplying background information 2009 [33], followed by several adaptions in about the goals intended by the intervention and healthcare [14, 16, 34, 35] between 2012 and supporting users to change attitudes and 2014. Gamification design principles focused behaviors by providing assistance and cues. In primarily on education and game-based addition, most articles suggest introducing learning until 2015 [17, 18, 36], but were later behavioral incentives, which can take a tangible extended to sustainability [19], websites [37], (e.g., cash prizes for the winner) or intangible information systems [38], fitness [20], (e.g., earning badges and certificates) form. crowdsourcing [39, 40] and context- Furthermore, scholars propose personalizing independent recommendations [8, 41, 42, 43, the system contents and mechanics, based on 44]. In general, gamification design has gained the assumption that the motivational function of scientific attention in recent years. Table 1 different affordances depends on the illustrates the distribution of subjects of the personality or user type. Immediate positive reviewed articles. feedback for good performance, such as earning points, and the ability to compare oneself with others, such as in leaderboards, also represent important principles for successful gamification design. In contrast, other principles suggested in single articles, such as supporting different roles or using fitting sounds are not universally applicable and may be particularly valuable in certain contexts, e.g., when users with different functions (e.g., physician and patient) use the system or when acoustic signals in the system should support multisensory learning. Notably, some principles (e.g. persuasive messages) are mentioned more often in a particular area (e.g. healthcare) than in others, indicating that the choice of appropriate design principles also still depends on the application area and the intended outcomes. Table 2 presents all design principles proposed in the reviewed articles. The majority of articles use qualitative methods to derive design principles for gamification and persuasive systems. These methods consist of either qualitative interviews (8 articles), case study analyses (2 articles), or participatory design (2 articles). Four studies mix several of these qualitative research methods, and ten studies can be classified as conceptual. Only a minority relies on quantitative analyses such as surveys (3 articles) and text mining (1 article). As Table 2 shows, scientists propose a variety of heterogeneous design principles for gamification and persuasive systems, some of which relate more to the content of the system (e.g., behavioral incentives, immediate positive feedback or persuasive messages), while others refer to the mechanics (e.g., increase and adjust difficulty over time or enable freedom of choice) or the context of the intervention (e.g., include the target group in co-design). For a comprehensive overview that can successfully guide gamification design, we argue that the identified principles require further conceptual discussion and categorization. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first review that focuses on synthesizing the diverging views and recommendations of design principles for gamification and persuasive systems from different contexts, user experience typically depends on three thereby closing the gap between process- elements: the user, the system and the context oriented design methods [8, 9] and element- [61]. focused design patterns or motivational In conceptualizing the identified design affordances [1, 2, 55]. We have identified a principles, we argue that they can be variety of more than 60 different design distinguished into user-oriented principles that principles. As the first point of discussion, the drive user behavior, system-oriented principles analysis reveals that some recommendations for that relate to the mechanisms that lead to the design of gamification and persuasive hedonic experiences or affective reactions such systems seem to be contradictory. as enjoyment and satisfaction, and context- For example, some scientists argue against oriented principles that refer to the context of punishment and for the motivational nature of the intervention. User-oriented and system- safe environments [47], while others favor oriented principles, in particular, can guide the losing options to exert pressure for behavioral choice of interface design patterns or change [15, 42], in line with behaviorist motivational affordances. To better illustrate theories of positive and negative reinforcement the link between design principles and [56]. Thus, we suggest that the important aspect motivational affordances, we suggest examples of co-designing the intervention with the target from the variety of motivational affordances group [8, 14, 17, 35, 44, 46] should include proposed in the academic literature [1, 2, 55] discussing whether losing options are perceived that can be selected to implement specific as a barrier or facilitator of motivational effects. design principles. As can be seen in our Negative and positive reinforcements, such examples, a particular affordance can serve to as rewards, represent external events as stated implement multiple design principles, in line in cognitive evaluation theory [57] that can with the observations of Deterding [6], e.g. undermine intrinsic motivation [58], which is why Chen [44] argues that behavioral the intrinsic need of competence [3] and incentives should be avoided. In contrast, a constitute an incentive [57], while peer-rating large number of the reviewed studies strongly provides community support and allows social suggest the introduction of behavioral recognition. incentives, not only conceptually, but also As a result, we propose a conceptual backed up by qualitative interviews [20, 47, 52] framework of design principles for the and quantitative surveys [54] that emphasize successful design of gamification and their motivational power. Since tangible persuasive systems (Figure 3) that comprises extrinsic incentives, such as money, can pose the most substantiated design principles the crucial challenge of influencing behavior considered important by at least five of the only as long as they are available [3], we reviewed articles and examples of their propose implementing intangible incentives implementation with motivational affordances. such as achievements and badges that could be User-oriented principles are those more efficient than tangible prizes. principles that lead to both individual and social Moreover, Wehbe et al. [36] suggest behavior outcomes. For example, providing avoiding social competition, whereas other immediate positive feedback (e.g., with points scholars strongly favor social competition and badges), introducing incentives (e.g., mechanisms [15, 19, 33, 41, 47, 54]. Social rewards) or guiding with persuasive messages comparison theory [59] underlines the (e.g., reminders and suggestions) directly introduction of comparison and competition induce individual user behavior towards mechanisms as a motivational drive for self- intended outcomes. On the other hand, allowing evaluation through comparison with others. social comparisons (e.g., with leaderboards) or However, it is suggested that interventions encouraging collaboration (e.g., with teams) should be carefully designed to ensure that lead to a community drive towards individual people do not perceive a high risk of exposing behavior change. their own inferiority to others [60]. System-oriented principles include design Second, as we argued in the results section, principles that promote hedonic experiences. the proposed principles refer to different For example, personalization of the system aspects of the design of gamification and (e.g., with avatars and customization) promotes persuasive systems. The design of a positive the identification with the system, and freedom of choice (e.g., different missions) leads to enjoyment. Context-oriented principles refer to the As with any scientific work, this study is not context of the intervention, such as considering without its limitations. While this work aimed the location or including the target group in co- to provide a generic overview of design design. principles for the design of gamification and persuasive systems from the academic literature, it neglected the design experiences of practitioners, which could also be considered valuable for deriving effective design principles. Further work is invited to expand the review with books, reports, and other sources of practitioners to verify consistency with the principles drawn from the scientific literature. Since this review, to the best of our knowledge, represents the first systematic analysis of design principles in gamification and persuasive systems, the identification and classification of design principles was based primarily on our own assessment of the similarities and differences between the principles proposed in the reviewed articles (e.g., "immediate feedback", "positive feedback", and "feedback mechanisms" were combined into "immediate positive feedback"). We, therefore, encourage further research to repeat or expand our review to verify the Regarding the game design model, e.g. in reliability of our design principles. form of the mechanics, dynamics and aesthetics Finally, the selection of appropriate design model, our framework of design principles that principles for a given application context relate to dynamics can help select appropriate should be facilitated by empirically comparing mechanics (i.e., motivational affordances) to the effectiveness of different principles in achieve intended aesthetics or emotional diverse areas, uncovering the most important responses [62]. Concerning various game principles for specific contexts, such as, but not design methods, which share the common steps limited to, education, business, sustainability, of defining objectives and expected behaviors, healthcare, and fitness, which are among the identifying player types and then deploying most popular in current research on appropriate game design principles [9], our gamification and persuasive systems. framework can assist in identifying suitable design principles for the objectives. For example, the evaluation of knowledge may be highly relevant in game-based learning, while it may be negligible in the fitness context. [1] J. Hamari, J. Koivisto, H. Sarsa, Does By bridging the level of motivational gamification work? - A literature review of empirical studies on gamification, in: 47th affordances with the levels of the game model and the game design methods, our conceptual Hawaii International Conference on framework of design principles aims to help System Sciences, 2014, pp. 3025 scientists and practitioners successfully design 3034.doi:10.1109/HICSS.2014.377. gamified interventions in a scientifically [2] J. Koivisto, J. Hamari, The rise of motivational information systems: A grounded manner. review of gamification research, Int. J. Inf. Manage. 45 (2019) 191 210. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.013. [3] R.M. Ryan, E.L. Deci, Self-Determination Theory. Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development and Wellness, Notes in Computer Science, Springer, The Guilford Press, New York, London, Cham, 2014. doi:10.1007/978-3-319- 2017. 07127-5_23. [4] D. Dicheva, C. Dichev, G. Agre, G. [14] J. Mintz, Additional key factors mediating Angelova, Gamification in education: A the use of a mobile technology tool systematic mapping study, J. Educ. designed to develop social and life skills in Technol. Soc. 18 (2015) 75 88. children with autism spectrum disorders: [5] T.H. Laine, R.S.N. Lindberg, Designing Evaluation of the 2nd HANDS prototype, engaging games for education: A Comput. Educ. 63 (2013) 17 27. systematic literature review on game doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.006. motivators and design principles, IEEE [15] Y. Wang, A. Fadhil, J.-P. Lange, H. Trans. Learn. Technol. 13 (2020) 804-821. Reiterer, Integrating taxonomies into doi:10.1109/TLT.2020.3018503. theory-based digital health interventions [6] S. Deterding, Eudaimonic design, or: Six for behavior change: A holistic invitations to rethink gamification, in: S. framework, JMIR Res. Protoc. 8 (2019) Fizek, M. Fuchs, P. Ruffino, N. Schrape e8055. doi:10.2196/resprot.8055. (Ed.), Rethinking Gamification, meson [16] J.A. Cafazzo, M. Casselman, N. press, Lüneburg, 2014, pp. 305 331. Hamming, D.K. Katzman, M.R. Palmert, [7] S. Deterding, D. Dixon, R. Khaled, L. Design of an mHealth app for the self- Nacke, From game design elements to management of adolescent type 1 diabetes: gamefulness: Def g A pilot study, J. Med. Internet Res. 14 Proceedings of the 15th International (2012) 193 205. doi:10.2196/jmir.2058. Academic MindTrek Conference [17] M. Israel, M.T. Marino, J.D. Basham, W. Envisioning Future Media Environments, Spivak, Fifth graders as app designers: 2011, pp. 9 15. doi:10.1016/s0022- How diverse learners conceptualize 5347(11)60242-5. educational apps, J. Res. Technol. Educ. [8] B. Morschheuser, L. Hassan, K. Werder, J. 46 (2013) 53 80. doi:10.1080/15391523. Hamari, How to design gamification? A 2013.10782613. method for engineering gamified software, [18] J.L. Plass, B.D. Homer, C.K. Kinzer, Inf. Softw. Technol. 95 (2018) 219 237. Foundations of game-based learning, doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2017.10.015. Educ. Psychol. 50 (2015) 258 283. [9] A. Mora, D. Riera, C. González, J. doi:10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533. Arnedo-Moreno, Gamification: A [19] D. Oppong-Tawiah, J. Webster, S. Staples, systematic review of design frameworks, A.F. Cameron, A. Ortiz de Guinea, T.Y. J. Comput. High. Educ. 29 (2017) 516 Hung, Developing a gamified mobile 548. doi:10.1007/s12528-017-9150-4. application to encourage sustainable [10] S. Deterding, The lens of intrinsic skill energy use in the office., J. Bus. Res. 106 atoms: A method for gameful design, (2020) 388 405. http://10.0.3.248/j. Human-Computer Interact. 30 (2015) jbusres.2018.10.051. 294 335. doi:10.1080/07370024.2014.99 [20] D.L. Kappen, L.E. Nacke, K.M. Gerling, 3471. L.E. Tsotsos, Design strategies for [11] J. Lämsä, R. Hämäläinen, M. Aro, R. gamified physical activity applications for Koskimaa, S.M. Äyrämö, Games for older adults, in: 2016 49th Hawaii enhancing basic reading and maths skills: International Conference on System A systematic review of educational game Sciences, 2016: pp. 1309 1318. design in supporting learning by people doi:10.1109/HICSS.2016.166. with learning disabilities, Br. J. Educ. [21] K. Seaborn, D.I. Fels, Gamification in Technol. 49 (2018) 596 607. theory and action: A survey, Int. J. Hum. doi:10.1111/bjet.12639. Comput. Stud. 74 (2015) 14 31. [12] J.D. Fijnheer, H. Van Oostendorp, Steps to doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.006. design a household energy game, Int. J. [22] K. Huotari, J. Hamari, A definition for Serious Games. 3 (2016) 3 18. gamification: anchoring gamification in doi:10.17083/ijsg.v3i3.131. the service marketing literature, Electron. [13] K. Werbach, (Re)defining gamification: A Mark. 27 (2017) 21 31. doi:10.1007/ process approach, volume 8462 of Lecture s12525-015-0212-z. [23] B.J. Fogg, Overview of Captology, in: Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 24 (2009) 485 Persuasive Technology. Using Computers 500. http://10.0.69.41/1CAIS.02428. to Change What We Think and Do, [34] A. Soror, F. Davis, Using self-regulation Morgan Kaufmann, 2003: pp. 15 22. theory to inform technology-based doi:10.1016/B978-155860643-2/50003-2. behavior change interventions, in: 47th [24] J. Hamari, J. Koivisto, T. Pakkanen, Do Hawaii International Conference on persuasive technologies persuade? - A System Sciences, 2014, pp. 3004 3012. review of empirical studies, volume 8462 doi:10.1109/HICSS.2014.373. of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, [35] J. Vainio, K. Kaipainen, I. Korhonen, Springer, Cham, 2014. doi:10.1007/978-3- Habit change as a learning process: Design 319-07127-5_11. framework for mobile interventions, in: [25] E. Llagostera, On gamification and IEEE-EMBS International Conference on persuasion, in: SB Games 2012, Brasilia, Biomedical and Health Informatics, BHI, Brazil, 2012, pp. 12 21. 2014, pp. 801 804. doi:10.1109/BHI. [26] M. Böckle, J. Novak, M. Bick, Exploring 2014.6864485. gamified persuasive system design for [36] R.R. Wehbe, J. Robb, J. Clarke, J. Costa, energy saving, J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 33 L.E. Nacke, Design guidelines for (2020) 1337 1356. doi:10.1108/JEIM-02- Gamifying reading applications, in: 2014 2019-0032. IEEE Games Media Entertainment, 2014: [27] T. Nystrom, Gamification of persuasive pp. 1 4. doi:10.1109/GEM.2014.7405433. systems for sustainability, in: 5th IFIP [37] H.C.L. Hsieh, H.H. Yang, Incorporating Conference on Sustainable Internet and gamification into website design to ICT for Sustainability, SustainIT 2017, facilitate effective communication, Theor. 2017, pp. 1 3. doi:10.23919/SustainIT. Issues Ergon. Sci. 21 (2019) 89 111. 2017.8379815. doi:10.1080/1463922X.2019.1645920. [28] G. Paré, M.C. Trudel, M. Jaana, S. Kitsiou, [38] R. Schulz, S. Martinez, T. Hara, Towards Synthesizing information systems a game-design framework for evidence- knowledge: A typology of literature based clinical procedure libraries, in: 7th reviews, Inf. Manag. 52 (2015) 183 199. International Conference on Serious doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008. Games and Applications for Health, [29] J. Webster, R. Watson, Analyzing the past SeGAH, 2019: pp. 1 8. doi:10.1109/ to prepare for the future: Writing a SeGAH.2019.8882474. literature review, Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 26 [39] M. Kavaliova, F. Virjee, N. Maehle, I.A. (2002) xiii xxiii. doi:10.1.1.104.6570. Kleppe, Crowdsourcing innovation and [30] N.R. Haddaway, B. Macura, P. Whaley, product development: Gamification as a A.S. Pullin, ROSES reporting standards motivational driver, Cogent Bus. Manag. 3 for systematic evidence syntheses: Pro (2016). doi:10.1080/23311975.2015.112 forma, flow-diagram and descriptive 8132. summary of the plan and conduct of [40] M. Sakamoto, T. Nakajima, S. Akioka, environmental systematic reviews and Gamifying collective human behavior systematic maps, Environ. Evid. 7 (2018) with gameful digital rhetoric, Multimed. 4 11. doi:10.1186/s13750-018-0121-7. Tools Appl. 76 (2017) 12539 12581. [31] C. Michels, J.Y. Fu, Systematic analysis of doi:10.1007/s11042-016-3665-y. coverage and usage of conference [41] A. Rapp, Designing interactive systems proceedings in web of science, through a game lens: An ethnographic Scientometrics 100 (2014) 307 327. approach, Comput. Human Behav. 71 doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1309-4. (2017) 455 468. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015. [32] R.W. Scherer, I.J. Saldanha, How should 02.048. systematic reviewers handle conference [42] A. Rapp, Drawing inspiration from World abstracts? A view from the trenches, Syst. of Warcraft: Gamification design elements Rev. 8 (2019) 4 9. doi:10.1186/s13643- for behavior change technologies, Interact. 019-1188-0. Comput. 29 (2017) 648 678. [33] H. Oinas-Kukkonen, M. Harjumaa, doi:10.1093/iwc/iwx001. Persuasive systems design: Key issues, [43] D. Liu, R. Santhanam, J. Webster, Toward process model, and system features., meaningful engagement: A framework for design and research of gamified [53] H. Haller, V. Nguyen, G. Debizet, Y. information systems, MIS Q. 41 (2017) Laurillau, J. Coutaz, G. Calvary, Energy 1011 1034. doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2017/ consumption in smarthome: Persuasive 41.4.01 9th [44] Y. Chen, Exploring design guidelines of IEEE International Conference on using user-centered design in gamification Intelligent Data Acquisition and Advanced development: A delphi study, Int. J. Hum. Computing Systems: Technology and Comput. Interact. 35 (2019) 1170 1181. Applications, IDAACS, 2017, pp. 804 doi:10.1080/10447318.2018.1514823. 809.doi:10.1109/IDAACS.2017.8095199. [45] L. Ding, C. Kim, M. Orey, Design of [54] R. Orji, D. Reilly, K. Oyibo, F.A. Orji, gamified asynchronous online discussions, Deconstructing persuasiveness of Technol. Pedagog. Educ. (2020) 1 17. strategies in behaviour change systems doi:10.1080/1475939X.2020.1801495. using the ARCS model of motivation, [46] D. Gooch, A. Vasalou, L. Benton, Behav. Inf. Technol. 38 (2019) 319 335. Exploring the use of a gamification http://10.0.4.56/0144929X.2018.1520302. platform to support students with dyslexia, [55] G.F. Tondello, A. Mora, L.E. Nacke, in: 6th International Conference on Elements of gameful design emerging Information, Intelligence, Systems and from user preferences, in: Proceedings of Applications, IISA, 2015, pp. 1 6. the Annual Symposium on Computer- doi:10.1109/IISA.2015.7388001. Human Interaction in Play, New York, [47] S. Sezgin, T.V. Yüzer, Analysing adaptive NY; 2017, pp. 129 140. gamification design principles for online doi:10.1145/3116595.3116627. courses, Behav. Inf. Technol. (2020) 1-17. [56] B.F. Skinner, Science and Human doi:10.1080/0144929X.2020.1817559. Behavior, Pearson Education, Inc., 1953. [48] G. Tierney, T. Horstman, C. Tzou, Youth [57] E.L. Deci, R.M. Ryan, Cognitive co-design of responsive digital badge evaluation theory, in: Intrinsic Motivation systems: disrupting hierarchy and and Self-Determination in Human empowering youth, CoDesign (2019) 1 Behavior. Perspectives in Social 17. doi:10.1080/15710882.2019.1654522. Psychology, Springer, Boston, MA, 1985, [49] A.S. Miller, J.A. Cafazzo, E. Seto, A game pp. 43 85. plan: Gamification design principles in [58] E.L. Deci, R. Koestner, R.M. Ryan, A mHealth applications for chronic disease meta-analytic review of experiments management, Health Informatics J. 22 examining the effects of extrinsic rewards (2016) 184 193. doi:10.1177/14604582 on intrinsic motivation., Psychol. Bull. 125 14537511. (1999) 627 668. doi:10.1037//0033- [50] M. Al-Ramahi, O. El-Gayar, J. Liu, 2909.125.6.627. Discovering design principles for [59] L. Festinger, A theory of social persuasive systems: A grounded theory comparison processes, Hum. Relations. 7 and text mining approach, in: 49th Hawaii (1954) 117 140. International Conference on System [60] A.P. Buunk, F.X. Gibbons, Social Sciences, 2016, pp. 3074 3083. comparison: The end of a theory and the doi:10.1109/HICSS.2016.387. emergence of a field, Organ. Behav. Hum. [51] R. Orji, K. Oyibo, R.K. Lomotey, F.A. Decis. Process. 102 (2007) 3 21. Orji, Socially-driven persuasive health doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.007. intervention design: Competition, social [61] C. Lallemand, G. Gronier, V. Koenig, User comparison, and cooperation, Health experience: A concept without consensus? Informatics J. 25 (2019) 1451 1484. doi:10.1177/1460458218766570. through an international survey, Comput. [52] R. Vilardaga, J. Rizo, E. Zeng, J.A. Kientz, Human Behav. 43 (2015) 35 48. R. Ries, C. Otis, K. Hernandez, User- doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.048. centered design of learn to quit, a smoking [62] R. Hunicke, M. LeBlanc, R. Zubek, MDA: cessation smartphone app for people with A formal approach to game design and serious mental illness, JMIR Serious game research, in: Proceedings of the Games. 6 (2018). doi:10.2196/ AAAI Workshop on Challenges in Game games.8881. AI, volume 4, AAAI Press, 2004.