Gamified eco-driving: A systematic literature review Eetu Wallius 1 and Dicle Berfin Köse 2 1 Tampere University, Kalevantie 4, 33100 Tampere, Finland 2 BI Norwegian Business School, Nydalsveien 37, N-0484 Oslo, Norway Abstract Due to the ongoing social turmoil and the climate crisis, passenger road vehicles face increasing pressure to improve energy-efficiency. A central aspect of this endeavor is to motivate drivers to adopt a more energy-efficient driving style. In that respect, the use of information systems (IS) can be a game changer. Among motivational IS, especially gamification is a promising approach to encourage eco-driving as it has the potential to direct user behavior by providing positive experiences like those experienced when playing games. However, despite the emerging interest on gamified eco-driving, there is a lack of comprehensive understanding on how gamification has been applied in the eco-driving domain, hindering the understanding of how it should be designed in this context and what areas need further research inquiries. Therefore, this study synthesizes existing research on gamified eco-driving (17 studies) through a systematic literature review. Based on the results, performance-based and social gamification are most applied, while they aim at encouraging a relatively comprehensive set of different eco- driving behaviors by addressing the motivational hurdles related to eco-driving. We encourage future research endeavors to consider a wider variety of gamification types and be more transparent about the goals of implementing gamification and evaluate the psychological effects accordingly. Keywords 1 Energy efficiency, eco-driving, gamification, systematic literature review 1. Introduction In 2020, transportation was the biggest contributor (27%) of greenhouse gas emissions in the US [5]. Similar data are seen in the EU as well: Energy plays a deterministic role in world transportation is responsible for nearly a quarter history: its transmission and transformation have of Europe’s greenhouse gas emissions, with road sustained and delimited all living organisms big transport being the biggest contributor (72.8%) and small and affected societies and civilizations and having the highest energy demand (73.4%) from prehistory to the modern era [1]. However, [6]. This poses pressure to improve transportation contemporary energy production and use pose energy-efficiency, i.e., to develop processes, many environmental, health-related and social products, and tasks so that they use lower amounts problems. Most notably, energy-related CO2 of energy while maintaining their level of emissions have grown to a record high in 2021 [3]. performance [7]. The strategies for reducing these Accordingly, with the European Climate Law, levels include e.g., the electrification of which came into effect in July 2021, the European transportation [8]. However, considering the fact Union aims to reduce its greenhouse gas that passenger road vehicles are the biggest emissions by 55% compared to 1990 levels [4]. contributor of CO2 emissions in the transportation One of the main contributors of greenhouse sector [9], road vehicle drivers can be the starting gas emissions is the global transportation sector. point in efforts to induce energy efficiency. 7th International GamiFIN Conference 2023 (GamiFIN 2023), April 18-21, 2023, Lapland, Finland. EMAIL: eetu.wallius@tuni.fi; dicle.b.kose@bi.no ORCID: 0000-0003-3251-7314 (A. 1); 0000-0002-1256-1310 (A. 2) ©️ 2023 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) 184 Given these points, vehicle drivers should be energy consumption and increases mileage per inspired and encouraged to drive in a more unit of consumed energy [14]. Eco-driving can energy-efficient manner. In that respect, the use of also include strategic (e.g., vehicle choice and information systems (IS) in the transportation maintenance) and tactical decisions (e.g., route domain can be a game changer, with its effects on choice, vehicle load) [14], [15]. However, for the the behavior of road vehicle drivers. Through IS, purpose of this study we only focus on the vehicle drivers can be provided with the right operational decisions, in other words, driver incentives and motivation to improve their driving behavior. The operational decisions that affect behavior. mileage are idling, speeding, use of cruise control, Among motivational IS, gamification has use of air conditioner, and aggressive driving [15]. become the most prominent design approach due It was shown by several investigations that to the rapidly increasing attention it has attracted operational decisions can reduce fuel among practitioners and academia [10]. consumption by 5-30% [16]. Gamification employs game-like design to Governments started to require energy- provide users with similar gameful experiences as efficient driving for driver’s license; however, games do with the aim of directing their behaviors several studies show that energy-efficient driving [11]. To serve the environmental and social deteriorates in time [17]. Accordingly, the number sustainability goals related to energy efficiency, of driver assistance systems are increasing. For gamification can transform driving in an energy- example, State Farm and DriveSmart encourage efficient manner to feel like playing a game. eco-driving by providing feedback on Gamification, however, is not a homogenous acceleration, braking, cornering, and speeding type of design or a ‘one size fits all’ solution. The [18], [19]. Previous research shows the benefits of experiences induced by gameplay are diverse, these systems in inducing eco-driving practices, ranging from a sense of achievement after particularly of gamification in helping drivers overcoming in-game challenges, to becoming retain their energy efficient driving habits (e.g., immersed in a virtual world, among others. This [17], [20]). diversity is also reflected in gamification design, which is an umbrella for elements such as 2.2. Gamification leaderboards, social networking, narratives, and goalsetting that draw inspiration from games [12]. To systematically analyze and find future To determine how gamification should be designed and implemented, it is necessary to research directions, we analyzed the existing consider users’ individual differences, targeted studies considering two gamification behaviors, and other contextual factors, as they perspectives: gamification taxonomy [21] and the influence what types of strategies might work best gamification affordances [22]. Gamification was conceptualized to comprise in achieving a sustained behavioral change [13]. While gamification has been increasingly three levels - affordances, psychological investigated in the driving context, the corpus outcomes, and behavioral outcomes, all of which lacks comprehensive understanding of how are situated in a certain context [22]. Affordances gamification has been applied to encourage are the perceived or actual elements and energy-efficient driving. Moreover, there exists mechanisms commonly used in games [23]. no understanding of which aspects of gamified Psychological outcomes are the psychological energy-efficient driving require further experiences gamification aims to induce and can investigation. Therefore, in this study, we be in the form of feelings of mastery and synthesize existing research investigating the use competence, relatedness, autonomy, and of gamification to encourage energy-efficient enjoyment. Behavioral outcomes are the activities driving to provide an overview and identify and behaviors that the gamification supports. avenues for future research. Gamification taxonomy classifies gamification elements into five groups: performance, ecological, social, personal, and 2. Background fictional [21]. Performance elements are used to 2.1. Eco-driving behaviors provide feedback to the users and comprise point, progression, level, stats, and acknowledgement Eco-driving is the process of operational elements. Ecological elements are the properties decisions regarding vehicle driving that reduces of the gamification context and comprise chance, 185 imposed choice, economy, rarity, and time interface” OR “persuasive smartphone pressure. Social elements enable users to interact application” OR “persuasive strategy” OR with others and comprise competition, “persuasive technolog*” OR “reality-enhanced cooperation, reputation, and social pressure. gam*” OR “serious gam*” OR “game element”) Personal elements are related to the users and AND (“eco-driv*” OR “eco driv*” OR ecodriv* make their experience more meaningful. This OR “eco-efficient driv*” OR “fuel consumption” group comprises elements of sensation, objective, OR “fuel efficiency” OR “environmentally puzzle, novelty, and renovation. Fictional friendly driv*” OR “fuel saving”) in the titles, elements tie user experience with the context abstracts and keywords, while limiting the search through the elements of narrative and storytelling. to include articles, conference publications and The resulting framework adopted for this study book chapters. is presented in Figure 1. The framework A total of 39 studies were retrieved with the comprises two dimensions. The first dimension search string. The following inclusion criteria presented in the horizontal axis stands for the were used to filter out studies not relevant to our affordances that induce psychological and analysis: (1) The manuscript is written in English behavioral outcomes. In the vertical axis, (0 excluded), (2) The manuscript reports a peer- affordances and their effects are grouped into reviewed study (0 excluded), (3) The manuscript gamification types. Accordingly, affordances that proposes a design or implementation related to in- belong to different gamification types may induce situ gamification (17 excluded), (4) The different types of psychological and behavioral manuscript is related to eco-driving (2 excluded), outcomes. (5) The study is available to the authors (3 excluded). Two researchers independently screened all the studies for inclusion and discussed on the disagreed studies. Finally, 17 manuscripts met all the inclusion criteria, as depicted in figure 2. Figure 1: Affordances of gamification types 3. Methods To provide an overview of the corpus Figure 2: Literature selection process investigating gamified eco-driving, and identify avenues for future research, we conducted a Each of the 17 manuscripts that met the systematic literature review. As the main aim is to inclusion criteria were analyzed by a single identify trends in existing research, the review can researcher. The following information was be considered as descriptive [24]. extracted from each manuscript: implemented or To comprehensively identify studies relevant considered gameful motivational affordances to our research aims, we used the Scopus indexing (e.g., points, storytelling), psychological and citation database in the literature search. We outcomes, and targeted eco-driving behaviors. considered keywords related to eco-driving (e.g., eco-driving, fuel consumption, fuel saving), and 4. Results gamification (e.g., gamification, reality-enhanced games, game element). After conducting pilot Overall, the analyzed corpus proposed searches to identify the suitable search terms, we interventions belonging to all the five used the search string (gamif* OR “persuasive 186 gamification categories (Table 1). Despite the terms of psychological outcomes. For personal relatively small number of studies, these gamification, the outcomes were usability [36], implementations were evaluated in terms of usefulness [36], perceived clarity [27], diverse psychological outcomes, as well as a engagement [27], attitude [27], and perceived rather comprehensive set of different eco-driving effectiveness [28], while both ecological and behaviors. fictional were evaluated in terms of perceived Performance-based gamification features clarity [27], engagement [27], and attitude [27]. (n=13, [17], [25]–[36]) were the most used, followed by social gamification (n=12, [17], [20], 5. Discussion and future avenues [26], [27], [29]–[33], [35]–[37]), while personal (n=4, [27], [28], [32], [36]), ecological (n=2, [27], [33]), and fictional (n=1, [27]) were much less Overall, the corpus focused on performance- common. based and social gamification, while the In terms of psychological outcomes, implementations mainly aimed at improving eco- implementations using performance-based driving by encouraging drivers to adopt optimal gamification were mostly evaluated in terms of driving speed or by encouraging an overall eco- friendly driving to decrease fuel consumption. usefulness (n=3, [26], [35], [36] and fun or joy The psychological outcomes derived from (n=2, [29], [35]), while other psychological gamification implementations related to both outcomes were only evaluated by a single study (i.e., engagement [27], attitude [27], perceived utilitarian and hedonic aspects of gamification, clarity [27], perceived effectiveness [28], most common being usefulness, and fun or joy. efficiency [29], perceived pressure [29], Overall, this implies that performance and social perceived distraction [29], perceived influence on gamification features support eco-driving eco-driving [29], system acceptance [26], ease of behaviors by both providing the driver with use [26], satisfaction [34], usability [36]). The information that they can use to adapt their behaviors as well as motivating eco-driving by most evaluated behavioral outcomes in studies implementing performance-based gamification providing hedonic pleasure. were driving speed (n=4, [17], [26], [31], [35]) Eco-driving behaviors typically lack any form followed by fuel or energy consumption (n=3, of direct feedback, or the possibility to reliably monitor one’s performance, which might become [17], [29], [35]), braking (n=2, [29], [35]), and a motivational hurdle for engaging in eco-driving. acceleration (n=2, [29], [35]). Other behavioral outcomes were only evaluated by a single study Thus, the prevalence of performance-based each (i.e., coasting [29], even driving [29], engine features suggests that most studies use speed [31], driving aggressiveness [31], coasting gamification to imbue eco-driving with feedback [29]). that supports drivers’ decision-making, while providing a sense of acknowledgement for The most evaluated psychological outcomes resulting from implementations using social behaving in a desired manner [20]. However, gamification were usefulness (n=2, [20], [36]) and another possible reason for performance-based fun or joy (n=2, [20], [29]), while the rest were gamification being the most common category is only evaluated by a single study each (i.e., system that features such as points or feedback are easily acceptance [26], usefulness [26], ease of use [26], implemented onto the driving tasks without engagement [27], attitude [27], perceived clarity compromising driving safety due to e.g., [27], information value [20], usability [36], distraction [40]. perceived efficiency [29], perceived pressure On the other hand, social features were also [29], perceived distraction [29]). The most commonly applied. The aim of social common behavioral outcomes among studies gamification is to provide interaction among implementing social gamification were driving gamification users – another feature that is speed (n=3, [17], [38], [39]), average energy or inherently absent in eco-driving, during which fuel consumption (n=3, [17], [20], [29]), and individuals are confined to their vehicles, braking (n=2 [17], [29]). Outcomes evaluated by allowing limited possibilities to interact with and a single study each were coasting [29], even compare one’s behavior to others [41]. driving [29], acceleration [29], and driving Personal, ecological, and fictional aggressiveness [31]. gamification types were less prevalent, and were Implementations using personal, ecological, and fictional gamification were only evaluated in 187 Table 1. Synthesis of the results Gamification Affordances Psychological Behavioral Outcomes types Outcomes Performance Points or score (n=10) Usefulness (n=3) Driving speed (n=4) (n=13) Feedback (n=9) Fun, joy (n=2) Average energy or fuel Badges (n=4) Engagement (n=1) consumption (n=3) Levels (n=4) Attitude (n=1) Braking (n=2) Awards, trophies, Perceived clarity (n=1) Acceleration (n=2) rewards (n=3) Perceived effectiveness Coasting (n=1) Performance statistics (n=1) Even driving (n=1) (n=2) Perceived efficiency (n=1) Engine speed (n=1) Hints (n=2) Perceived pressure (n=1) Driving aggressiveness Perceived distraction (n=1) (n=1) Perceived influence on Coasting (n=1) driving (n=1) System acceptance (n=1) Ease of use (n=1) Satisfaction (n=1) Usability (n=1) Social (n=12) Leaderboard or Usefulness (n=2) Driving speed (n=3) ranking (n=8) Fun, joy (n=2) Average energy or fuel Social comparison System acceptance (n=1) consumption (n=3) (n=3) Usefulness (n=1) Braking (n=2) Social networking Ease of use (n=1) Coasting (n=1) (n=1) Engagement (n=1) Even driving (n=1) Common goals (n=1) Attitude (n=1) Acceleration (n=1) Competition (n=2) Perceived clarity (n=1) Driving aggressiveness Cooperation (n=1) Information value (n=1) (n=1) Usability (n=1) Perceived efficiency (n=1) Perceived pressure (n=1) Perceived distraction (n=1) Perceived influence on driving (n=1) Personal Challenges or Usability (n=1) - (n=4) objectives (n=4) Usefulness (n=1) Perceived clarity (n=1) Engagement (n=1) Attitude (n=1) Perceived effectiveness (n=1) Ecological Collectibles (avatar Perceived clarity (n=1) - (n=2) outfits) (n=1) Engagement (n=1) Lootboxes (n=1) Attitude (n=1) Fictional Storytelling (n=1) Perceived clarity (n=1) - (n=1) Engagement (n=1) Attitude (n=1) 188 only evaluated in terms of psychological 6. References outcomes. While the lack of personal and ecological gamification features is surprising, as [1] V. Smil, “World History and Energy,” they can provide meaning to the user for example Encyclopedia of Energy, vol. 6, pp. 549–561, by providing them with clear eco-driving 2004, doi: 10.1016/b0-12-176480-x/00025- objectives, which is a feature that is easily 5. implemented onto the driving task, the relative [2] World Bank Group, “Commodity markets absence of fictional features might be explained Outlook. The Impact of the War in Ukraine by the risks they involve. For example, by on Commodity Markets,” 2022. immersing the user into a gameful world using [3] International Energy Agency, “Global narrativization might cause them to become Energy Review: CO2 Emissions in 2021,” detached and distracted from the driving task, thus 2022. compromising safety which is to be considered [4] European Commission, “European Climate when designing such gamification. Law | Climate Action,” European Union, Nevertheless, based on the review, we 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/eu- encourage future research to consider climate-action/law_en (accessed Sep. 08, gamification types beyond the performance and 2021). social. Especially fictional elements, such as [5] United States Environmental Protection narratives could be an effective way to support Agency, “Fast Facts on Transportation motivation towards eco-driving when accounting Greenhouse Gas Emissions,” epa.gov, 2022. for the safety risks, as narrativization and https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast- storytelling is arguably a promising way to facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas- promote sustainable behaviors [42]. Additionally, emissions (accessed Jul. 20, 2022). we encourage ecological gamification [6] European Commission, “Transport implementations, as they foster sustained interest, emissions,” ec.europa.eu. potentially leading long-term effects on eco- https://ec.europa.eu/clima/eu- driving behaviors [20]. action/transport-emissions_en (accessed Jul. Furthermore, we encourage future research 20, 2022). endeavors to be more transparent about the goals [7] M. Lackner, “Energy Efficiency: of implementing gamification and evaluate the Comparison of Different Systems and psychological effects accordingly. For example, Technologies,” in Handbook of Climate while many studies implemented social Change Mitigation and Adaptation, Springer gamification features, whose goal is to primarily International Publishing, 2022, pp. 381–456. foster connectedness, competitiveness or social doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-72579-2_24. pressure [20], the evaluated psychological [8] S. McBain and J. Teter, “Tracking Transport outcomes were mainly related to perceptions of 2021 - Analysis - IEA,” 2021. utility, such as usefulness, or to more abstract [9] International Energy Agency, “Transport: hedonic outcomes, such as joy. Thus, the corpus Improving the sustainability of passenger provides little evidence of how gamification and freight transport,” iea.org, 2021. implementations reach the goals related to https://www.iea.org/topics/transport imbuing eco-driving with a gameful experience, (accessed Jul. 20, 2022). and what types of gameful experiences might be [10] J. Koivisto and J. Hamari, “The rise of the most effective in promoting eco-driving. motivational information systems: A review The limitations of this study include the of gamification research,” International relatively small number of analyzed studies which Journal of Information Management, vol. 45. hinders the understanding of what types of Elsevier Ltd, pp. 191–210, Apr. 01, 2019. gamification strategies are the most suitable for doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.013. encouraging eco-driving. Moreover, while we [11] K. Huotari and J. Hamari, Defining conducted pilot searches to identify relevant Gamification - A Service Marketing keywords, it is possible that relevant keywords Perspective. 2012. were missed, especially in relation to alternatives [12] S. Deterding, D. Dixon, R. Khaled, and L. to fuel-driven vehicles. Nacke, “From game design elements to gamefulness,” in Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek 189 Conference on Envisioning Future Media [22] J. Koivisto and J. Hamari, “The rise of Environments - MindTrek ’11, 2011, p. 9. motivational information systems: A review doi: 10.1145/2181037.2181040. of gamification research,” Int J Inf Manage, [13] B. Morschheuser, L. Hassan, K. Werder, and vol. 45, pp. 191–210, Apr. 2019, doi: J. Hamari, “How to design gamification? A 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.013. method for engineering gamified software,” [23] D. A. Norman, “Affordance, Conventions, Inf Softw Technol, vol. 95, pp. 219–237, Mar. and Design,” Interactions, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2017.10.015. 38–43, 1999, [Online]. Available: [14] T. Stillwater and K. S. Kurani, “Drivers http://www.jnd.org discuss ecodriving feedback: Goal setting, [24] G. Paré, M. C. Trudel, M. Jaana, and S. framing, and anchoring motivate new Kitsiou, “Synthesizing information systems behaviors,” Transportation Research Part F: knowledge: A typology of literature Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 19, pp. 85– reviews,” Information and Management, vol. 96, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2013.03.007. 52, no. 2, pp. 183–199, 2015, doi: [15] M. Sivak and B. Schoettle, “Eco-driving: 10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008. Strategic, tactical, and operational decisions [25] R. Massoud, R. Berta, S. Poslad, A. de of the driver that influence vehicle fuel Gloria, and F. Bellotti, “IoT Sensing for economy,” Transp Policy (Oxf), vol. 22, pp. Reality-Enhanced Serious Games, a Fuel- 96–99, 2012, doi: Efficient Drive Use Case,” Sensors, vol. 21, 10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.05.010. no. 10, p. 3559, May 2021, doi: [16] Md. S. Alam and A. McNabola, “A critical 10.3390/s21103559. review and assessment of Eco-Driving policy [26] R. F. T. Brouwer, A. Stuiver, T. Hof, L. & technology: Benefits & limitations,” Kroon, J. Pauwelussen, and B. Holleman, Transp Policy (Oxf), vol. 35, pp. 42–49, “Personalised feedback and eco-driving: An 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.05.016. explorative study,” Transp Res Part C Emerg [17] V. C. Magana and M. Munoz-Organero, Technol, vol. 58, no. PD, pp. 760–771, Sep. “GAFU: Using a Gamification Tool to Save 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2015.04.027. Fuel,” IEEE Intelligent Transportation [27] S. Nousias et al., “Exploiting Gamification to Systems Magazine, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 58–70, Improve Eco-driving Behaviour: The 2015, doi: 10.1109/MITS.2015.2408152. GamECAR Approach,” Electron Notes [18] State Farm, “Drive Safe & SaveTM Mobile - Theor Comput Sci, vol. 343, pp. 103–116, State Farm®,” State Farm, 2020. May 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.entcs.2019.04.013. https://www.statefarm.com/customer- [28] P. di Lena, S. Mirri, C. Prandi, P. Salomoni, care/download-mobile-apps/drive-safe-and- and G. Delnevo, “In-vehicle Human save-mobile (accessed Jan. 23, 2020). Machine Interface,” in Proceedings of the [19] DriveSmart, “DriveSmart EN | DriveSmart is 2017 ACM Workshop on Interacting with the app of the good driver. Now you can Smart Objects, Mar. 2017, pp. 7–12. doi: analyze how you drive, improve at the road 10.1145/3038450.3038455. and certify your driving. Welcome to the [29] R. Ecker, P. Holzer, V. Broy, and A. Butz, good drivers Community!,” DriveSmart, “EcoChallenge: A race for efficiency,” in 2020. http://drive-smart.com/ (accessed Jan. MobileHCI, 2011, pp. 91–94. 23, 2020). [30] P. Bihler, D. Blumenau, S. Bendel, and S. [20] M. Günther, C. Kacperski, and J. F. Krems, Pilger, Section I: proceedings of the IADIS “Can electric vehicle drivers be persuaded to International Conference Interfaces and eco-drive? A field study of feedback, Human Computer Interaction 2010 : section gamification and financial rewards in II: proceedings of the IADIS International Germany,” Energy Res Soc Sci, vol. 63, p. Conference Game and Entertainment 101407, May 2020, doi: Technologies 2010 ; part of the IADIS Multi 10.1016/j.erss.2019.101407. Conference on Computer Science and [21] A. M. Toda et al., “Analysing gamification Information Systems 2010 ; Freiburg, elements in educational environments using Germany, July 26-30, 2010. IADIS Press, an existing Gamification taxonomy,” Smart 2010. Learning Environments, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 16, [31] V. C. Magaña and M. M. Organero, “The Dec. 2019, doi: 10.1186/s40561-019-0106-1. Impact of Using Gamification on the Eco- driving Learning,” in Advances in Intelligent 190 Systems and Computing, vol. 291, Springer [40] E. Wallius, A. C. T. Klock, and J. Hamari, Verlag, 2014, pp. 45–52. doi: 10.1007/978- “Playing it safe: A literature review and 3-319-07596-9_5. research agenda on motivational [32] M. Ćwil and W. Bartnik, “Supporting energy technologies in transportation safety,” Reliab efficient train operation by using Eng Syst Saf, vol. 223, Jul. 2022, doi: gamification to motivate train drivers,” in 10.1016/j.ress.2022.108514. Lecture Notes in Computer Science [41] A. M. Toda et al., “Analysing gamification (including subseries Lecture Notes in elements in educational environments using Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in an existing Gamification taxonomy,” Smart Bioinformatics), 2018, vol. 10711 LNCS, pp. Learning Environments, vol. 6, no. 1, Dec. 239–253. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-78795- 2019, doi: 10.1186/s40561-019-0106-1. 4_17. [42] M. Hofman-Bergholm, “Storytelling as an [33] C. Tselios et al., “Enhancing an Eco-Driving Educational Tool in Sustainable Education,” Gamification Platform Through Wearable Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 14, no. 5, and Vehicle Sensor Data Integration,” in Mar. 2022, doi: 10.3390/su14052946. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), vol. 11912 LNCS, Springer, 2019, pp. 344–349. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030- 34255-5_26. [34] D. S. Tan, Bo. Begole, Wendy. Kellogg, and SIGCHI (Group : U.S.), Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems : 2011 proceeding, Vancouver, BC, Canada - May 07-12, 2011. ACM Press, 2011. [35] S. Trösterer and P. Mörtl, “Motivating Drivers to Drive Energy Efficient,” in Future Interior Concepts, Springer, Cham, 2021, pp. 71–87. [36] A. Vaezipour, A. Rakotonirainy, and N. Haworth, “Design of a Gamified Interface to Improve Fuel Efficiency and Safe Driving,” in Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), vol. 9747, Springer Verlag, 2016, pp. 322–332. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319- 40355-7_31. [37] T. Pace, S. Ramalingam, and D. Roedl, CHI ’07 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2007. [38] V. C. Magaña and M. M. Organero, “The impact of using gamification on the eco- driving learning,” in Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 2014, vol. 291, pp. 45–52. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-07596-9_5. [39] R. F. T. Brouwer, A. Stuiver, T. Hof, L. Kroon, J. Pauwelussen, and B. Holleman, “Personalised feedback and eco-driving: An explorative study,” Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol, vol. 58, no. PD, pp. 760–771, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2015.04.027. 191