<!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>Gamification  and  Location-­‐based  Services  </article-title>
      </title-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2011</year>
      </pub-date>
      <abstract>
        <p>Grant  McKenzie   Department  of  Geography,  The  University  of  California,  Santa  Barbara   grant.mckenzie@geog.ucsb.edu    </p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>While   gamification   has   currently   become   a   hot   topic   in   the   area   of   location-­‐based   mobile  
applications,  the  concept  has  previously  been  discussed  via  several  different  labels  including  “serious  
games”   and   “gaming   with   a   purpose.”     From   an   educational   standpoint,   games   are   an   excellent  
teaching  tool,  involving  students  in  game-­‐play  while  they  learn  [4,  5].    Human-­‐computer  interaction  
research   calls   the   concept   “gaming   with   a   purpose,”   where   people   collectively   solve   large  
computational  problems  (e.g.  network  security,  computer  vision)  though  online  games  [6,  7].  
 
One   type   of   application   built   on   the   gamification   model   is   social   location   sharing   applications.    
Services   such   as   foursquare,   gowalla   and   scvngr,   to   name   a   few,   are   on   the   leading   edge   of   this  
medium   and   amassing   users   by   the   thousands   [8].   These   location-­‐based   social   networks   (LBSN)  
allow  users  to  virtually  “check-­‐in”  to  a  venue  via  their  gps-­‐enabled  mobile  device.    With  every  “check-­‐
in,”  a  user  gains  points  and  badges.    These  “awards”  create  a  competition  between  fellow  users.     In  
most  systems,  the  user  with  the  highest  number  of  “check-­‐ins”  is  awarded  special  recognition.    
 
The  original  goal  for  these  LBSN  applications  was  to  create  a  multiplayer  game  out  of  everyday  travel  
behavior.    Recently,  big  business  has  seen  the  benefit  of  knowing  their  patrons’  locations.    Companies  
such  as  Starbucks  have  jumped  onboard,  offering  discounts  to  users  with  the  most  number  of  “check-­‐
ins”  at  a  specific  venue.    The  original  aim  of  location-­‐based  gaming  is  being  replaced  by  commercially  
driven  gamification.    
 
 
Research  Needs  
 
From  a  cognitive  engineering  standpoint,  gamification  of  location-­‐aware  mobile  applications  offers  a  
plethora   of   interesting   research   opportunities.     Why   would   a   user   choose   to   share   location  
information?     To   which   locations/venues   would   a   user   choose   to   “check-­‐in”   and   which   would   they  
not?    What  weights  do  users  place  on  locations?      
 
Incentives  
 
One   of   the   fundamental   requirements   of   gamification   is   the   need   to   incentivize   the   user.     The   user  
must  have  a  reason  to  contribute  to  the  system.    This  has  been  and  continues  to  be  a  major  area  of  
research  in  social  psychology,  computer  science  and  marketing  [9,10].    Research  has  found  that  users  
need   some   combination   of   social   and   economic   incentives   in   order   to   adopt   and   contribute   to   a  
game-­‐based   application   [11].     While   a   considerable   amount   of   research   has   explored   general  
incentives,  very  little  research  has  focused  on  the  location-­‐specific  aspects.      Where  is  a  user  likely  to  
share  information?    Do  certain  locations  offer  more  incentive  than  others?      
 
For   example,   a   user   might   want   to   broadcast   that   they   are   at   the   trendiest   nightclub   in   town.    
Publically  broadcasting  this  information  increases  the  user’s  social  stature.    The  fact  that  the  user  is  
located  at  a  highly  desirable  location  (arguably)  increases  his  social  worth.    That  same  user  might  not  
want  it  known  that  he  visited  a  medical  center  last  week.    Since  medical  facilities  are  often  associated  
with   disease,   the   user   does   not   want   to   decrease   his   social   capital   by   being   associated   with   the  
location.     In   other   words,   locations   hold   measures   of   social   value   and   the   ability   to   broadcast   your  
presence  at  a  location  is  one  way  to  increase  your  own  social  value.  
 
A   number   of   interesting   research   questions   are   produced   from   this   argument.   What   determines   a  
location’s  social  value  and  how  do  you  measure  this  value?    One  might  argue  that  a  location’s  social  
value  is  directly  related  to  a  user’s  incentive  to  contribute  information  at  that  location.  
     
Travel  Behavior  
 
The   gamification   of   location-­‐aware   applications   also   offers   an   interesting   opportunity   to   examine  
travel  behavior.    Many  users  adopt  these  services  with  the  intention  of  having  fun  with  their  friends…  
and  do  not  realize  there  is  a  fee.  The  cost  of  playing  these  games  is  not  entirely  financial,  but  instead  
involves  publically  broadcasting  personal  profile  data  along  with  location  specifics.    This  might  seem  
like  a  relatively  low  cost  to  the  average  user,  but  the  benefits  to  commercial  business  are  huge.  The  
research  community  has  a  lot  to  gain  from  the  gamification  model  as  well.      We  now  have  access  to  
petabytes   of   previously   unavailable   spatially-­‐referenced   personal   and   social   data.     While   this   data  
may   not   completely   replace   a   multi-­‐user   travel   survey,   it   could   provide   considerable   insight   into   a  
population’s   travel   behavior.     Existing   studies   have   focused   on   the   mobility   of   LBSN   users   [12,13],  
but   further   studies   should   explore   the   validity   and   trustworthiness   of   data   provided   via   these  
applications.   Examination   of   the   spatial   and   temporal   resolution   of   datasets   produced   via   this  
method  should  also  be  considered.  
 
Not  only  could  this  data  be  used  for  studying  transportation  patterns  and  studying  large-­‐scale  travel  
behavior,   but   it   could   also   play   a   role   in   tailoring   navigation   and   wayfinding   models   to   specific  
individuals.       Local   landmarks   are   often   used   to   enrich   wayfinding   [14]   as   users   are   normally   quite  
familiar  with  locations  in  their  local  region.    Since  each  LBSN  user  frequents  a  different  set  of  venues  
and   locations,   a   navigation   model   could   be   customized   to   make   use   of   frequented   locations.     These  
locations  could  be  used  as  landmarks  for  route  navigation  as  they  would  most  likely  be  highly  salient  
to   the   user.     Research   has   shown   that   landmark   saliency   is   a   result   of   interaction   between   the  
observer,  the  environment  and  the  landmark  [15].    In  our  case,  knowledge  of  this  interaction  and  the  
frequency   of   the   interaction   could   be   used   to   measure   saliency.     I   believe   this   is   an   important  
research   question.   Can   gamification   of   location-­‐based   mobile   applications   aid   in   defining   a   user-­‐
centric  model  for  landmark  saliency  and  navigation?    
 
 
Conclusion  
 
Gamification  is  playing  a  significant  role  in  this  new  generation  of  location-­‐based  services  and  mobile  
GIS.     Applications   are   adopting   the   gamification   model   in   order   to   attract   users   and   users   freely  
publish  spatially  referenced  information  under  the  guise  of  playing  a  game.    We  as  researchers  have  a  
tremendous   opportunity   to   make   use   of   the   data   generated   through   this   method   and   study   the  
influence  gamification  is  having  on  the  location-­‐enabled  community.  
 
This  area  of  research  and  data  collection  comes  with  its  fair  share  of  conversation  points.    Issues  of  
trust,   privacy   and   general   data   uncertainty   are   all   valid   concerns   and   should   continue   as   topics   of  
discussion.     We   must   also   be   aware   that   gamification   offers   a   trump   card   to   society’s   privacy  
concerns   (for   better   or   for   worse).     Users   want   to   play   games   with   their   friends   and   are   willing   to  
give  up  a  certain  level  of  privacy  that  they  would  otherwise  not.    Substantial  research  questions  need  
to  be  asked  of  the  data  produced  by  this  method.    For  one,  how  accurate  and  trustworthy  is  this  data?  
 
In  designing  and  engineering  the  next  generation  of  mobile  GIS  applications  and  devices,  we  must  not  
ignore  the  power  of  gamification.    I  believe  the  mobile  industry  will  continue  to  see  a  rise  in  location-­‐
based  gaming,  not  just  as  an  entertainment  medium,  but  also  for  the  purposes  of  data  collection  and  
profit.     The   resulting   data   and   the   methods   used   to   engage   users   are   certainly   worthy   of   additional  
study.    As  is  the  case  with  commercialization  of  this  model,  research  in  this  area  has  only  just  begun.  
 
 
References  
 
[1]  Deterding,  S.,  Sicart,  M.,  Nacke,  L.,  OʼHara,  K.,  &amp;  Dixon,  D.  (2011).  Gamification.  using  game-­‐design  
elements  in  non-­‐gaming  contexts.  Proceedings  of  the  2011  annual  conference  extended  abstracts  
on  Human  factors  in  computing  systems  (2425–2428).  
[2]  Chaplin,  H.  (March  29,  2011).  I  don’t  want  to  be  a  Superhero.    Slate  Magazine  Online.  
http://www.slate.com/id/2289302  
[3]  Goodchild,  M.F.  (2007).  Citizens  as  sensors:  the  world  of  volunteered  geography.  GeoJournal,  
69  (4),  211-­‐221.  
[4]  Michael,  D.R.,  Chen,  S.L.  (2005).  Serious  Games:  Games  That  Educate,  Train,  and  Inform.  Muska  &amp;  </p>
      <p>Lipman/Premier-­‐Trade  
[5]  Hooper,  G.,  Fitzpatrick,  G.  and  Weal,  M.  J.  (2008)  Does  it  Matter  who  is  Holding  the  PDA  in  a  
Mobile  Learning  Experience?  In:  IADIS  International  Conference  of  e-­‐Learning,  11-­‐13  April,  
2008,  Algarve,  Portugal.
[6]  von  Ahn,  L.  (2006).    Games  with  a  purpose.  IEEE  Computer  Magazine  39,  6,  92–9  
417-­‐426.  
Proceedings  of  the  2004  ACM  SIGCHI  International  Conference  on  Advances  in  computer  
entertainment  technology.  New  York,  NY.  321-­‐324  </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Case  Mobile  Crowdsourcing.  SoME  ’11  Hyderabad,  India.    </title>
      <p>Perspectives  in  Social  Psychology.  Plenum  Press  
Activity  Patterns  in  Foursquare.  Fifth  International  AAAI  Conference  on  Weblogs  and  Social  </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Media.  Barcelona,  Spain.  </title>
      <p>[13]  Z.  Cheng,  J.  Caverlee,  K.  Lee,  and  D.  Sui.  Exploring  Millions  of  Footprints  in  Location  Sharing  
Services.  5th  International  AAAI  Conference  on  Weblogs  and  Social  Media  (ICWSM).  Barcelona,  
July  2011  
[14]  Raubal,  M.,  Winter,  S.  (2002)  Enriching  wayfinding  instructions  with  local  landmarks  Lecture  
Notes  in  Computer  Science  2478,  243-­‐259  </p>
      <p>Cognitive  Processing  9,  4,  249-­‐267  </p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list />
  </back>
</article>