Measuring Fun with Adolescents

Serious videogames use entertainment to teach, train, or change behavior. What began in the 1970s as tentative attempts to create learning software is now a recognized videogame genre and an emerging health science. Although more research is needed, a growing body of literature suggests serious videogames can be effective. Support for serious videogames, however, is not universal. An informal Web search reveals numerous skeptics. Critics question serious videogames' entertainment value and, thus, their viability. "How can serious videogames attract and maintain players," the argument goes, "if they aren't as much fun as commercial titles, or even any fun at all?" This article examines the argument that, to be effective, serious videogames should be overtly fun and comparable to commercial off-the-shelf videogames. It explores differences between game developer- and researcher-led projects and discusses ways serious videogames can avoid boring and alienati...

Loading .., 2020

The gaming industry and the concept of gamification have altered the way many developers and users approach interactive products. As social gaming demographics expand to what was previously considered "casual" audiences, more users expect an enjoyable experience from their digital applications and games. Developers now request more detailed subjective descriptions of satisfaction and the player experience from user experience (UX) practitioners. Focusing on how fun a product is for users/players requires subjective, situationally dependent metrics rather than the traditional usability pillars: effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction. UX professionals are engaged in constructing a comprehensive ecology of the player experience and how to measure it. This article contributes to that ecology by detailing a case in which our team conducted a usability test on a new video game peripheral. Our client's primary concern lay with how fun experienced gamers found the device. As our test progressed, we encountered a number of funrelated participant behaviors that led us to develop unique metrics beyond an initial systems survey. These new metrics helped our team and our client better define and discuss enjoyability. Our case, in conjunction with a detailed definition and review of player experience and UX scholarship, shows the importance of adopting metrics contextually specific to the video game product and player group when measuring fun or enjoyability is the primary goal.

Fun plays a significant role in learning. Given its positive impact on education, the role of fun has often been investigated in the context of gamification and educational games. An important problem with the study of the role of fun in learning is the lack of consistency in the assessment. There are a few existing tools for the evaluation of fun alone, but it is rarely assessed along with the other features of usability and gaming experience on a single scale. With the intent to fill this gap, we present MEEGA360, a modified version of the MEEGA + scale. Strengths and limits of the MEEGA + scale will be described, along with our solutions, and a first application.

This article explains how the joint effect of demands, control (decision latitude) and social support can predict fun. Demands include variation and challenges. Control is understood as giving the user decision making authority and allowing the use and development of skills. Social support refers to the opportunity for co-activity and the experience of social cohesion. A fun interface should be demanding, but at the same time allow control and socially rewarding activity. Theory from work and organisational psychology, social psychology and human factors design is reviewed. Implications for design and evaluation of fun are proposed

BMC …, 2010

Jan P Piek (j.piek@curtin.edu.au) Leon M Straker (l.straker@curtin.edu.au) Lynn Jensen (l.jensen@curtin.edu.au) Alma Dender (a.dender@curtin.edu.au) Nicholas C Barrett (nc.barrett@optusnet.com.au) Sue McLaren (S.mclaren@curtin.edu.au) Clare Roberts (c. ...

At T2, young people were asked whether there had been any difference since their parent attended the LWT Parenting Programme. 83% reported that there had been a positive difference and that their family does more things together, the levels of conflict have decreased and parents' coping strategies are better, as illustrated below: 'Not been getting grounded. Different praise and punishments, more freedom. ' 'Don't get sent to room.' 'Before we shouted at each other. Now we don't shout at each other and are more calm.' At the three month follow up, young people still reported an improved relationship with the parents, reflected in increased tolerance for one another and more mutual respect, as illustrated below: 'Mum trusts me out with my friends. Mum talking to me more when things are bad and we sort them out.' 'A lot calmer and more fun. Can count on them and we listen to each other.' The young people were also asked about the best changes that had happened in their family at both points in time. At T2, young people talked about how they had started to form better bonds with their parents: 'Started to bond more and work as a team together now. At the moment it's going at a steady pace.' 'We can play games together.' At the three month follow-up, the positive relationship building was still improving with 90% of young people reporting definite positive changes in their relationships and a more peaceful family life. A number of young people also commented on their own behaviour, noting that it has also become more positive and reported better rapport with teachers and schoolmates: 'I don't fight anymore, I get on better at school and I keep my head down. ' 'I hang with people that are good.' '[We are] bonding more and doing things together. Also I give more help around the house.'

First of all, I would like to thank my family and friends for supporting my decision to pursue such a dicult and demanding goal. I would also like to thank my advisor, professor Flávio Soares Corrêa da Silva, for all the help, advices and friendship that he provided me during the execution of this work. I thank my professors and colleagues at the University of São Paulo, particularly my dearest peers from the Laboratory of Interactivity and Digital Entertainment Technology (LIDET) for their support and sharing of knowledge, and the professors from the Judging Commission for their commentaries and suggestions regarding this work. Finally, I thank the volunteers that have agreed to play the games in the experiment performed in this work, the Committee of Ethics in Research, and CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior) for their nancial support during the execution of this work.

The aim of the study is to draw a comparison of 11-14 age group secondary school students playfulness level to play games which consist of physical activity. It also aims to evaluate playfulness level in terms of various parameters. For this purpose, 11-14 age group students' playfulness level were examined according to cities, gender, and ages. A total of 523 11-14 year-old students, including 303 from Kayseri and 220 from Trabzon, and some various schools formed a study group for the research conducted in the relational model. " Playfulness scale for playing games that consist of physical activity of children of 10-14 age group " that was developed by Hazar (2014) was used in the data collection. Based on the research, the level of playfulness of the participants was found to be "good" at 3.40-4.19. Students living in Kayseri and Trabzon were found to have "good" in terms of social adaptation, wish to play game, wish to win, and in general. Students in Kayseri "good" level had a playfulness at "medium" level in Trabzon. Due to the comparison of male and female student scores, it was found that there was a significant difference in favor of male students in game play overall, game passion, and risk taking dimensions. Girls are more likely to have social adaptation, playfulness, and a meaningful difference generally. Also, girls who live in Kayseri are more likely to be students. They wish to play game, social adaptation, wish to win, and risk taking. Meaningful differences can however be seen based on the scores of the 11 and 12 year students.

The aim of the study is to draw a comparison of 11-14 age group secondary school students playfulness level to play games which consist of physical activity. It also aims to evaluate playfulness level in terms of various parameters. For this purpose, 11-14 age group students' playfulness level were examined according to cities, gender, and ages. A total of 523 11-14 year-old students, including 303 from Kayseri and 220 from Trabzon, and some various schools formed a study group for the research conducted in the relational model. " Playfulness scale for playing games that consist of physical activity of children of 10-14 age group " that was developed by Hazar (2014) was used in the data collection. Based on the research, the level of playfulness of the participants was found to be "good" at 3.40-4.19. Students living in Kayseri and Trabzon were found to have "good" in terms of social adaptation, wish to play game, wish to win, and in general. Students in Kayseri "good" level had a playfulness at "medium" level in Trabzon. Due to the comparison of male and female student scores, it was found that there was a significant difference in favor of male students in game play overall, game passion, and risk taking dimensions. Girls are more likely to have social adaptation, playfulness, and a meaningful difference generally. Also, girls who live in Kayseri are more likely to be students. They wish to play game, social adaptation, wish to win, and risk taking. Meaningful differences can however be seen based on the scores of the 11 and 12 year students.

2008

2.4.2.1 Social control and leisure boredom 41 Parental monitoring Gender and identity Age 43 2.4.2.2 Psychological disposition and leisure boredom Motivation Personality and affect 2.4.2.3 The influence of context on leisure boredom Having nothing to do 45 Limited leisure resources Lack of challenge Time use 46 2.4.3 Leisure boredom and risk behaviour 2.4.3.1 Substance use 48 2.4.3.2 Sexual risk behaviour 49 2.4.3.3 Dropout 49 2.4.3.4 Negative affect and delinquency 49 2.4.3.5 Sensation seeking 50 2.4.4 Measurement of leisure boredom 2.4.5 Interventions for leisure boredom 2.4.6 Limitations 2.4.7 Further research 2.5 Conclusion Chapter Three Reliability of the Leisure Boredom Scale for use with high school learners 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Research question and aim 3.3 Methods 3.3.1 Sample