Dataset Information

A Gamification Framework for Cognitive Assessment and Cognitive Training: Qualitative Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cognitive tasks designed to measure or train cognition are often repetitive and presented in a monotonous manner, features that lead to participant boredom and disengagement. In this situation, participants do not put forth their best effort to do these tasks well. As a result, neuropsychologists cannot draw accurate conclusions about the data collected, and intervention effects are reduced. It is assumed that greater engagement and motivation will manifest as improved data quality. Gamification, the use of game elements in nongame settings, has been heralded as a potential mechanism for increasing participant engagement in cognitive tasks. Some studies have reported a positive effect of gamification on participant performance, although most studies have shown mixed results. One reason for these contrasting findings is that most studies have applied poor and heterogeneous design techniques to gamify cognitive tasks. Therefore, an appropriate gamification design framework is needed in these tasks.

Objective

This study aimed to propose a framework to guide the design of gamification in cognitive tasks.

Methods

We employed a design science research (DSR) approach to provide a framework for gamifying cognitive assessments and training by synthesizing current gamification design frameworks and gamification works in cognitive assessment and training, as well as incorporating field experiences. The prototypes of the framework were iteratively evaluated with 17 relevant experts.

Results

We proposed a framework consisting of 7 phases: (1) preparation; (2) knowing users; (3) exploring existing tools for assessing or training a targeted cognitive context and determining the suitability of game-up and mapping techniques; (4) ideation; (5) prototyping using the Objects, Mechanics, Dynamics, Emotions (OMDE) design guideline; (6) development; and (7) disseminating and monitoring.

Conclusions

We found that (1) an intermediate design framework is needed to gamify cognitive tasks, which means that game elements should be selected by considering current cognitive assessment or training context characteristics since game elements may impose an irrelevant cognitive load that, in turn, can jeopardize data quality; (2) in addition to developing a new gamified cognitive task from scratch, 2 gamification techniques are widely used (first, adding game elements to an existing cognitive task and second, mapping an existing game to a cognitive function or impairment to assess or train it); and (3) further research is required to investigate the interplay of cognitive processes and game mechanics.

SUBMITTER: Khaleghi A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8170558 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere has been a growing interest in the application of gamification (ie, the use of game elements) to computerized cognitive training. The introduction of targeted gamification features to such tasks may increase motivation and engagement as well as improve intervention effects. However, it is possible that game elements can also have adverse effects on cognitive training (eg, be a distraction), which can outweigh their potential motivational benefits. So far, little is known about the effectiveness of such applications.ObjectiveThis study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of gamification on process outcomes (eg, motivation) and on changes in the training domain (eg, cognition), as well as to explore the role of potential moderators.MethodsWe searched PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest Psychology, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Science Direct, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore, Association for Computing Machinery, and a range of gray-area literature databases. The searches included papers published between 2008 and 2018. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model.ResultsThe systematic review identified 49 studies, of which 9 randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the review indicated that research in this context is still developing and lacks well-controlled empirical studies. Gamification in cognitive training is applied to a large range of age groups and audiences and is mostly delivered at a research site through computers. Rewards and feedback continue to dominate the gamification landscape, whereas social-oriented features (eg, competition) are underused. The meta-analyses showed that gamified training tasks were more motivating/engaging (Hedges g=0.72) and more demanding/difficult (Hedges g=-0.52) than non- or less-gamified tasks, whereas no effects on the training domain were found. Furthermore, no variables moderated the impact of gamified training tasks. However, meta-analytic findings were limited due to a small number of studies.ConclusionsOverall, this review provides an overview of the existing research in the domain and provides evidence for the effectiveness of gamification in improving motivation/engagement in the context of cognitive training. We discuss the shortcomings in the current literature and provide recommendations for future research.

Project description:ObjectivesClinical guidelines recommend early cognitive assessment after stroke to inform rehabilitation and discharge decisions. However, little is known about stroke survivors' experiences of the cognitive assessment process. This qualitative study aimed to explore patients' experiences of poststroke cognitive assessments.DesignStroke survivors were purposively sampled in an iterative process through a pool of research volunteers who had previously taken part in the Oxford Cognitive Screen Recovery study. Stroke survivors and their family caregivers were invited to participate in a semistructured interview steered by a topic guide. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Demographic, clinical and cognitive data were acquired from patients' previous research data.SettingStroke survivors were originally recruited from the acute inpatient unit at Oxford University Hospital (John Radcliffe), UK. Participants were interviewed after discharge either at their homes or via telephone or videocall.ParticipantsTwenty-six stroke survivors and eleven caregivers participated in semi-structured interviews.ResultsWe identified three key phases of the cognitive assessment process and themes pertaining to each phase. The phases (numbered) and themes (lettered) were as follows: (1) before the cognitive assessment: (A) lack of explanation, (B) considering the assessment useless; (2) during the cognitive assessment: varied emotional responses, moderated by (D) perception of the purpose behind cognitive assessment, (E) perception of cognitive impairment, (F) confidence in cognitive abilities, (G) assessment administration style and (3) after the cognitive assessment: (H) feedback can impact self-confidence and self-efficacy, (I) vague feedback and clinical jargon are unhelpful.ConclusionsStroke survivors require clear explanations about the purpose and outcomes of poststroke cognitive assessments, including constructive feedback, to promote engagement with the process and protect their psychological wellbeing.

Project description:The Primary Care Outcomes Questionnaire (PCOQ) is a new patient-reported outcome measure designed specifically for primary care. This paper describes the developmental process of improving the item quality and testing the face validity of the PCOQ through cognitive interviews with primary care patients.Two formats of the PCOQ were developed and assessed: the PCOQ-Status (which has an adjectival scale) and the PCOQ-Change (which has the same items as the PCOQ-Status, but a transitional scale). Three rounds of cognitive interviews were held with twenty patients from four health centres in Bristol. Patients seeking healthcare were recruited directly by their GP or practice nurse, and others not currently seeking healthcare were recruited from patient participation groups. An adjusted form of Tourangeau's model of cognitive processing was used to identify problems. This contained four categories: general comprehension, temporal comprehension, decision process, and response process. The resultant pattern of problems was used to assess whether the items and scales were working as intended, and to make improvements to the questionnaires.The problems identified in the PCOQ-Status reduced from 41 in round one to seven in round three. It was noted that the PCOQ-Status seemed to be capturing a subjective view of health which might not vary with age or long-term conditions. However, as it is designed to be evaluative (measuring change over time) as opposed to discriminative (measuring change between different groups of people), this does not present a problem for validity. The PCOQ-Status was both understood by patients and was face valid. The PCOQ-Change had less face validity, and was misunderstood by three out of six patients in round 1. It was not taken forward after this round.The cognitive interviews successfully contributed to the development of the PCOQ. Through this study, the PCOQ-Status was found to be well understood by patients, and it was possible to improve comprehension through each round of interviews. The PCOQ-Change was poorly understood and, given that this corroborates existing research, this may call into question the use of transitional questionnaires generally.

Project description:BackgroundFinding ways to increase and sustain engagement with mHealth interventions has become a challenge during application development. While gamification shows promise and has proven effective in many fields, critical questions remain concerning how to use gamification to modify health behavior.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to investigate how the gamification of mHealth interventions leads to a change in health behavior, specifically with respect to smoking cessation.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative longitudinal study using a sample of 16 smokers divided into 2 cohorts (one used a gamified intervention and the other used a nongamified intervention). Each participant underwent 4 semistructured interviews over a period of 5 weeks. Semistructured interviews were also conducted with 4 experts in gamification, mHealth, and smoking cessation. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis undertaken.ResultsResults indicated perceived behavioral control and intrinsic motivation acted as positive drivers to game engagement and consequently positive health behavior. Importantly, external social influences exerted a negative effect. We identified 3 critical factors, whose presence was necessary for game engagement: purpose (explicit purpose known by the user), user alignment (congruency of game and user objectives), and functional utility (a well-designed game). We summarize these findings in a framework to guide the future development of gamified mHealth interventions.ConclusionsGamification holds the potential for a low-cost, highly effective mHealth solution that may replace or supplement the behavioral support component found in current smoking cessation programs. The framework reported here has been built on evidence specific to smoking cessation, however it can be adapted to health interventions in other disease categories. Future research is required to evaluate the generalizability and effectiveness of the framework, directly against current behavioral support therapy interventions in smoking cessation and beyond.