MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2404781118 · doi:10.1145/2858036.2858062

Fostering Intrinsic Motivation through Avatar Identification in Digital Games

2016· article· en· W2404781118 on OpenAlexaff
Max V. Birk, Cheralyn Atkins, Jason T. Bowey, Regan L. Mandryk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia Influence and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrinsic motivationAvatarOperationalizationIdentification (biology)Self-determination theorySelf identificationEntertainmentAffect (linguistics)Human–computer interactionPsychologyAutonomyEmbodied cognitionComputer scienceSocial psychologyMultimediaArtificial intelligenceCommunicationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fostering intrinsic motivation with interactive applications can increase the enjoyment that people experience when using technology, but can also translate into more invested effort. We propose that identifying with an avatar in a game will increase the intrinsic motivation of the player. We analyzed data from 126 participants playing a custom endless runner game and show that similarity identification, embodied identification, and wishful identification increases autonomy, immersion, invested effort, enjoyment, and positive affect. We also show that greater identification translates into motivated behaviour as operationalized by the time that players spent in an unending version of the infinite runner. Important for the design of games for entertainment and serious purposes, we discuss how identification with an avatar can be facilitated to cultivate intrinsic motivation within and beyond games.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations260
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedia Influence and HealthFrench-language works237,207