MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604155351 · doi:10.2196/games.7197

Who Is Still Playing Pokémon Go? A Web-Based Survey

2017· article· en· W2604155351 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Serious Games · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsPhysical activityActivity trackerBitTorrent trackerHealth benefitsInternet privacyComputer sciencePsychologyMedicineArtificial intelligencePhysical therapyTraditional medicineEye tracking

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Poor physical activity is one of the major health care problems in Western civilizations. Various digital gadgets aiming to increase physical activity, such as activity trackers or fitness apps, have been introduced over recent years. The newest products are serious games that incorporate real-life physical activity into their game concept. Recent studies have shown that such games increase the physical activity of their users over the short term. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we investigated the motivational effects of the digital game "Pokémon Go" leading to continued use or abandonment of the game. The aim of the study was to determine aspects that motivate individuals to play augmented reality exergames and how this motivation can be used to strengthen the initial interest in physical activity. METHODS: A total of 199 participants completed an open self-selected Web-based survey. On the basis of their self-indicated assignment to one of three predefined user groups (active, former, and nonuser of Pokémon Go), participants answered various questions regarding game experience, physical activity, motivation, and personality as measured by the Big Five Inventory. RESULTS: In total, 81 active, 56 former, and 62 nonusers of Pokémon Go were recruited. When asked about the times they perform physical activity, active users stated that they were less physically active in general than former and nonusers. However, based on a subjective rating, active users were more motivated to be physically active due to playing Pokémon Go. Motivational aspects differed for active and former users, whereas fan status was the same within both groups. Active users are more motivated by features directly related to Pokémon, such as catching all possible Pokémon and reaching higher levels, whereas former users stress the importance of general game quality, such as better augmented reality and more challenges in the game. Personality did not affect whether a person started to play Pokémon Go nor their abandonment of the game. CONCLUSIONS: The results show various motivating elements that should be incorporated into augmented reality exergames based on the game Pokémon Go. We identified different user types for whom different features of the game contribute to maintained motivation or abandonment. Our results show aspects that augmented reality exergame designers should keep in mind to encourage individuals to start playing their game and facilitate long-term user engagement, resulting in a greater interest in physical activity.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.280 · 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