MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611159971 · doi:10.1145/3025453.3025982

Keeping Users Engaged through Feature Updates

2017· article· en· W2611159971 on OpenAlexaff
Zhao Zhao, Ali Arya, Anthony Whitehead, Gerry Chan, S. Ali Etemad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWearable computerActivity trackerPopularityBitTorrent trackerEntertainmentComputer scienceWearable technologyHuman–computer interactionAffect (linguistics)Physical activityMultimediaSedentary lifestyleUser engagementApplied psychologyPsychologyWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligenceSocial psychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationEye trackingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gamification and exergames in particular have been broadly employed in health and fitness as an attempt to promote exercise and more active life styles. Motivated by popularity and availability of wearable activity trackers, we present the design and findings of a study on the motivational effects of using activity tracker-based games to promote daily exercise. Furthermore, we have investigated user behaviors, usage patterns, engagement, and parameters that affect them. An exergame was developed with an accompanying wearable device, for which different variations of application updates were pushed out periodically over a 70-day period. The results of this long-term study show that the usage of wearable activity trackers during exercise, even when gamified for increased entertainment, sees a consistent decline over time. This decline, however, is observed to be reversible with periodic updates to the game. This work, we believe, can make a significant contribution to solving the user retention problem of wearable-based exergames.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.681
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.310 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations53
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207