MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763135235 · doi:10.1145/3116595.3125499

Evaluating the Onboarding Phase of Free-toPlay Mobile Games

2017· article· en· W2763135235 on OpenAlexaff
Falko Weigert Petersen, Line Ebdrup Thomsen, Pejman Mirza-Babaei, Anders Drachen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFlow Experience in Various Fields
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilArts and Humanities Research CouncilEuropean Commission
KeywordsOnboardingComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionMobile deviceGame mechanicsContext (archaeology)MultimediaPsychologyWorld Wide WebSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first few minutes of play, commonly referred to as the onboarding phase, of Free-to-Play mobile games typically display a substantial churn rate among new players. It is therefore vital for designers to effectively evaluate this phase to investigate its satisfaction of player expectations. This paper presents a study utilizing a lab-based mixed-methods approach in providing insights for evaluating the user experience of onboarding phases in mobile games. This includes an investigation into the contribution of physiological measures (Heart-Rate Variability and Galvanic Skin Conductance) as well as a range of self-reported proxy measures including: a) stimulated recall, engagement graphs, b) flow state survey and c) post-game experience questionnaire. These techniques were applied across 28 participants using three mobile Free-to-Play titles from different genres. This paper makes two important contributions to the games user research (GUR) domain: 1) evaluates different research techniques (e.g. physiological measures and experience graphs) in the context of mobile games; 2) provides an empirically based recommendation for design elements that result in high arousal.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.374 · 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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFlow Experience in Various FieldsFrench-language works237,207