The Response to Impactful Interactivity on Spectators’ Engagement in a Digital Game
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As gaming spectatorship has become a worldwide phenomenon, keeping the spectator in mind while designing games is becoming more important. Here, we explore the factors that influence spectators’ engagement. Through the use of GRiD Crowd, a game akin to life-size Pong, different levels of spectator influence on the game were tested and their impact on engagement via arousal measures were analyzed. Spectator influence on the game was accomplished via smartphone, where 78 participants put in different audience compositions (alongside friends or strangers) were tested. We found that when the spectators had an impact on the game, higher levels of emotional arousal were recorded, which generated an increase in engagement. These results provide a suggestion of design that could be used by game designers who wish to engage their spectatorship, a segment of their target market that is becoming impossible to ignore.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it