MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185991793 · doi:10.1145/3474677

Merlynne

2021· article· en· W3185991793 on OpenAlexafffund
Tina Chan, Robert P. Gauthier, Ally Suarez, Nicholas F. Sia, James R. Wallace

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsCognitive dissonanceAvatarPsychologyPeer supportSocial psychologyApplied psychologyComputer scienceHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human-Computer Interaction researchers have explored how online communities can be leveraged for peer support, but general disinterest and a lack of engagement have emerged as substantial barriers to their use in practice. To address this gap, we designed Merlynne, a serious game that seeks to motivate individuals to support peers through Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). Our game explored use of the Proteus Effect - a phenomenon where players adopt characteristics of their in-game avatar - to motivate peer support through stereotyped 'helpful' and 'unhelpful' avatars. We then conducted a mixed-methods, exploratory study to investigate its design. We found that our game successfully motivated players to offer peer support, despite the substantial emotional labour required by CBT. However, we were not able to replicate the Proteus Effect, and did not find differences in that support based on a player's avatar. In reflecting on our findings, we discuss design challenges and considerations for the use of serious games to motivate participation in mental health support, including: fatigue, a player's need for self-expression and to relate to those they are supporting, and ludonarrative dissonance.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207