MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385264180 · doi:10.2196/45436

Gamification and Soft Skills Assessment in the Development of a Serious Game: Design and Feasibility Pilot Study

2023· article· en· W4385264180 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Luca Altomari, Natalia Altomari, Gianpaolo Iazzolino

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Serious Games · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Process (computing)Game designResource (disambiguation)ProductivityPopulationKnowledge managementValue (mathematics)Computer scienceWork (physics)EngineeringMultimediaMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The advent of new technologies has had a profound impact on the labor market, transforming the way we work and interact with each other. With the rise of digital tools and platforms, gamification has emerged as a powerful technique for enhancing productivity and engagement in various fields, including human resource management. In particular, gamification has been found to be effective in developing and assessing soft skills, which play a critical role in determining the success of individuals, teams, and organizations. OBJECTIVE: We present a serious game that identifies the most sought-after skills in the job market and offers feedback, and we provide a set of guidelines for the creation of serious games. METHODS: We present the serious game Among the Office Criticality (AOC). The AOC game structure involves a set of sequence analysis techniques, which is known as process mining. RESULTS: The pilot study findings indicate that the game is both engaging and beneficial to subjects, suggesting that the results align with current theoretical perspectives. Furthermore, the study suggests that the obtained data can be extended to the broader population. CONCLUSIONS: This study illustrates a serious game structured according to the needs of the labor market and developed to put the user at the center, using evaluation techniques consistent with the literature, with the aim of constituting an interdisciplinary approach suitable for adequately assessing users and creating value for them.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 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

Citations32
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Serious GamesSame topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207