"Gamified online-questionnaire: advantages and limitations "
How to Cite
Vernigor K., Voronina Y., Sineva O. "Gamified online-questionnaire: advantages and limitations ". Interaction. Interview. Interpretation. 2016. Vol. 8. No. 12. P. 43-53. (in Russ.).
Abstract
Refusals to complete the questionnaires, “fatigue of respondents” against the background of high activity of various research companies are the current problems of the traditional data collection. On the example of the online survey, this article examines the potential of gamification of survey tools as a possible option to overcome this problem. The study is based on a comparison of gamified and traditional version of the questionnaire. Cognitive interview was the primary method for evaluating the impact of using gamification. The hypothesis of the study implied that a gamified questionnaire was more understandable for respondents in comparison with its standard variant. There were two indicators serving as the criteria for testing the hypothesis: the first one was navigation of the form and coherence of the narrative, the second one was the wording of questions. The standard version of the questionnaire based on the semantic grouping of questions. The original standardized questionnaire was devoted to the examination of the question “What do Russians dream about?” Four types of narrative were proposed as a conceptual framework for gamification of this questionnaire: a narrative quest “the room”, the speaker is connecting the semantic structure for the rest of gamified narratives, narratives of the “ideal state”, “drive the train” and “truth serum”. Each block of questions in a gamified questionnaire was semantically linked with the narrative, creating a complex structure of the questionnaire. The content of standardized questions remained the same. The results of the analysis of the cognitive interview resulted in the following benefits and limitations of gamification: a gamified structure of the questionnaire should be built from simple to complex, gamification through the narrative is effective for structuring questionnaire, and the questionnaire is more efficient in creating your own one (according to the research goal).
Keywords:
gamification, questionnaire, cognitive interview, online survey, data collection methods, gamified questionnaire
References
Adamou B. (2014) Research games as a methodology: the impact of online research games upon participant engagement and future research game participation. Research Through Gaming Ltd. URL: www.researchthroughgaming.com/publication/view/researchgames-as-amethodology-the-impact-of-online-researchgames-upon-participant-engagement-and-futureresearchgame-participation-by-betty-adamou (assessed 20.01.2017).
Brewer R.; Anthony L.; Brown Q.; Irwin G.; Nias J.; Tate B. (2013) Using gamification to motivate children to complete empirical studies in lab environments. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children; 24–27 June; New York; USA; pp. 388–391.
Cechanowicz J.; Gutwin C.; Brownell B.; Goodfellow L. (2013) The effects of gamification on participation and data quality in a real-world market research domain. Proceedings of Gamification; 2–4 October; Stratford; Ontario; Canada; pp. 58–65. URL: http://hci.usask.ca/publications/view.php?id=324 (assessed 20.01.2017).
Koenig-Lewis N.; Marquet M.; Palmer A. (2013) The effects of gamification on market research engagement and response. URL: marketing.conference-services.net/resources/327/3554/pdf/AM2013_0291_paper.pdf (accessed 11.12.2016).
Mavletova A. (2015a) Web surveys among children and adolescents: is there a gamification effect? Social Science Computer Review; vol. 33; no 3; pp. 372–398.
Mavletova A. (2015b) A gamification effect in longitudinal web surveys among children and adolescents. The Market Research Society; vol. 57; no 3; pp. 413–438. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.2501/IJMR-2015-035 (accessed 11.12.2016).
Puleston J. (2011) Improving online surveys. International journal of market research; vol. 53; no 4; pp. 557–560.
Puleston J.; Sleep D. (2011) The game experiments. Proceedings of the ESOMAR (European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research) Congress; 10–13 September; Amsterdam; Netherlands.
Turner G.; Van Zoonen L.; Adamou B. (2014) Research through gaming: public perceptions of (the future of) identity management. Sage case studies in research methods. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/978144627305013496519 (accessed 11.12.2016).
Tourangeau R. (1984) Cognitive sciences and survey methods. Cognitive aspects of survey methodology: building a bridge between disciplines; Washington DC: National Academy Press; pp. 73–100.
Willis G. (1999) Cognitive Interviewing: a «how to» guide. Research Triangle Institute. URL: http://directory.umm.ac.id/articles/interview.pdf (accessed 11.12.2016).
Brewer R.; Anthony L.; Brown Q.; Irwin G.; Nias J.; Tate B. (2013) Using gamification to motivate children to complete empirical studies in lab environments. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children; 24–27 June; New York; USA; pp. 388–391.
Cechanowicz J.; Gutwin C.; Brownell B.; Goodfellow L. (2013) The effects of gamification on participation and data quality in a real-world market research domain. Proceedings of Gamification; 2–4 October; Stratford; Ontario; Canada; pp. 58–65. URL: http://hci.usask.ca/publications/view.php?id=324 (assessed 20.01.2017).
Koenig-Lewis N.; Marquet M.; Palmer A. (2013) The effects of gamification on market research engagement and response. URL: marketing.conference-services.net/resources/327/3554/pdf/AM2013_0291_paper.pdf (accessed 11.12.2016).
Mavletova A. (2015a) Web surveys among children and adolescents: is there a gamification effect? Social Science Computer Review; vol. 33; no 3; pp. 372–398.
Mavletova A. (2015b) A gamification effect in longitudinal web surveys among children and adolescents. The Market Research Society; vol. 57; no 3; pp. 413–438. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.2501/IJMR-2015-035 (accessed 11.12.2016).
Puleston J. (2011) Improving online surveys. International journal of market research; vol. 53; no 4; pp. 557–560.
Puleston J.; Sleep D. (2011) The game experiments. Proceedings of the ESOMAR (European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research) Congress; 10–13 September; Amsterdam; Netherlands.
Turner G.; Van Zoonen L.; Adamou B. (2014) Research through gaming: public perceptions of (the future of) identity management. Sage case studies in research methods. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/978144627305013496519 (accessed 11.12.2016).
Tourangeau R. (1984) Cognitive sciences and survey methods. Cognitive aspects of survey methodology: building a bridge between disciplines; Washington DC: National Academy Press; pp. 73–100.
Willis G. (1999) Cognitive Interviewing: a «how to» guide. Research Triangle Institute. URL: http://directory.umm.ac.id/articles/interview.pdf (accessed 11.12.2016).
Citation Formats
Other cite formats:
APA
Vernigor, K., Voronina, Y., & Sineva, O. (2016). "Gamified online-questionnaire: advantages and limitations ". Interaction. Interview. Interpretation, 8(12), 43-53. Retrieved from https://inter-fnisc.ru/index.php/inter/article/view/4911
Section
Field work research
