As printed in The Design of Learning Games, © Springer-Verlag, 2011
(with permission).
Chapter 5
CREATING FLOW, MOTIVATION, & FUN IN
LEARNING GAMES
Curtiss Murphy1, Dustin Chertoff2, Michael Guerrero3, Kerry Moffitt4,
1
Alion Science and Technology, 5365 Robin Hood Road, Suite 100, Norfolk, VA 23513;
Intelligent Automation Inc, 15400 Calhoun Drive, Suite 400, Rockville, MD 20855; 3Naval
Postgraduate School, WA366, 700 Dyer Road, Monterey, CA 93943-500; 4 Raytheon BBN, 10
Moulton St., Cambridge, MA 02138
2
Abstract:
Just a few years ago, the industry was abuzz, demanding statistical proof of
what was generally accepted as truth: games could be great teaching tools.
Video games obviously created very engaging experiences where many players
can play for hours on end. Games could put players ‘in the zone’ in an
experience known as ‘flow’. Even still, we needed proof to validate that they
could actually teach something.
Fortunately, those days are past. In recent years, there have been many great
examples of learning games and a variety of studies have shown that fantastic
results are possible. Unfortunately, they also show that wonderful results are
not always guaranteed and that designing an effective learning game is hard.
So, now the question shifts from ‘can it work’, to ‘how do we make it work?’
This chapter explores how to design effective learning games by looking at
three critical areas: flow, motivation, and fun. For each area, we present
important theoretical discoveries as well as practical ways to apply them in
learning games.
Key words: Games; Learning Games; Game Design; Flow, Motivation; Fun; Learning.
2
1.
Chapter 5
INTRODUCTION
Learning games are video games that are used for non-entertainment
purposes, specifically to teach material or reinforce learning. Games can be
used to learn all kinds of things, in almost any domain. Sailors in the US
Navy play the Damage Control Trainer as part of their boot camp training.
Marines use games and virtual environments to train convoy operations
(Hussain et al. 2009). The Army uses games to introduce core values to
potential recruits before enlisting. In healthcare, you see games used to
improve physical fitness, aid diabetics, and improve the lives of asthmatics
(Baranowski et al. 2008). Learning games are all around us, being used in all
sorts of innovative ways. Given the volume of studies and publications
available, this chapter begins with the basic premise that games can be used
to create learning that is both real and measurable. Of that, we have no
question.
However, it is the design of the game that is the key to its success. Just
because it is possible for games to create meaningful learning experiences, it
doesn’t mean they always do. After all, designers of training games face the
challenges of two industries: entertainment and education. They have to
build games that engage as well as instruct and that’s quite difficult. In this
chapter, we will explore three critical areas needed to create effective
learning games. The areas are flow, motivation, and fun. We will present
them in order of depth and priority: flow leads us to motivation and we end
with fun. We present solid guidelines for designing games that promote
flow. Throughout this chapter we will highlight some of the best examples
and most effective techniques for harnessing these elements to design more
effective learning games.
2.
FLOW
Sometimes, an activity captures our attention so completely that the rest
of the world seems to disappear. We become so totally engaged in meeting
the immediate challenges in front of us that time becomes distorted,
somehow it seems to both slow down and to fly by unnoticed. In such a
state, we perform better, forget ourselves, and become one with what we’re
doing. This state is known as ‘Flow’ and it perfectly captures the
fundamental appeal of games (Murphy 2011). This section explains the
scientific importance of flow and how it applies to games.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
2.1
3
Introduction to Flow
Psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi spent more than 25 years
researching human performance and the nature of optimal experience
(Csikszentmihalyi 1990, 1997). He initially noticed this phenomenon while
studying top athletes, who would often describe record-breaking
performances as being ‘almost effortless.’ He later realized that his theories
applied to almost any human activity, from factory work to works of art,
from the simplest of activities such as reading, to the masterful actions of a
surgeon. He studied children and adults in dozens of countries, beginners
and experts, East and West, rich and poor. Based on years of extensive
research, he concludes that under certain conditions people can attain a level
of optimal experience, known as ‘flow.’ In such a state, people become
highly focused, become less aware of themselves, experience an altered
sense of time, and feel fully in control of their actions.
Csikszentmihalyi describes flow as “the state in which people are so
involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter; the experience
itself is so enjoyable that people will do it even at great cost, for the sheer
sake of doing it.” (Csikszentmihalyi 1990, p4) Others have described it as
'the ultimate in harnessing the emotions in the service of performing and
learning.’ (Goleman 1995, p.90) The state of flow induces feelings of fun,
pleasure, and enjoyment and leads to lasting memories. In addition, “the
flow experience acts as a magnet for learning - that is, for developing new
levels of challenges and skills.” (Csikszentmihalyi 1997, p33)
As Csikszentmihalyi describes (Csikszentmihalyi 1990), there are seven
core components of flow that are summarized in Table 2.1. These
components can be broken into two categories: conditions and
characteristics. Conditions must be achieved before flow can be reached.
Characteristics occur while a person is in flow, even though they may be
unaware of it.
4
Chapter 5
Conditions of Flow
Clear tasks
Feedback
An attainable, balanced goal
Concentration/focus
Characteristics of Flow
Explanation
Person understands what they must complete
Person receives clear and immediate feedback showing
what succeeds and what fails
Goal is challenging and within their abilities to complete
Person is not distracted and can fully attend to the task
Explanation
Control
Person believes their actions have direct impact on tasks and
that they can control the outcome
Diminished awareness of self Complete focus on the task leaves little room for feeling
self-conscious or doubt. Often described as becoming a part
of the activity.
Altered sense of time
Perception of time is distorted. Seconds can feel like
minutes, minutes like hours. Yet, time also passes by
quickly, unnoticed.
Table 2.1 – Conditions and Characteristics of Flow
Think of the conditions as the pre-requirements and the characteristics as
the outcome. In order for flow to occur, the right conditions must exist, so
let’s take a look at them. The first condition states that the activity must have
clear objectives. The person needs to understand what they are trying to
accomplish. The second condition states that the activity must provide a lot
of feedback about progress. Immediate feedback is usually required for flow,
as the person needs to understand the impact of their moment-to-moment
decisions and actions. The last condition says that the person must be
allowed to concentrate on the task without a lot of distractions.
That leaves one condition left: the need for an attainable, balanced goal.
This condition requires that the tasks must be simultaneously challenging
and achievable. A task that is not challenging (or that requires excessive time
to accomplish) becomes boring and we lose interest. On the other hand, if
the task is too hard, we become frustrated and anxious, and once again, we
lose interest. Everything hinges on the balance between the difficulty of the
task and our skill. Further, since a person’s skills will improve over time, the
challenge needs to increase along with the improving skills. This is referred
to as the flow channel (Murphy2011). It is shown in figure 2.1 (based on a
diagram from Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p 74).
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
5
Figure 2.1 - Flow – Balance of Difficulty vs. Time/Skill
Csikszentmihalyi repeatedly emphasizes this relationship. He asserts that
maintaining this balance is one of the most critical prerequisites for flow and
is important for both motivation and learning. “It is this dynamic feature that
explains why flow activities lead to growth and discovery. One cannot enjoy
doing the same thing at the same level for long. We grow either bored or
frustrated; and then the desire to enjoy ourselves again pushes us to stretch
our skills, or to discover new opportunities for using them.”
(Csikszentmihalyi 1990, p.75)
2.2
Flow in Games
The intense feelings of engagement, discovery, and learning we
experience during flow are a core part of the appeal of games and are hugely
important for game design (Murphy 2011). As long as the conditions are met
and the challenge is balanced against skill and time, players can experience
flow in the first few moments of playing a game or hundreds of hours later,
as an expert. As game designers, the question is not whether flow is
important, but rather, how long you can keep your players in flow (Chen
2007).
This is a fundamental realization that has significant implications. “When
treated as a system, Flow explains why people prefer certain games more
than other games and how they become addicted towards these games. If a
game meets all the core elements of Flow, any content could become
rewarding, any premise might become engaging.” (Chen 2007) There are
lots of successful games that validate this claim. Consider the Sims™. In the
Sims™, you control virtual characters that look and act a lot like normal
people. The gameplay often involves making your ‘sims’ perform a variety
of ordinary tasks such as doing dishes, taking out the trash, bathing, and
6
Chapter 5
going to work. However, the game is well designed and can keep players in
a state of flow for long periods of time. In other words, it meets the
requirements of flow because its ‘goals are clear, feedback relevant, and
challenges and skills are in balance.’ (Csikszentmihalyi 1997, p. 31) Despite
the rather mundane mechanics, the Sims™ elegant use of flow helped it to
become one of the most successful game series of all times.
To promote flow as a game designer, you should constantly be aware of
the following:
1. Use clear tasks – present clear, non-confusing tasks to the player
2. Provide feedback – provide simple, direct feedback as players make
progress
3. Balance challenge with player skill and time - give tasks that are
challenging, but accomplish-able and not overly long; scale the
difficulty to match growth in player skill
4. Minimize distractions – avoid elements that direct attention away
from the tasks
This rest of this section will expand on these aspects of game design and
provide practical steps for creating flow in learning games.
2.3
Use Clear Tasks
The first requirement of flow is the need for clear tasks. This requirement
says that a person needs to have a tangible goal(s) in mind in order to
achieve flow in an activity. The task can be almost anything, but it needs to
have some specific end. As an example, consider the following task: dig a
hole. It’s a simple task, but it is not very clear. How deep are you supposed
to dig? What are you looking for? Should the hole be round or square?
What’s the purpose of the hole? Compare that to this task: use a spade to dig
a 4-6” hole for each flower bulb. This is very similar, but is much clearer.
The second task tells the person exactly what they are supposed to do.
Games use tasks extensively (Rouse 2004; Schell 2005). We propose that
there are three types of tasks that games routinely offer. The first type is
explicit tasks. These come in an infinite variety and include ideas such as:
beat the boss mob on the next level; achieve max level of cooking skill;
collect 100 coins; match 5 colors together; build 10 houses for your town; or
make 20 friends. Explicit tasks are usually dictated directly to the player as
part of the gameplay and interface. Games often use terms like quests,
objectives, goals, missions, directives, and of course, tasks.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
7
The second type is implicit tasks. These are tasks that the game
implicitly expects of the player but that are not explicitly dictated by the
game interface. This includes ideas such as: try to stay alive as long as
possible; earn as many points as you can; collect as many things as possible;
maximize all of your character’s skills; or find all the secret areas. Implicit
tasks are sometimes optional, but they are still a primary part of the game in
some way. Games will often provide an interface to help the player gauge or
track their progress on implicit tasks. Games might show a player: how long
they’ve survived; the number of waves slain; how they rate on a high-score
list; or how many secrets they’ve found.
The third type is player-driven tasks. These are self-directed goals that
the player creates for themselves, during their experience. They are neither
explicitly directed by the game, nor implicitly expected of the player. Playerdriven tasks are limited only by the creativity of the player and the
sophistication of the game mechanics. Game designers consider this an
important design consideration that is worth striving for (Schell 2005). After
all, once a player is evolving their own goals, then they are clearly enjoying
the game and will play longer. Koster expands upon this concept by adding
the idea of emergent gameplay (Koster 2005). This is where the game
provides a simple set of mechanics that interact together to create a complex
system. Emergent gameplay enables the widest range of player experiences –
experiences that even the designers may not have expected.
Minecraft™ is a wonderful example of a game that uses player-driven
tasks. It is an internet phenomenon that has sold over 15 million copies, won
numerous awards, and was one of the few games selected for the
Smithsonian Museum’s Art of Video Games (Choney 2011). In Minecraft™,
the player is dropped into a world of simplistic looking blocks (see Figure
2.2). Players have two primary mechanics: move around and destroy the
world by clicking on the blocks. When destroyed, each block leaves behind
resources that can be harvested and used to build new things. Players can
create simplistic tools such as picks and axes or complex objects such as
beds and electrical circuits. The game offers little guidance on what you
should do. In fact, there are no explicit tasks at all. However, once darkness
descents upon the land, the monsters come out and usually kill the player.
After respawning in the light of day, the player will discover the games only
implicit goal - stay alive.
Minecraft™ is an example of a sand-box type of game. Figure 2.2 shows
a scene where the player has decided to craft their own little beach town.
There is a town hall, a set of apartments in the mountain wall, an enormous
central fountain, swimming pool, sugar farm, and little smiley-face
8
Chapter 5
meditation garden. All of this was created without any explicit or implicit
tasks. The mechanics allow players to destroy, harvest, and build almost
anything they can imagine: floating castles of glass, rivers of lava, railroad
roller coasters, death traps, or functioning musical instruments. Alternately,
players can build nothing at all. Their goal may be to wander around
exploring the nearly limitless landscape. Minecraft™ demonstrates how
games use player-driven tasks and emergent gameplay to create flow.
Figure 2.2 – Player-Driven Tasks in Minecraft™
2.4
Provide Feedback
The second requirement for flow is feedback (typically immediate).
According to Csikszentmihalyi, feedback is a fundamental requirement for
both flow and motivation. Csikszentmihalyi describes that ‘the kind of
feedback we work toward is in and of itself often unimportant: What
difference does it make if I hit a tennis ball between the white lines, [or] if I
immobilize the enemy king on the chessboard. … What makes this
information valuable is the symbolic message it contains: that I have
succeeded in my goal.’ (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p57) He further explains
that ‘almost any kind of feedback can be enjoyable, provided it is logically
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
9
related to a goal in which one’ is invested. In addition to being relevant to
flow, feedback is a prominent component of almost all modern learning
theories. Studies have shown that frequent feedback is critical for
understanding (USDOT 2008; Bransford et al. 2000) and should be timed
appropriately, be meaningful, be stated in positive terms, and help the
learner correct their performance (Hayes, 2006).
While much is known about feedback in more traditional learning
environments (Mory 2004; Shute, 2008), there is less confirmed research
about the best use of feedback in learning games. Fortunately, the
entertainment industry has been using feedback in games for a long time and
they are quite adept at it (Schell 2005; Murphy 2011). So, let’s learn from
them.
There are as many ways to provide feedback in games as there are unique
tasks that can be performed. For promoting flow, the important thing to
remember is that feedback should always be relevant to the task at hand and
should be immediate, whenever possible. Feedback is how players perceive
progress and it enables us to correlate our actions to outcomes
(Csikszentmihalyi 1990; Murphy 2011). Below are some guidelines for
promoting flow in learning games via good feedback.
1. Simple progress indicators such as ‘Task Completed’ messages,
completion/failure meters, and level indicators are standard mechanisms
for feedback
2. Changes in the user interface (enabling/disabling actions) and
interactions with in-game characters are a great way to provide
feedback.
3. Counters (i.e. 5 out of 6), quest progress (i.e. check marks), and other
completion marks are important ways to give feedback about current
progress.
4. Guidance in response to a player’s lack-of-action. This can reduce
difficulty and also act as a form of feedback. This can include directing
players to ‘look over here’ or ‘do this’.
5. Do not use subtle visual changes of text or pixels. Even large changes in
text can be overlooked if the color or shape does not change. Generally,
you should consider using motion (visual or audible) or sharp contrast to
direct attention to the feedback. If the player does not notice the
feedback, then the feedback did not occur.
6. Natural consequences in response to player actions can be particularly
powerful. This means exactly what the name implies and includes things
such as watching a fire go out because they use the hose correctly,
10
7.
8.
9.
10.
Chapter 5
seeing water stop spraying when a patch is applied, or visualizing the
results of a catastrophic failure (Murphy 2010).
Point scoring (i.e. 10,000 points), non-competitive high-scores (i.e.
default scores to beat), and performance ratings (i.e. 3 of 4 stars) are
standard ways to give feedback on how a player is performing relative to
expected norms.
Resource indicators should always be used, if the resource is important
to the task. Make sure to give clear feedback about increases and
decreases of key resources. Consider using scrolling numbers that are
centrally located, but non-permanent (i.e. ‘XP: +10’, ‘Coins: +5’).
Little badges or semi-permanent icons (i.e. ‘+8’) can be used to provide
feedback about progress that is less critical or not time-sensitive.
Keep feedback focused on players’ progress towards goals of the game.
Feedback about unimportant actions should be minimized,
As an example of using feedback in learning games, consider the Navy’s
Damage Control Trainer (DCT). This game showed a 50-80% improvement
in an individual’s performance in just one hour of game play (Hussain et al.
2009). Figure 2.2 shows one scene where the game is providing multiple
forms of feedback at the same time. As the student interacts with the pipe
and patch, the game provides immediate feedback by showing the patch
attach to the pipe, by splashing water and changing audio cues when the
spray is blocked, and by pushing the patch away when applied incorrectly on
top of the rushing water. When the leak is patched correctly, the water flow
changes to a drip. At the same time, the interface is also providing more
general feedback about time elapsed, suggestions and hints, water flow,
available inventory items, and success/failure progress indicators. There’s a
lot of feedback in this one scene and it focuses on the moment to moment
actions of the player. This helps keep players in flow.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
11
Figure 2.3 – Use of Feedback in Navy’s Damage Control Trainer
2.5
Balance Challenge with Player Skill
The third condition of flow is the need to balance difficulty and player
skill. To maximize flow, we need to design an experience that rides the
knife-edge between too easy and too hard. This is especially tricky in the
beginning moments of a game where there is a lot of new material and a
wide variety of player skills/knowledge.
2.5.1 Increasingly Difficult
One of the most common techniques is to begin a game with a simplified
version of the game play. The game might start out with just a few weapons,
actions, or areas to explore. Over time, as the player gets more skilled, it can
open up new features until eventually everything becomes available. Each
new addition increases the challenge of the game and helps the game to feel
harder. This in turn helps to manage the balance of difficulty versus skill that
is critical for flow. Remember that, “enjoyment appears at the boundary
between boredom and anxiety, when the challenges are just balanced with
the person’s capacity to act.” (Csikszentmihalyi 1990, p52)
12
Chapter 5
Unfortunately, this is far from easy to do. After all, learning games also
have to convey instructional content, not just the game itself. There is a lot
of material to manage which tends to lead to designs that overwhelm new
players. The game can easily give too much information or just as bad, leave
players mired in basic tutorials when they are ready to move on. When
designing your games, consider the following practical tips:
1. Know your target audience. Find out what knowledge, skills, and
experiences they bring to the game.
2. Avoid introducing a lot of skills, abilities, or material at the same time.
Break it up and spread it far apart. This is especially problematic at the
start of a game, but can just as easily crop up later on.
3. Avoid introducing material that is not relevant to the immediate tasks.
Instead, provide just-in-time guidance, when it is needed. In addition,
remember that games are often non-linear, which means the guidance
needs to reflect their current actions.
4. Avoid the tendency to over-specify. Skip past the minutiae and focus
only on what is immediately salient. An overwhelmed player will never
enter flow.
5. Try to use design patterns that organically support the balance of
challenge vs player skill. For example, consider the time-tested practice
of chapter-based level design that starts at a tutorial and works through
increasingly challenging missions, requiring the player to build on what
they learned in a previous mission.
6. Make sure the chapters are of reasonable length and introduce new skills
as a way of increasing difficulty as the player progresses.
7. Add things to the interface over time, as the player becomes more
skilled. Start out simple, with minimal information, and add in new data
as needed. The interface is a part of the complexity of the game and
affects the difficulty.
2.5.2 Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment (DDA)
A number of game companies have attempted to address the balance of
difficulty versus skill by implementing dynamic difficulty adjustment
(DDA). DDA is a programming model that attempts to automatically adjust
a game’s difficulty to match the player’s skill. If the player is struggling, the
challenges are made easier; if the player is dominating, the challenges are
made more difficult. For instance, opponents can become less numerous or
tougher; time criteria may be extended or shortened; or solutions may be
made more or less obvious via graphical techniques such as highlights and
particles. DDA systems have been implemented in a variety of popular titles.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
13
In Left 4 Dead™, Valve created an Artificial Intelligence Director to manage
the how hard the game is as well as how intense the action feels (i.e.
emotion). Valve’s approach considers the emotional intensity to be another
aspect of game difficulty.
A competing argument was proposed by author and game developer,
Jenova Chen. He proposed that most DDA systems fail to adequately
maintain the characteristic of control that is a part of flow (Chen 2007). He
theorizes that it would be better to give players direct, in-game control over
when and how the difficulty is adjusted. As part of his thesis, Chen
demonstrated the technique via the game, ‘flOw’, shown in Figure 2.4. In the
screen shot, the player is flying a creature like an amoeba. By eating other
creatures, it can get bigger. If the game is too hard, the player can eat the
green blob (shown in the top left corner). If, however, the player wants more
challenge, they can eat the little red blob (shown in the top right) to go to a
deeper, harder level. Near the bottom of the screen, you can see a vague
ghost outline of the kinds of creatures the player can expect on the next
deeper level. This gives the player a strong sense of control over how
difficult they want the experience to be. Does that ghosty, swirly creature
look like fun or does it look too scary and dangerous?
Chen’s appropriately named game won multiple industry awards, became
a highly popular PS3 downloadable title, and was recently selected to be part
of the Smithsonian Museum’s Art of Video Games (Choney 2011).
Although his theory has not been studied extensively, it is a practical
exploration of flow that has been used successfully in other major titles. For
example, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion™ provides a difficulty scale that
players can adjust at any time, even in the middle of combat. Popular
MMO’s such as World of Warcraft™ and Everquest™ allow player’s to
select the difficulty of dungeons and missions. Each of these games uses
player controlled difficulty to allow the player to manually adjust the
difficulty and keep themselves in flow.
14
Chapter 5
Figure 2.4 - ‘flOw’ With Real-Time User Adjustable Difficulty
2.5.3 Repetition
Repetition is a pretty simple concept: use a skill again and again to get
better. The correlation between repetition and learning has been well studied
(Greene 2009, Hintzman et al. 1995, Miller et al. 2004). However, as the
National Research Council points out, ‘while time on task is necessary for
learning, it is not sufficient for effective learning’ (Bransford et al. 2000,
p77). It’s the old ‘necessary, but not sufficient’ problem. In a learning game,
you need to design repetition so that players get the information they need to
improve their performance with each iteration. Also, the task must be
designed so that players want to repeat the actions to improve their skills,
and ultimately, remain in flow.
Learning game designers should expect that players will struggle with
certain skills. Allow players to fail with the realization that with appropriate
feedback, players can repeat the sequence and improve their play. But
players have to be enticed to want to repeat a skill or task until they get it
right. The following design guidelines can help keep the player engrossed in
the activity while remaining in flow.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
15
1. Design small consequences for failure on necessary, but minor tasks.
Most games simply let players ‘try again’. Games commonly use this
technique to ensure that players have adequately learned necessary skills
before progressing to the next level of difficulty, without discouraging
them. In essence, “failure is part of the process that leads to success”
(Beck and Wade 2004).
2. Give the player enough feedback so they can figure out how to improve
their performance the next time. You don’t have to give them the
answers, just enough hints to point them in the right direction and keep
the activity challenging, but still accomplishable.
3. Minimize the use of ‘insta-death’ mechanics. That is, situations where a
single mistake results in complete failure. In both entertainment and
learning games, we use insta-death mechanics to drive home that an
action is very bad and should always be avoided. For instance, jumping
off of a cliff or causing fellow ship-mates to die. While these lessons are
important, too much insta-death makes a game feel very difficult and
unforgiving.
4. Avoid long recoveries after failure. This typically happens in lengthy
missions/chapters that don’t have partial-recovery points. This leads to
long repeats of easy content that feels boring and will break flow. Try to
break missions/chapters into smaller, bite-sized pieces or allow players to
re-enter the level at different points.
5. Allow players to skip excessive and meaningless repetition of the same
skill. Focus on skills related to the learning objectives, let the player
know when they succeeded, and move on.
6. Make the repeated task feel different each time around. This means
providing choices, actions, and control so that the player can become
engaged in a similar but slightly different experience. Alternately, the
next time around, the process should go much faster. This allows them to
enjoy the experience of mastery over previously challenging content.
7. Avoid repetition without learning. Entertainment games sometimes use
repetition to extend ‘hours of play’, which is not the goal of learning
games. The classic example is the inability to describe the details of a
penny (Hintzman et al. 1995). We see thousands of pennies in our lives,
but we never learn much about it, nor do we care. That is repetition
without learning.
2.5.4 Reflection
Another technique that can help maintain the balance of difficulty versus
skill is the use of reflection. Reflection is another learning technique, but
unlike repetition, the studies on reflection are pretty clear. Simple stated, we
16
Chapter 5
learn a lot by reflecting upon the outcomes of our own performance and this
becomes more effective as our skill and knowledge increase (Bransford et al.
2000). Reflection includes both thinking about and communicating with
others about the performance. The tricky part with reflection is not whether
it works, but rather, how to create moments of reflection in a game without it
feeling like a huge break in the game play.
Reflection can be used in games to help maintain flow as the player
becomes more experienced. Remember that in order to maintain flow, the
challenges must increase along with the player’s skill. Therefore, it is likely
that the player will get stuck at some point. They will inevitably rise to some
point where the challenge is too hard. Clever use of reflection can help the
player think about their mistakes allowing them to improve their skills and
overcome a previously unsolvable problem. This helps to keep them in flow
with the reward that they get to move on to new content.
One of the most common moments of reflection in games is the ‘score’
screen, or in military jargon, the ‘debrief’. A typical score screen shows
which tasks were completed along with overall player statistics. Score
screens often provide feedback against a normative value (i.e. 3 of 5 possible
stars). Seeing how they did provides an opportunity for players to reflect
upon their overall performance, which in turn, leads to improvements in their
behavior. The key to maintaining flow is to provide the information that
they need to improve their play. This can entice them to repeat the level and
try different things in order to improve their skills.
The score screen is not the only way to use reflection in games. In fact,
because of its dynamic, nearly instantaneous nature, the game medium has
incredible potential. As an example, consider the screen shot of League of
Legends™ (LoL) in Figure 2.5. Here, the player has been slain by opponents
and must wait 30-60 seconds before respawning and getting back into the
action. This cooling off period affords an opportunity for reflection. While
dead, players can see a ‘death recap’ that gives immediate feedback on what
happened. After they respawn, the players can apply what they have learned
by purchasing defensive items or changing tactics with their team. In this
instance, the player should realize that a lot of the damage was from physical
sources and that Tristana was their biggest threat. LoL turns an interruption
in game play (being dead) into a moment of reflection that helps the player
improve their performance and maintain flow.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
17
Figure 2.5 – A Moment of Reflection After Death in League of Legends™
2.6
Minimize Distractions
Our next few topics are extensions of the age-old K.I.S.S principle:
‘Keep it Simple, Silly’. Simplicity is a fundamental quality of effective
games, and is one of the things that distinguish games from traditional
simulations. Well-designed games encourage flow because they simplify
concepts down to goals and rules of action, which eliminates the questions of
‘what should be done, and how’ (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997, p29). In other
words, games simplify away all of the complexities of real life so that we are
not distracted from the essence of the task.
Consider the act of donning a fire ensemble in real life. This is actually a
fairly complex task. It involves putting on several layers of protective
meshes, in the correct order, and attaching them together at various seams.
However, putting on the suit is just one of many steps required to put out a
fire. In the Damage Control Trainer game, the learning objective is for
players to understand the big picture of how to put out a fire. Therefore,
donning the fire ensemble is only a minor goal and the rule of action is to
click an icon on the wall. When thinking about simplicity, remember this
summation from Will Wright, designer of the Sims™, ‘Your garden is not
complete until there’s nothing else you can remove.’
In games, one of the most common approaches to simplicity is the idea of
transcendence, which just means that ‘the player is more powerful in the
game world than they are in the real world’ (Schell 2008). We often
18
Chapter 5
associate this with magical or fantastical abilities, but as we just saw with the
DCT, it applies to mundane tasks as well. Consider that games allow players
to do things faster, with less red tape, with less outside assistance, with faster
learning curves, and in highly unlikely situations. Stated another way, games
can make things simpler by abstracting away the extraneous details that
would complicate play. As long as simplifying the play is not counter to the
learning objectives, using a simplified design is good for learning because it
helps to keep the player in flow.
2.6.1 Simpler Interfaces
The best way to make a game simpler to understand is to simplify the
interface. A game’s interface includes the game mechanics, the way that the
user interacts with the game, and the heads up display that shows data. This
includes all forms of input (mouse, keyboard input, touch screens) and
whatever is displayed to the user. Fundamentally, the interface is a vehicle
for communication between the player, the game, and the
designer/instructor. The player communicates what they want to happen next
and the game communicates what is happening at any moment in time. For
the designer, the interface is how they communicate content and learning
material to the player.
Below are a few guidelines that will help to simplify your interfaces and
reinforce flow:
1. Make sure the interface provides clear feedback, highlights goals and
objectives, and minimizes distractions.
2. Make sure the difficulty of the interface matches the player skill. This
means the interface should be extremely simple at the beginning, but can
become more complex over time to reflect the player’s growing skill.
3. Make the interface easy to read and try to leverage standards used by
similar games in the entertainment industry.
4. Avoid things that distract the player. A bad interface hinders flow by
drawing a player’s attention to irrelevant content. This makes it harder to
understand feedback and makes the objectives unclear. Common
examples include extreme amounts of numbers or cutesy animations that
attract the eye to unimportant things.
5. Minimize use of obtuse key or mouse combinations (ex
Shift+RightMouse+Drag or Alt+F10). A bad interface will not only
hinder flow but actively increase the game’s difficulty by adding the
hidden task to ‘figure out the interface.’
6. Always chose the design option that is simplest from the player’s
perspective.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
19
7. Minimize the number of ways that users can interact with your game.
This affects the unique methods of interaction, not the circumstances or
the content of the interaction. Keep the interface familiar and re-use
interaction metaphors that you have used before.
8. Play test with target users and make note of any time you see them
focused on the interface, rather than the content. Any focus on the
interface should be considered a weakness in the design.
Essentially, a good interface will feel ‘invisible’ to the player, only
noticed when they are actively using it. A good interface leaves a player’s
brain power focused on the task at hand while also guiding their attention to
what is important.
2.6.2 Paradox of Choice
As Sid Meier is often quoted, games are just ‘a series of meaningful
choices’ (Koster 2005, p14). Choices show up almost everywhere in games,
from basic mechanics, to what items to use, to upgrades, to avatar
appearance. Choices are an important part of games, but, choice has to be
balanced with simplicity. ‘Moderation in all things’ is a good principle to
follow. Let’s explore what happens when simplicity is trumped in favor of
providing more options.
Barry Schwartz determined that there is actually a Paradox of Choice
(Schwartz 2004). After extensive study, he concluded that while having
some choice is generally good, having too many choices can be severely
detrimental. The first thing he found is that people facing too many options
often suffer from option paralysis. This is where people become incapable
of making a decision and so chose nothing. This can happen even if all the
options have positive outcomes. It can also happen whether the decisions are
trivial, like picking a type of jelly, or a major life event, like buying a house.
In a nutshell, having too many options makes the task seem more difficult
and breaks flow.
Unfortunately, that is not the only problem created by choice. Schwartz
also found that people seem to be hard-wired to simplify the decision criteria
when faced with too many options. In other words, humans begin to group
up options into simple categories - whatever way makes sense at the time.
Our brain is struggling to process too much data, so it looks for ways to
make the decision easier to resolve. The good side of this is that it makes it
easier to make the decision. The bad side of simplifying is that we are very
likely to discard criteria that we may have otherwise considered extremely
important. The result is that people make worse decisions. In some cases,
20
Chapter 5
Schwartz found that the criteria can become so simplified that it essentially
becomes a completely random choice. The simplified criteria can also make
it harder for them to correlate cause and effect, which makes the task seem
more difficult and disrupts flow.
Finally, Schwartz found that people will be less happy with whatever
option they pick and will feel worse. Because there are too many choices,
people cannot balance all of the factors, so they simplify things. They know
something important is being lost in the process and instinctively conclude
that whatever they pick is probably not the best choice. This leads to
increased regret about the decision they make, whether it is right or wrong. It
also causes this funny thing called anticipation of regret, which occurs
before the decision is even made. Both of these feelings of regret act as
distractions that disrupt flow.
This has huge implications for game design. Fortunately, the solutions
are pretty straight forward.
1. Remember the age-old axiom, ‘less is more.’ Since ‘everything suffers
from comparison’ (Schwartz 2006), present less things to compare.
Sometimes learning games need to teach or test subtle differences in the
material, but they shouldn’t do it all at once. Break things up.
2. When forcing players to make decisions, limit the number of options and
keep them simple.
3. When designing game mechanics, minimize the number of distinct
actions a player can take at any one time. Design your user interfaces
with the minimal number of options/actions required to meet the learning
goals. A good guide is four options.
4. Finally, provide a default when you can. That means showing a default
for the choice - something that is in their best interest. The default makes
it okay to ‘not decide’ while still getting a positive outcome. This
technique is simple and very effective. When players aren’t sure what to
pick, the default makes the choice much simpler, reduces the feelings of
regret, and minimizes distractions.
Examples of how this works in games are easy to find. Consider that
Tiny Wings™ has only one choice – touch the screen now or not. Consider
that players in League of Legends™ have only four primary abilities that
player’s can use for any champion. Consider that in World of Warcraft™,
there were originally only 9 classes to pick from, where major competitors at
the time had 24 or more. Each of these is a wildly successful game where the
design benefitted from fewer, more meaningful decisions that led to better
flow.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
21
2.6.3 Opportunity Cost
Another aspect of simplicity and decisions is opportunity cost.
Opportunity cost states that when deciding between options that have
value, the cost of the decision includes not just the value of the option, but
also the cost of not-choosing the other options (Buchanan 1999). As a
practical example, if you chose to vacation in London, you are giving up the
options of vacationing in Salt Lake City, Williamsburg, or Disney World. It
sounds both silly and obvious at the same time, but it has a profound impact
on our ability to make decisions.
In general, opportunity cost is associated with decisions that have some
sort of permanence or lasting impact. For example, we don’t struggle with
opportunity cost when selecting a drink from the fridge, because we can just
go back and get the other ones. However, it’s a huge problem when deciding
where to vacation or which house to buy. It is also very relevant to the types
of choices typically presented in games such as picking a class or assigning
stats. Opportunity cost directly affects two of the conditions of flow:
minimizing distractions and balancing difficulty with skill. In general,
mechanics that suffer from both too many choices (paradox of choice) and
choices with lasting consequence (opportunity cost) are almost guaranteed to
break flow.
Ignoring paradox of choice or opportunity cost can lead to mechanics that
are intended to be fun by allowing for diverse player experiences, but
actually create moments of extreme anxiety. The impact on flow is that the
task seems quite difficult and the side effects are very distracting. What was
meant to be fun results in a loss of flow. Sometimes opportunity cost and the
paradox of choice can discourage players so much that they stop playing
your game all together. At a minimum, it will cause them to stall decisions
for as long as possible (Schwartz 2004).
In principle, the solution is simple: a) use fewer options and b) do not
present a lot of options that have permanence. Permanence is the idea that
an option has very long-lasting impact. For instance, the decision of which
vacation to take cannot be undone. Once you go to Williamsburg, you can’t
undo the cost or time. Contrary to what you might expect, Schwartz found
that if you are using decisions with permanent impact, it is better not to
allow people to change their mind later. If a decision has a huge opportunity
cost, and there is some way, however slight, to change your mind, then you
will constantly second guess your decision. In other words, if the option is
22
Chapter 5
meant to have long-lasting consequences, then once the player has made the
decision, make it clear that it is final so they will stop looking backward.
Again, in the vacation example, once you land at the Williamsburg airport,
you will stop thinking about Disney World. The decision is made and you
can’t undo it, so there is no reason to think about it anymore.
Unfortunately, minimizing player choice can sometimes go against
industry standards, particularly with modern role-playing-games (RPG). The
designs seen in the games Fate™ and Titan’s Quest™ are good examples of
how this typically occurs. In Titan’s Quest™, players can allocate points per
level into a tiered hierarchy of skills. Each branch of the hierarchy offers
significantly different abilities and game play. Similarly, in Fate™, players
can allocate points every level, to distribute among 20-30 different skills. In
both cases, there are dozens of options, with millions of combinations, and
these decisions significantly shape the experience that players will have and
the chances for success. Games like Fate™ and Titan’s Quest™ offer these
types of systems because they want to expand player customization and
enhance replay value. Unfortunately, the science of choice shows that this
adds significant stress to players, increases the perceived difficulty of the
game experience, and impedes flow. The research on both paradox of choice
and opportunity cost would suggest that any value gained from the
customization or replay was probably overwhelmed by the negative impact
of player anxiety, deferred decisions, and decrease of flow.
On the other hand, consider the award winning game, League of
Legends™ (LoL). Here, designers also had to contend with a wide array of
player options for item and weapon upgrades. Like Fate™ and Titan’s
Quest™, these decisions can massively impact both the player’s experience
and their chances of success. To mitigate this problem, LoL used two clever
techniques. First, they provide recommended items as shown in Figure 2.6.
These recommendations act as ‘default’ options, which reduce the perceived
number of choices and provide an easy out when players attempt to simplify
the decision (Schwartz 2004). Further, although the game presents 6
recommended items, the game plays out such that players can only afford a
few of the items at any given time. This reduces the decision to 2 or 3
options at any one time. As players learn more about the game, they can
make their own decisions and bypass the recommendations altogether, but
whenever they try a new character, unique recommendations are still
available as a safety net. Second, LoL items have very little permanence. All
item purchases are reset after each game (~30-45 mins). This eliminates
almost entirely the problem of opportunity cost and thus reduces anxiety.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
23
Figure 2.6 – Recommendations in LoL Mitigate Opportunity Cost and
Paradox of Choice
Despite having hundreds of possible items to pick from, the clever use of
‘default’ options and lack of permanence effectively mitigates both paradox
of choice and opportunity cost in LoL. These types of design decisions
earned LoL multiple awards, much critical acclaim, and helped them become
‘one of the year’s most successful strategy games’ (Johnson 2011, p44).
3.
MOTIVATION
The second major area of our chapter explores motivation. Motivation is
basically why a person decides to do a particular activity. Motivation comes
in all shapes and sizes and applies differently to each person, even for a
given activity. Consider the everyday act of brushing your teeth. You might
be motivated to avoid cavities, to have fresh breath, to remove a bad taste, or
simply because it’s part of your routine. The exact motivation may vary from
person to person, but the result is the same. Across the board, motivation is
an extremely powerful force and is a key part of flow (Csikszentmihalyi,
1990). In this section we will explore ways to motivate players in learning
games.
24
Chapter 5
Motivation has been studied extensively and the research clearly shows
that it has a huge impact on learning outcomes (Deci 1995; Pink 2009;
Williams and Williams 2010). It should be considered a critical part of
designing a learning game. Further, a lack of motivation (e.g. boredom) has
been shown to negatively impact a learner’s ability to focus attention
(Czikszentmihalyi and Czikszentmihalyi 1992). As one would expect,
people divert their attention to other stuff, whether one’s internal thoughts or
another task altogether. Motivation can also help a person to overcome
moments of bad flow by persevering through difficult challenges or
continuing on with a boring task. Consider also that, anxiety and boredom
have both been shown to significantly decrease motivation and focus (Lee
1999; Teachman 2005). Lee and Teachman studied how anxiety affected the
performance of students taking a test and found that high levels of anxiety
had a negative impact on performance, motivation, focus, and the ability to
process information. The bottom line is that motivation is a key part of
getting our players to focus, process information, maintain flow, and
ultimately, learn.
3.1
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation
One of the first things to consider about motivation is that it is generally
broken up into two types: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation
means that the activity is rewarding in and of itself (e.g. we get a feeling of
satisfaction or joy that comes from doing the activity). Extrinsic motivation
exists outside of the activity. It usually implies some sort of reward such as
money for work or the currently popular in-game achievements. As a blanket
rule, activities that are intrinsically rewarding are more motivating than
activities that rely on extrinsic rewards. Further, intrinsic rewards are more
likely to lead to flow (Csikszentmihalyi 1990).
The difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is pretty
straight forward. However, putting it into practice can be tricky at times. The
differences can seem quite subtle and arbitrary. After all, each person sees
the world differently and may be motivated in different ways. Fortunately,
there are three concepts that game designers can use as guidance to motivate
players in learning games. These are helpful rules of thumb, rather than
guarantees.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
25
3.1.1 Flow
The first concept is flow. We’ve already discussed flow at length and
talking about flow as a way to promote intrinsic motivation is sort of a
circular argument. After all, flow is intrinsically rewarding by definition
(Csikszentmihalyi 1990) and intrinsically rewarding activities are more
likely to lead to flow. However, the fact that flow is so closely associated
with intrinsic enjoyment helps to highlight some concrete and practical
design tips.
Flow requires four conditions: goals, feedback, balance, and few
distractions. These conditions are great ways to introduce rewards to
motivate play and learning. For instance, the rewards in game can be tied to
the goals of the game. Since your design should already be using tasks to
help the player achieve flow, it seems natural to offer rewards for completing
them. Further, we can use rewards as part of the feedback. The type/amount
of reward can be an indicator of the player’s performance. For example,
using anchors on the DCT debrief screen can indicate that the sailor has done
a good job of saving his ship. Finally, we can use the rewards to affect the
balance of difficulty versus skill. For instance, the rewards can be
improvements that make players more powerful and enable them to tackle
previously challenging content. Alternately, the rewards can be new abilities
that they need to learn, which increases the difficulty and helps the game
keep up with their growing skill.
3.1.2 Control
The second concept is the issue of control (Deci 1995). This is when a
reward is being used to control a person’s behavior. An example of this is
when a parent offers to pay a child for scoring goals on the soccer field. The
parent wants the child to perform a certain way and is attempting to motivate
them with an if-then reward. The aim is to control their behavior leading to
better performance. As you might expect, this is not a good idea. It may have
some short term benefits, but the long term ramifications are detrimental.
The research clearly shows that using rewards as a control mechanism leads
to reduced creativity, increased cheating (or other undesired behavior), and
most importantly, reduced performance. In addition, it shifts all of the focus
onto the reward and destroys the intrinsic enjoyment of the activity (Deci
1995).
There is a potential conflict between the discussion of flow and control.
If you tie the reward to the goals, then isn’t there a risk that the extrinsic
26
Chapter 5
reward is really just an attempt to control their behavior? The answer is that
it depends entirely on your intent as the designer. If the rewards are not
intended to control the players, then you are probably okay. However, you
need to closely examine your motivations for each extrinsic reward. If the
reward is actually a form of control, then Deci’s research shows that players
will perceive that at an intuitive level and it will have negative consequences
(Deci 1995).
3.1.3 Baseline Rewards
The third concept is the idea of baseline rewards (Pink 2009). These are
extrinsic rewards that are required to meet a minimal set of expectations. As
an example, people go to work and expect to receive a fair compensation. If
the baseline reward isn’t adequate, then that creates a sense of feeling
cheated, which acts as a distraction that breaks flow. However, once the
baseline reward is reached, then the science shows that additional tangible
rewards tend to have a substantial negative effect on intrinsic motivation
(Pink 2009; Deci 1995).
Thinking about baseline rewards will help us to better understand the
right way to use extrinsic motivators. When we examine entertainment
games, it is quite clear that they commonly give extrinsic rewards when
players accomplish objectives. They do this in all kinds of ways. They might
play a visual/auditory reward, show a little movie, award in-game currency,
narrate new parts of the story, or grant access to some new content.
Whatever the reward, it is extremely common. Therefore, many players may
expect it. In that case, not offering some sort of reward may violate their
expectations, distracting them away from the task and breaking flow. The
point is that designers can evaluate whether the reward is a baseline
expectation as a way to avoid the negative consequences of extrinsic
motivators.
3.1.4 Achievements
With these three guidelines in mind, let’s talk for a moment about the
recent trend toward achievements in games. Achievements are little sidetasks that are usually unrelated to the primary objectives of the game.
Achievements often give some sort of trivial and irrelevant reward for
completing them such as a virtual stamp or a point counter (ex. 13 of 2000
achievement points). However, there are many varieties of achievements.
Some achievements are more like goals which means they might be
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
27
promoting flow, whereas, some are definitely attempts to control the player’s
behavior, which can interrupt flow.
The use of achievements in games has turned into a rather heated debate
(Hecker 2010). However, we can simplify the argument by considering the
three guidelines above. If the achievements sync up with the ideas of flow,
control, and baseline rewards, then they are probably fine. If not, then what
is intended to be a fun and exciting side-track, is probably decreasing
enjoyment, reducing flow, and harming intrinsic motivation (Hecker 2010;
Csikszentmihalyi 1990; Pink 2009). As a final note, Hecker has proposed
that if you still want to use achievements, then you should try to use things
that are unexpected, verbal, or that provide informational feedback (Hecker
2010). Unexpected rewards are less likely to be associated with control
whereas feedback rewards may help to promote flow.
3.2
Engagement and Motivation
One of the positive aspects of flow and motivation is that they create an
increased level of engagement. For learning games, this means players are
more engaged with the content in the game, which keeps them focused on
the material we want them to learn. This is particularly important because
studies show a strong correlation between academic performance and
learners that are engaged with their studies (Finn and Rock 1997; Fredricks
et al. 2004). In addition, positive feelings, such as those associated with
flow, are known to keep students engaged in learning longer (Bryan and
Bryan 1991, Bryan et al. 1996, Konradt et al. 2003). While it is true that time
on task does not necessarily lead to learning, it is also true that the longer a
student spends with a subject, the more likely they are to excel with it
(Dweck 1996, Duckworth and Seligman 2005). Basically, the feelings of
motivation found in games can be used to keep a player engaged in the
activity and thereby increase student performance and knowledge retention
(Whitehall and McDonald 1993; Ricci et al. 1996).
A technique commonly used to increase motivation and engagement is
the use of emotional pulls. Emotional pulls are effective because we are all
emotional beings by nature. Fortunately, there are many, many types of
emotions you can leverage including: fear for one's life; the thrill of acting
out a fantasy in a virtual world; and burning curiosity about what's around
the next corner (whether figurative or literal) (Lazzaro 2004). When using
emotional motivation, always consider the target audience and the domain.
For example, the crew of a ship may be particularly sensitive to the dangers
of dying at sea; and budding surgeons may be particularly motivated by
losing a limb or patient. Emotional experiences can also be used as a
28
Chapter 5
powerful form of feedback. For example in the Damage Control Trainer, a
critical error can lead to a video showing the death of shipmates as seen in
Figure 3.1. In this case, the emotional experience provides both feedback
and motivation that leads to increased engagement and flow.
Figure 3.1 - Emotional, Natural Consequences in the Damage Control
Trainer
3.3
Principle of Scarcity
Another way to affect motivation is with the principle of scarcity. This
states that people assign more value to opportunities when they are less
available (Cialdini 2001). In other words, when you have to trade something
in limited supply for something else, it results in an increased perception of
value. The principle of scarcity also states that an object of desire that
requires effort and sacrifice to attain can be more fulfilling and enjoyable.
Clever use of this technique can increase motivation and flow by affecting
the perceived value of goals, increasing the person’s perseverance, and
providing feedback.
3.3.1 Acquiring New Abilities
One way that games motivate players is by making new features
available only after they have persevered through a significant challenge.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
29
Because it required significant work to earn the feature or item, the player
will place more value on the result. If the result is something they want, they
may also be willing to work longer (i.e. practice more) to overcome the task.
The feature may be a new way to interact with the world or a new item that
performs actions that were previously unavailable. It could even just be a
display trinket of some kind that marks the value of their work. If the reward
is a new feature or ability, then this in turn opens up more opportunities and
challenges that can be overcome, allowing the process to repeat. This
application of scarcity addresses aspects of both flow and motivation, which
is probably why it is used in thousands of different games.
3.3.2 In-Game Currency
Another practical application of this is via in-game currency. Typically,
the game rewards players with some sort of limited currency for tackling
various challenges. Currency allows players to purchase things that help
them play the game, motivating them to acquire the currency. The Call of
Duty: Modern Warfare™ (CoD) series provides a great example of this
technique. In the game’s multiplayer mode, there are abilities that players
can obtain such as attachments for weapons, never-ending sprint mode, or a
parting shot at an opponent. To acquire these abilities, players have to
accumulate specific types of currency. In CoD, the various types of currency
are linked to the use of specific actions in game. In effect, you have to
practice certain skills to earn specific upgrades. The CoD system is an
elegant blend of both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards that helps motivate
players to practice specific sets of skills.
3.4
Zeigarnik Effort
The Zeigarnik effect is a psychological phenomenon that is used
extensively in entertainment games. It states that people remember
uncompleted or interrupted tasks better than completed tasks (McKinney
1935). This idea has a significant impact on motivation by increasing the
drive to complete tasks. It also has a lot of practical uses. In games, this is
typically applied by showing players some sort of visual list of the current
tasks that are not complete. This in turn motivates the player to work on
those tasks. Typically feedback is relayed to the player as a percentage or
fraction of their progress toward a final goal. For instance if a player was
tasked with collecting 10 items then as each item is acquired a counter
increments and displays their progress. The Zeigarnik effect impacts
motivation and when applied correctly, can promote flow by clearly
communicating goals and providing feedback on progress.
30
Chapter 5
Designers should almost always use some variation of this technique.
Basically, you are creating a direct tie between goals and feedback that is
incredibly motivating. To make the best use of this technique, some care is
required. Try to use tasks that focus more heavily on developing the skills of
the player (player skill) rather than modifying the abilities of the avatar
(avatar skill). The best way to do this is to make sure the tasks emphasize
skills that you want the players to learn. This allows players to achieve real
progress by overcoming challenges that focus on the desired learning
objectives, instead of just wasting time incrementing virtual pixels. As each
small sub-task is achieved, the feedback will then closely relate to the
player’s skill.
The CoD multiplayer system discussed above is a great example of how
to apply this. The CoD currency system shows which tasks you haven’t
completed yet. Because the tasks stand out as incomplete, the Zeigarnik
effect encourages you to finish them. Further, remember that the CoD
currency tasks are linked to specific skills that players should be practicing
anyway, rather than just virtual avatar skills. The result is that the Zeigarnik
effect motivates players to complete the CoD currency tasks, which leads to
an improvement of player skills.
Use of this is extremely common in modern games. However, it is also
common to over use it, creating a ‘get every quest and always click, yes’
phenomenon. This may increase motivation but does so in ways that may be
unintended or even undesirable for learning games. The player is motivated
to complete the task, but may not have any idea what he is completing or
why. Blow describes this as the compulsion to spend time increasing avatar
skills, instead of real-life player skills (Blow 2010). In this case, improving
flow might not lead to the kinds of learning we want. Design carefully.
3.5
Experiential Design
Experiential design is a design technique that leverages a person’s
previous experiences to create motivation. The goal of experiential design is
to increase motivation by realizing that people carry with them much
variability, both in terms of personality and life experience. This variability
influences user expectation, motivation, and interpretation of events. As new
experiences unfold, people use what they already know to make new
decisions and process new information. Our previous experiences can
influence our motivation to pursue goals, perhaps based on previous
enjoyment and expected rewards (Vroom 1995) or through the knowledge
that some type of fundamental need will be addressed (Ryan and Deci 2000).
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
31
In part, this relies on understanding a target audience’s previous
experiences. While individuals might differ in the meaning behind the
activities of an experience, the activities are shared amongst the whole
audience. Thus, experiential design begins by determining the content of the
experience. The next step is to create multiple pathways to experience this
common content so that it reaches a variety of users.
The goal is to create a holistic experience which ultimately produces
better results for all types of users (Chertoff et al. 2008). Such holistic
experiences incorporate five dimensions of the user’s prior experience:
sensory (i.e. visual artifacts), cognitive (i.e. tasks), affective (i.e. emotional
connection), active (i.e. sense of agency), and relational (i.e. social aspects).
These five dimensions account for the variability in individual experiences.
They give meaning and increase motivation towards the activities. Creating
activities tailored towards these dimensions can account for a wide range of
users. In fact, researchers found that feelings of flow and presence were
greater in environments that made better use of these five dimensions
(Chertoff et al. 2010).
The dimensions of experiential design are often implicitly used in
massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPG). MMORPGs
are large virtual worlds that have vast amounts of content and lore that builds
upon itself as the player explores the world. Sensory content is experienced
through the visual and audio artifacts. A wide variety of tasks are presented
that provide both short and long-term player goals. Through story-telling
elements associated with tasks, players can build an emotional connection to
characters that they encounter. Furthermore, there is a large social element
from interacting with many other players in the virtual space. Lastly, all of
these elements are experienced through the player’s avatar, which grows
over the course of play.
Not every player is drawn to a MMORPG for the same reasons. The
various reasons that people play these types of games are well chronicled by
Richard Bartle’s four player types: achiever, socializer, explorer, and killer
(Bartle 2003). For example, socializers come for the varied social
opportunities, while achievers desire to test their ability to complete
extremely challenging game content. For MMORPGs, these categories
capture the experiences that designers can expect from their players. It is
worth noting that this classification is dynamic. A player can move from one
type to another depending on what they wish to accomplish that play session.
As a result, creating content that appeals to all of these player categories is
important. To see how this can be applied, consider the MMORPG Lord of
the Rings Online (LOTRO).
32
Chapter 5
LOTRO follows players as they experience the world of J.R.R. Tolkien’s
The Lord of the Rings in the time period leading up to the War of the Ring.
The developers had to consider how to present the world to players that
might not be familiar with the content. For this, considerable effort was
taken to tell Tolkien’s story in a manner that would appeal to those with
extensive knowledge of the story as well as those who were completely new
to the material. It is also apparent from the content found in the game that
the developers considered how for each of the four player categories should
be addressed.
The sensory dimension of the game is most important to the explorer.
Explorers of Middle-Earth have an expectation from their reading of the
story of what the world is supposed to look and feel like. Seeing the ruins of
a previous age creates a sense of connection between the game and their past
experience with the story. For explorers not familiar with the lore, the sense
of discovering a location creates a sense of curiosity to find out more. For
achievers, socializers, and killers, the sensory content serves as a setting for
their preferred activities. For these players, the ruins are the place where they
complete a quest, meet with friends, or attack an enemy.
The cognitive dimension of the game is important for all player types as
it provides the structure by which activities are performed. For explorer
types, this is the reason to travel to new locations. Achievers get a lot of
content that they can tackle. Explorer types can appreciate quests that guide
them toward new locations. Some quests require additional players in order
complete, which supports the socializer player type. Meanwhile, killers get
satisfaction from the requirement to defeat hordes of enemy monsters. In
addition, a player-vs-player game type was included for those killer types
that desired more.
The affective dimension of the game influences all player types through a
particularly in-depth series of quests. This series, called the “Epic Quest” in
game, more fully connected the player with the plot of The Lord of the
Rings. It provided an opportunity for players to form connections to the main
characters in the world as they made decisions related to the plot. It is
primarily through this Epic Quest that players new to the world of MiddleEarth are exposed to the major plot elements found in the books.
The active dimension also influences all player types since the player’s
experience in the world occurs through an avatar. This avatar has a number
of statistics that can be improved and customized in ways that satisfy all four
player types. Achievers can level up their avatar and grow more powerful.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
33
Killers can focus on growing more powerful through repeated player-vsplayer content. Explorers gain experience by finding new locations. Lastly,
socializers can measure their character’s progress by adding other players to
their friend’s list or by joining an in-game guild.
The relational dimension is most important to the socializer, but is also
important for heavy achievers and killers. Both socializers and killers need
other players in the game to stay engaged. Socializers need other players to
talk to, while killers need a subject for their player-vs-player combat.
Meanwhile, achievers that wish to take on the most complex game content
require groups of like-minded players to accomplish those tasks. As a result,
heavy achievers are often members of large in-game guilds.
Ultimately, LOTRO allows players of all types to travel through large
portions of Middle-Earth, actively engaging and relating to the world in a
manner most conducive to their individual play style. The game uses
experiential design to help players gain a much greater experience of the
material. Regardless of previous experience with the material or player type,
the use of the different dimensions of experience allow players to build new
experiences upon old ones as one of the many unsung heroes of the War of
the Ring. By addressing the various dimensions in one game, the designers
engage the player at multiple levels and motivate them to continue play.
4.
FUN
The third and last of our major areas is fun. Typically, when designing
learning games, we don’t think about ‘fun’ per say. After all, it’s kind of a
nebulous word that is hard to precisely define. That said, many of the topics
discussed under the Flow and Motivation sections could just as easily have
been categorized under fun. After all, engagement, deep involvement,
motivation, and being-in-the-zone sound a lot like qualities of ‘fun’. Even
Csikszentmihalyi routinely uses the word enjoyment when describing flow.
So, for all of the ambiguity of the term, fun is still an important
consideration when designing learning games.
4.1
Learning is Fun
Raph Koster presents a compelling argument that games are just teachers
and ‘fun is really just another word for learning.’ He takes that further
saying, ‘a good game is therefore one that teaches everything it has to offer
before the player stops playing.’ (Koster2005, p46) From his perspective,
34
Chapter 5
fun is the positive feedback that our brain gives us for learning and
mastering patterns and is a critical part of both motivation and flow. He
argues that the opposite of fun is either noise (i.e. patterns that we don’t
understand) or boredom (i.e. simplistic patterns that have nothing to teach
us). Both noise and boredom are destructive to fun, motivation, and flow
(Koster 2005; Csikszentmihalyi 1990). From his perspective, games are just
‘iconified representations of human experience that we can practice with and
learn patterns from.” (Koster 2005, p 36).
He argues that humans are great at pattern-matching. One of our greatest
strengths is our ability to take in unbelievably vast amounts of information,
find the inherent patterns, and apply them to solve problems. This ability is
paired with an equally important system that rewards us chemically for
finding and applying new patterns. This, in a nutshell, is why we play
(Koster 2005).
4.2
Types of Fun
Nicole Lazarro was another author who explored the meaning of fun. In
her various papers on game design, she proposes that there are really 4 types
of fun: easy, hard, serious, and social (Lazzaro 2004). Lazarro showed that
top selling entertainment games typically possess at least 3 of the 4 types of
fun.
Easy fun is associated with ‘play’ in real life. It often involves elements
of exploration, creativity, or fantasy where goals are often personal and not
imposed by predetermined objectives. Easy fun is associated with feelings of
curiosity, surprise, wonder, and awe. This is exemplified by the Minecraft™
scene (Figure 2.2), where the player acted out their own goals to craft a little
village and then watches in curiosity and wonder as it burns to the ground.
Hard fun is associated with attaining and exercising mastery through
goal completion. It involves overcoming obstacles by applying skill and
strategy. Ideally the process iterates through cycles where you will
experience frustration, triumph, and relief while maintaining the conditions
for flow. This type of fun is the one typically associated with learning
games, particularly where the goal is to master skills with real world value.
This is a major part of role playing and real-time strategy games.
Serious fun describes the enjoyment that players get from the experience
itself. It is sometimes referred to as altered states. Serious fun is focused on
the emotions that frequently result from repetition, rhythm, or collection
such as excitement, zen-like focus, or relaxation. Serious fun is that which
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
35
promotes mental order over mental chaos. It is a form of play as therapy and
is by definition intrinsically motivating since the experience is pursued for
its own sake. This is easily seen in games like Bejewelled, Tetris, and a
number of solitaire card games.
Social fun is based on the interactions between people such as
communication, cooperation, and competition. It results in feelings of
friendship, amusement, bonding, and admiration. Entertainment games have
been increasingly designed to create social experiences. Recent trends
include multiplayer features, online communities, and the popularity of
social networking games. There are other types of social fun such as
schadenfreude (gloating over a rival), naches (rewards of mentoring), and
fiero (triumph over a difficult task) (Koster 2005).
Fun can be thought of in terms of both motivation and flow. Therefore,
look for ways to include as many types of fun as possible.
1.
Invoking serious fun simply means creating gameplay that the player
will value for its own sake (i.e. intrinsically motivating).
2. Easy fun can be integrated by creating opportunities for players to
accomplish goals of their own choosing (player-driven tasks) or with
creative solutions.
3. Koster argues that ‘the more formally constructed your game is, the
more limited it will be.’ (Koster 2005, p38) The idea then is to create
simple systems that have complex interactions that lead to emergent
gameplay. This often involves the exploration and wonder as players
discover unexpected game experiences (i.e. easy fun).
4. Hard fun can be created by using clear tasks that focus on completion.
5. Try to allow for easy fun through self-directed exploration. This can
help avoid the play-it-once, set-it-aside type of experience.
6. Social fun is particularly useful because there are so many ways to
include it. One approach is a multiplayer mode where players can work
either cooperatively or competitively in real time. However, this can be
tricky in learning environments and has some potential draw backs.
7. Social network games (e.g. Facebook) allow communication,
cooperation, and competition to occur asynchronously (Johnson 2009).
8. Consider using forums, chatting, or email to facilitate social
communication. Alternately, news feeds can relay actions of other
players or leader boards can show top performers.
9. Consider creating a persistent game state so that players have a chance
to impact and interact upon the same world in non-real time.
10. Consider common teaming techniques such as pair playing or mentor
based partnerships.
36
Chapter 5
11. For more ideas on social fun, see Koster’s presentation at the 2011
Game Developer’s Conference (Koster 2011). He presented an
impressive list of forty different mechanics for social fun and argued
that games are barely scratching the surface of what is possible.
4.3
Fun in the Rules
Jonathan Blow, creator of the game Braid™, insists that games need to
reinvent themselves as a medium in order to live up to their full potential.
The crux of Blow's message is that games are an interactive system of rules
that can convey content that is independent from any linear story elements.
In his words: ‘Any time we set up a system of behavior...that system
communicates something to the player’ (Blow, 2008). In order to convey
meaning most robustly, games ought to be designed so that their meaning
(i.e. content) is embedded directly within the fun mechanics of the game. In
other words, the fun should relate directly to the learning objectives, not as
tangential add-ons.
The game Braid™ is a perfect example of putting the learning content
directly into the game mechanics. Braid™ explores the complex nature of
time by allowing players to directly manipulate various aspects of time:
faster, slower, backward, and forward. Blow wants players to think about
and learn about how time operates at a fundamental level. Figure 4.1 shows a
scene where the player must manipulate time to solve a puzzle. They must
fall into the pit, defeat a monster, get the key, and then reverse time back to
before they fell into the pit. In this puzzle, the key is immune to time
reversal, and the player will be back on the bridge, but holding the key. In
the picture, you can clearly see that there is no way out of the pit. The only
solution is for the player to explore, learn about, and apply the complex
manipulation of time that is the fundamental concept (i.e. learning objective)
behind the game. Time is the lesson and is also the core mechanic of the
game.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
37
Figure 4.1 – In Braid, Learning About Time Is Core To The Fun
The application to learning games is clear: make the instructional content
a core part of the fun in the game. Make sure the fun of the game is squarely
directed at what you want them to learn. As discussed in section 2.2, it
doesn’t matter whether the base material seems boring or not. The technique
applies whether you are talking about the replication of cells, the collision of
planets, or battles of the civil war. Most designers agree that you can make a
compelling game of almost any content (Murphy 2010). The key is to find
out what is engaging about the content and identify the patterns that can be
mastered. Use those as core elements of the fun in your game. Then, use the
techniques of flow and motivation to create a compelling experience that
allows players to explore the learning content. As this quote, attributed to
Sid Meier, sums up, the goal is to design a “series of interesting and
meaningful choices in pursuit of a clear and compelling goal.”
4.4
Presence
Another way to look at player experience is to consider how strongly the
player is immersed. When the content and tasks in the game environment
support a strong sense of immersion, the player can feel transported into
another space. This feeling is often referred to as a sense of presence, or
“being there” (Heeter 1992). Many researchers have studied what causes a
person to become and remain present. For example, Witmer and Singer
concluded that keeping users deeply involved was very important for
maintaining a sense of presence (Witmer and Singer 1998).
38
Chapter 5
The idea that deep involvement is necessary for presence is supported by
recent game studies. Clarke and Duimering noted that gamers often stated a
desire for a high-sensory experience, but that such an experience was
irrelevant ‘eye-candy’ if the game was not enjoyable (Clarke and Duimering
2006). The authors conclude that the tasks and goals of the game influenced
what gamers would perceive. Game tasks that had little or no impact toward
completing the overall goal were largely ignored by players. Deeper sensory
immersion was dependent on how integrated the sensory aspects of the
environment were on goal completion.
It is incumbent upon the designer to create sensory experiences to
encourage flow. In other words, to achieve high sensory immersion, it is
necessary for the player’s tasks to make use of the variety of sensory
content. For example, a first-person shooter that encourages players to take
cover amongst debris and terrain to avoid enemy fire should provide a better
sensory experience than a game that does not. Essentially, sensory content
needs a purpose for it to be at its most immersive. The purpose for the
content ultimately comes from the tasks created by the designer.
One example of a game that combines the sensory experience with
relevant game goals is Immune Attack. Immune Attack is a game developed
by the Federation of American Scientists to teach high school and college
biology students about the human body. In the game, you take control of a
nanobot injected into the body of someone with a suffering immune system.
Each game task requires you to interact with the various organs and cells
found in the body. As a result, player exposure towards the visual and
structural representations of cells is highly connected towards successful
completion of game goals. It acts to reinforce the notion that the player is
vital to the game environment and results in a higher sensory experience
through feelings of presence.
5.
CONCLUSIONS
Games are no longer just a fringe part of our culture or something that
only young people do. Even the Smithsonian National Museum of Art
recognizes that games are now a part of the fabric of our society. And, they
will become more prevalent, not less. We began this chapter by conceding
that games can be effective teaching tools. But, as Ali Carr-Chellman
pointedly observes, ‘Most of the educational games that are out there today
are really flash-cards. They are glorified drill-and-practice. They don’t have
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
39
the depth and rich narrative that really engaging video games have... We
need to design better games.’ (CarChellman 2010).
Society has already accepted and embraced games for entertainment. Our
job now is to design learning games that actually work! That is a tough order
to fill. As learning game designers, we are sandwiched between two
industries and we contend with the challenges of both. To make matters
worse, games are becoming increasingly complex and costly (Murphy 2005)
and learning science continues to evolve with each new study of how people
learn (Pink 2009). Designing a learning game is hard and as Carr-Chellman
observed, we haven’t done that well so far just by blindly stumbling along,
relying on luck.
If we want to leverage the benefits of games, then we need to embrace
the strengths that games have to offer. In other words, we need to think like
game designers. To help make that possible, this chapter presented three
areas that are critical to games: flow, motivation, and fun. Of the three, we
believe flow is the most important. After all, flow is the fundamental reason
why people play games. In addition to flow, we looked at ways to increase
motivation. High motivation is clearly linked to improved learning and is
just as important to the design of successful games. Finally, we explored
how fun fits in as well as a variety of ways to make our learning games more
fun. Together, these three areas capture the essence of what is needed to
design learning games that both engage and instruct. The best thing is that
you don’t need any special tools to apply them. These ideas cost very little to
implement and can be put into effect almost immediately on any project.
Schell gives some basic guidance: designing games requires as much art
as science (Schell 2008). This chapter has shown how this idea applies to
learning games. The art side is the creative, almost mystical part of design
that leads to a game with flow or allows for player-driven tasks. The science
side guides us to create games where the goals are clear, the feedback is
relevant, and the challenges and skills are in balance. The art side guides us
to design simple interfaces and helps us to design fun into pattern mastery.
The science side validates that we should minimize distractions while
encouraging repetition and reflection. The art illustrates the power of
intrinsic rewards, emotional motivation, and engagement whereas the
science tells us we can get there by applying the principle of scarcity and
minimizing both opportunity cost and the paradox of choice. Artful design is
needed for a game that seamlessly becomes more difficult over time. The
science reminds us to use the Zeigarnik effect and make sure our extrinsic
rewards work well with flow and baseline rewards and aren’t attempts to
control the player.
40
Chapter 5
Schell’s idea applies to both entertainment games and learning games.
Armed with both art and science, we are no longer stumbling blindly, hoping
to get lucky. Instead, we are purposefully designing our games to maximize
both learning and fun. We are intentionally building games that actively
encourage the optimal human experience. We are answering Car-Chellman’s
challenge. In short, we are designing better learning games with flow,
motivation, and fun.
REFERENCES
Baranowski, T., Buday, Richard, Thompson, Debbe, Baranowski, Janice, 2008, Playing for
real: video games and stories for health-related behavior change, Published in the
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Volume 31, Issue 1, Jan 2008.
Bartle, R., 2003, Designing Virtual Worlds, New Riders, 2003.
Beck, John, Wade, Mitchell, 2004, Got Game – How the Gamer Generation is Reshaping
Business Forever, Harvard Business School Press, 2004.
Blow, Jonathan, 2008, Montreal International Game Summit, 19 November, 2008.
Recording and slides available here: http://braid-game.com/news/?p=385
Blow, Jonathan, 2010, Video games and the human condition, CS Colloquium: Rice
University.
Bransford, J., Brown A., and Cocking, R, National Research Council, 2000, How People
Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. National Academy Press.
Bryan, T., Bryan, J, 1991. Positive mood and math performance, Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 24(8), 490-494.
Bryan, T., Mathur, S., & Sullivan, K, 1996, The impact of positive mood on learning,
Learning Disability Quarterly, 19(3), 153-162.
Buchanan, James, 1999, Cost and Choice: An Inquiry in Economic Theory. Available in the
Collected Works of James M. Buchanan from the Library of Economics and Liberty at
http://www.econlib.org.
Carr-Chellman, Ali, 2010, Gaming to re-engage boys in learning, Published Jan 2011, at
http://www.ted.com/talks/ali_carr_chellman_gaming_to_re_engage_boys_in_learning.ht
ml?hpt=Sbin.
Jenova, Chen, 2007, Flow in games, Master’s thesis. Also published in Vol 50, No 4,
Communications of the ACM, Apr 2007.
Chertoff, D. B., Schatz, S. L., McDaniel, R., & Bowers, C. A, 2008, Improving presence
theory through experiential design, Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments , 17
(4), 405-413.
Chertoff, D. B., Goldiez, B., & LaViola, J. J, 2010, Virtual experience test: a virtual
environment evaluation questionnaire, Proceedings of the IEEE Virtual Reality 2010
Conference, (pp. 103-110). Waltham, Massachusetts.
Choney, Susan, 2011, 80 video games head for Smithsonian art exhibit, Article published on
MSNBC
on
May
9,
2011.
Available
online
at
http://ingame.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/05/09/6613809-80-video-games-head-forsmithsonian-art-exhibit.
Cialdini, Robert, 2001, Influence: Science and Practice (4th Edition), Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
41
Clarke, D., & Duimering, P. R, 2006, How computer gamers experience the game situation: a
behavioral study, ACM Computers in Entertainment , 4 (3), 1-23.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, 1990, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper
Collins.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, and Csikszentmihalyi, Isabella, 1992. Optimal Experience:
Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness, Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, 1997, Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with
Everyday Life, Basic Books.
Deci, Edward, 1995, Why We Do What We Do. Penguin Group.
Duckworth, A. L. & Seligman, M. P, 2005, Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic
performance of adolescents, Psychological Science, 16(12), 939-944.
Dweck, C.S, 1996, Implicit theories as organizers of goals and behavior, In P.M. Gollwitzer
& J.A. Bargh, The Psychology of Actions: Linking Cognition and Motivation to Behavior
(pp 69-90), New York: Guilford Press.
Finn J.D., & Rock, D. A, 1997, Academic success among students at risk for school failure,
Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 221-234.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P.C., & Paris, A.H, 2004, School engagement: potential of the
concept, state of the evidence, Review of Educational Research, 42(2), 59-109.
Goleman, D, 1995, Emotional Intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ, Random
House, New York.
Greene, Robert L, 2009, Repetition and learning, Retrieved on Jan, 2011 from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/repetition-and-learning/
Hayes, R.T, 2006, The Science of Learning: A Systems Theory Approach. Boca Raton, FL:
Brown Walker Press.
Hecker, Chris, 2010, Achievements considered harmful?, Presented at Game Developer’s
Conference, San Francisco, March 2010.
Heeter, C, 1992, Being there: the subjective experience of presence, Presence: Teleoperators
and Virtual Environments , 1, 262-271.
Hintzman, D, Curran T, and Oppy B, 1995, Effects of similarity and repetition on memory:
registration without learning, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory,
and Cognition.
Husain, Talib PhD, Murphy, Curtiss, Bowers, Clint, Cannon-Bowers, Janis, Menaker, Ellen
S., Pounds, Kelly, Koenig, Alan, Wainess, Richard, Lee, John, 2009, Designing and
developing effective training games for the US Navy, 2009 Interservice/Industry Training,
Simulation, and Education Conference, Orlando, FL.
Johnson, Soren, 2009, Analysis: asynchronicity in game design, Game Developer Magazine,
March 2009.
Johnson, Soren, 2011, The end of games? Or, will free-to-play swallow the industry?, Game
Developer Magazine, May 2011.
Konradt, U., Filip, R., & Hoffmann, S, 2003, Flow experience and positive affect during
hypermedia learning, British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), 309-327.
Koster, Raph, 2005, A Theory of Fun for Game Design. Paraglyph Press.
Koster, Raph, 2011, Social mechanics for social games, Presented at the Game Developer’s
Conference, San Francisco, CA, Mar 2011.
Lazarro, Nicole, 2004, Why we play games: four keys to more emotion without story,
Proceedings of the Game Developers Conference 2004.
Lee, J.H, 1999, Test anxiety and working memory, The Journal of Experimental Education,
67 (3), pp 218-240.
42
Chapter 5
McKinney, F, 1935, Studies in the retention of interrupted learning activities, Journal of
Comparative Psychology, vol n° 19(2), p. 265-296.
Miller, Jeremy, Westerman, Deanne, Lloyd, Marianne, 2004, Are first impressions lasting
impressions? An exploration of the generality of the primacy effect in memory for
repetitions,Published in Memory and Cognition, 2004.
Mory, E.H, 2004, Feedback research revisited, In D.H. Jonassen (Ed), Handbook of Research
on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 745-783), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Murphy, Curtiss, 2005, A low cost methodology for achieving joint objectives - ONR game,
Published and presented at the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education
Conference, Orlando, FL, Dec 2005.
Murphy, Curtiss, 2010, How to create an award winning serious game, Presented at the
Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference, Orlando, FL,
December 2010.
Murphy, Curtiss, 2011, Why games work – the science of learning, (in publication) Presented
at Modsim World, Virginia Beach, VA 2011, available online at
http://www.goodgamesbydesign.com/Files/WhyGamesWork_TheScienceOfLearning_C
Murphy_2011.pdf.
Pink, Daniel, 2009, Drive - The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. Riverhead
Hardcover.
Ricci, K., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J, 1996, Do computer-based games facilitate
knowledge acquisition and retention?, Military Psychology, 8(4), 295-307.
Rouse Richard III, 2004, Game Design Theory And Practice – Second Edition. Wordware
Publishing, Inc.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L, 2000, Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being, American Psychologist , 55, 68-78.
Schell, Jesse, 2008, The Art of Game Design, a Book of Lenses. Morgan Kaufmann
Publishers.
Schwartz, Barry, 2004, The Paradox of Choice, Why More is Less, Harper Perennial.
Schwartz, Barry, 2006, The paradox of choice, why more is less, Presented at Google and
available
as
a
Google
Tech
Talk
at
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6127548813950043200&hl=en&emb=1#.
Shute, V, 2008, Focus on formative feedback, Review of Educational Research 78(1), pp.
153-189.
Teachman, B.A, 2005, Information processing and anxiety sensitivity: cognitive vulnerability
to panic reflected in interpretation and memory biases, Cognitive Therapy and Research,
29, pp 483-503.
US Department of Transportation, 2008, Aviation Instructor’s Handbook, Federal Aviation
Administration.
Van Eck, Richard, 2006, Digital game-based learning: it’s not just the digital natives who are
restless, EDUCAUSE Review, vol 41, no 2, March/April, 2006.
Vroom, V. H, 1995, Work and motivation (2nd ed.), New York: Wiley.
Whitehall, B. & McDonald, B., 1993, Improving learning persistence of military personnel
by enhancing motivation in a technical training program, Simulation and Gaming, 24,
294-313.
Williams, K. Williams, C, 2010, Five key ingredients for improving student motivation,
Research in Higher Education Journal.
Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J, 1998, Measuring presence in virtual environments: A
presence questionnaire, Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments , 7, 225-240.
1. Creating Flow, Motivation, & Fun in Learning Games
43