IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i3p877-d314639.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Gamification-Based Intervention Program that Encourages Physical Activity Improves Cardiorespiratory Fitness of College Students: ‘The Matrix rEFvolution Program’

Author

Listed:
  • Jose Mora-Gonzalez

    (PROFITH “PROmoting FITness and Health through physical activity” Research Group, Sport and Health University Research Institute (iMUDS), Department of Physical Education and Sports, Faculty of Sports Science, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Isaac J. Pérez-López

    (Educación física y transformación social, SEJ546 Research Group, Department of Physical Education and Sports, Faculty of Sports Science, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Irene Esteban-Cornejo

    (PROFITH “PROmoting FITness and Health through physical activity” Research Group, Sport and Health University Research Institute (iMUDS), Department of Physical Education and Sports, Faculty of Sports Science, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Manuel Delgado-Fernández

    (PA-HELP “Physical Activity for Health Promotion, CTS-1018” Research Group, Department of Physical Education and Sports, Faculty of Sports Science, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to examine the effects of a gamification-based program on cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) levels of college students. We divided 112 college students into an intervention group (IG) and a control group (CG). IG college students followed a 15-week gamification-based program, whereas CG followed traditional lectures. CRF was assessed using the 20-meter shuttle-run test. CRF significantly improved after the program in the IG compared to CG (d ≤ 0.94, p < 0.001). Only participants of IG had significant CRF improvements (d ≤ 0.87, p < 0.001) between pre- and post-assessments. In the IG, from the students who attended 100% of lectures, 87.8% met physical activity recommendations for 100% of weeks, whereas from those who attended <100%, only 26.7% met them them for 100% of weeks ( p < 0.001). Participants who met recommendations 100% of weeks had a significant CRF improvement ( p < 0.001). Motivating college students throughout innovative teaching methods (e.g., gamification) can lead to health improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • Jose Mora-Gonzalez & Isaac J. Pérez-López & Irene Esteban-Cornejo & Manuel Delgado-Fernández, 2020. "A Gamification-Based Intervention Program that Encourages Physical Activity Improves Cardiorespiratory Fitness of College Students: ‘The Matrix rEFvolution Program’," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-11, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:3:p:877-:d:314639
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/3/877/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/3/877/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Conn, V.S. & Hafdahl, A.R. & Mehr, D.R., 2011. "Interventions to increase physical activity among healthy adults: meta-analysis of outcomes," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 101(4), pages 751-758.
    2. Robson, Karen & Plangger, Kirk & Kietzmann, Jan H. & McCarthy, Ian & Pitt, Leyland, 2015. "Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 411-420.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gonzalo Flores-Aguilar & María Prat-Grau & Jesús Fernández-Gavira & Antonio Muñoz-Llerena, 2023. "“I Learned More Because I Became More Involved”: Teacher’s and Students’ Voice on Gamification in Physical Education Teacher Education," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Ana Manzano-León & Pablo Camacho-Lazarraga & Miguel A. Guerrero-Puerta & Laura Guerrero-Puerta & Antonio Alias & José M. Aguilar-Parra & Rubén Trigueros, 2021. "Development and Validation of a Questionnaire on Motivation for Cooperative Playful Learning Strategies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-10, January.
    3. Diego Fernández-Vázquez & Víctor Navarro-López & Roberto Cano-de-la-Cuerda & Domingo Palacios-Ceña & María Espada & Daniel Bores-García & José Manuel Delfa-de-la-Morena & Nuria Romero-Parra, 2024. "Influence of Virtual Reality and Gamification Combined with Practice Teaching Style in Physical Education on Motor Skills and Students’ Perceived Effort: A Mixed-Method Intervention Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-15, February.
    4. Romina Gisele Saucedo-Araujo & Palma Chillón & Isaac J. Pérez-López & Yaira Barranco-Ruiz, 2020. "School-Based Interventions for Promoting Physical Activity Using Games and Gamification: A Systematic Review Protocol," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-11, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anna Mutule & Marcos Domingues & Fernando Ulloa-Vásquez & Dante Carrizo & Luis García-Santander & Ana-Maria Dumitrescu & Diego Issicaba & Lucas Melo, 2021. "Implementing Smart City Technologies to Inspire Change in Consumer Energy Behaviour," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Athina G. Bright & Stavros T. Ponis, 2021. "Introducing Gamification in the AR-Enhanced Order Picking Process: A Proposed Approach," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-16, March.
    3. Adina Letiţia Negruşa & Valentin Toader & Aurelian Sofică & Mihaela Filofteia Tutunea & Rozalia Veronica Rus, 2015. "Exploring Gamification Techniques and Applications for Sustainable Tourism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-30, August.
    4. Armand Faganel & Filip Pačarić & Igor Rižnar, 2024. "The Impact of Gamification on Slovenian Consumers’ Online Shopping," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, April.
    5. An, Siyang & Cheung, Chi Fai & Willoughby, Kelvin W., 2024. "A gamification approach for enhancing older adults' technology adoption and knowledge transfer: A case study in mobile payments technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    6. Poncin, Ingrid & Garnier, Marion & Ben Mimoun, Mohammed Slim & Leclercq, Thomas, 2017. "Smart technologies and shopping experience: Are gamification interfaces effective? The case of the Smartstore," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 320-331.
    7. Andrea Stevenson Thorpe & Stephen Roper, 2019. "The Ethics of Gamification in a Marketing Context," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 597-609, March.
    8. Marcucci, Edoardo & Gatta, Valerio & Le Pira, Michela, 2018. "Gamification design to foster stakeholder engagement and behavior change: An application to urban freight transport," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 119-132.
    9. Sharma, Wamika & Lim, Weng Marc & Kumar, Satish & Verma, Aastha & Kumra, Rajeev, 2024. "Game on! A state-of-the-art overview of doing business with gamification," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    10. Haziri Fortesa & Chovancová Miloslava & Fetahu Faton, 2019. "Game mechanics and aesthetics differences for tangible and intangible goods provided via social media," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 13(1), pages 772-783, May.
    11. Sara Contreras-Martos & Alfonso Leiva & Álvaro Sanchez & Emma Motrico & Juan Bellón & Susana Aldecoa Landesa & Rosa Magallón-Botaya & Marc Casajuana-Closas & Edurne Zabaleta-del-Olmo & Bonaventura Bol, 2021. "Implementation of the EIRA 3 Intervention by Targeting Primary Health Care Practitioners: Effectiveness in Increasing Physical Activity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-16, October.
    12. Fang Yuan & Sanying Peng & Ahmad Zamri Khairani & Jinghong Liang, 2024. "A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Physical Activity Interventions among University Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-20, February.
    13. Marc A Adams & James F Sallis & Gregory J Norman & Melbourne F Hovell & Eric B Hekler & Elyse Perata, 2013. "An Adaptive Physical Activity Intervention for Overweight Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-11, December.
    14. Mette Tøien & Morten Heggelund & Lisbeth Fagerström, 2014. "How Do Older Persons Understand the Purpose and Relevance of Preventive Home Visits? A Study of Experiences after a First Visit," Nursing Research and Practice, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-8, March.
    15. Jesús López-Belmonte & Adrian Segura-Robles & Arturo Fuentes-Cabrera & María Elena Parra-González, 2020. "Evaluating Activation and Absence of Negative Effect: Gamification and Escape Rooms for Learning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-12, March.
    16. Jing Liu & Yu Cheng & Joseph T F Lau & Anise M S Wu & Vincent W S Tse & Shenglai Zhou, 2015. "The Majority of the Migrant Factory Workers of the Light Industry in Shenzhen, China May Be Physically Inactive," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-14, August.
    17. Luigino Bruni & Vittorio Pelligra & Tommaso Reggiani & Matteo Rizzolli, 2020. "The Pied Piper: Prizes, Incentives, and Motivation Crowding-in," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 643-658, October.
    18. Täuscher, Karl, 2017. "Leveraging collective intelligence: How to design and manage crowd-based business models," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 237-245.
    19. Chanté Johannes & Nicolette V. Roman & Sunday O. Onagbiye & Simone Titus & Lloyd L. Leach, 2024. "Strategies and Best Practices That Enhance the Physical Activity Levels of Undergraduate University Students: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(2), pages 1-22, February.
    20. Tran, Yen & Yamamoto, Toshiyuki & Sato, Hitomi & Miwa, Tomio & Morikawa, Takayuki, 2020. "The analysis of influences of attitudes on mode choice under highly unbalanced mode share patterns," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:3:p:877-:d:314639. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.