IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-024-03172-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design and analysis of personalized serious games for information literacy: catering to introverted and extraverted individuals through game elements

Author

Listed:
  • Phimphakan Thongthip

    (Chiang Mai University)

  • Kannikar Intawong

    (Chiang Mai University)

  • Suepphong Chernbumroong

    (Chiang Mai University)

  • Perasuk Worragin

    (Chiang Mai University)

  • Yootthapong Tongpaeng

    (Mae Fah Luang University)

  • Kitti Puritat

    (Chiang Mai University)

Abstract

Personalized learning has become increasingly prevalent in computer-based education. Nevertheless, there remains a scarcity of studies addressing personalized serious games. This paper delves into a study on a personalized serious game that utilizes suitable game elements tailored to students’ personality traits, focusing on the dimensions of introversion and extraversion. To evaluate the impact of personalized serious games, a comparative experiment was conducted. The study involved both a Control group (Non-personalized game-based approach) and an Experimental group (Personalized game-based approach). Participants were assessed using pre-post tests measuring knowledge acquisition and retention in information literacy for source evaluation, as well as intrinsic motivation measured through the IMI questionnaire. The findings indicate that while personalized serious games can enhance intrinsic motivation, particularly in terms of perceived competence and effort, they did not significantly impact knowledge acquisition and retention. User behavior data statistics revealed a substantial 37% improvement in engagement, measured by both average and total playtime, especially noticeable among introverted participants. However, this personalized approach was found to be less effective for extraverted participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Phimphakan Thongthip & Kannikar Intawong & Suepphong Chernbumroong & Perasuk Worragin & Yootthapong Tongpaeng & Kitti Puritat, 2024. "Design and analysis of personalized serious games for information literacy: catering to introverted and extraverted individuals through game elements," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03172-5
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03172-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-03172-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-024-03172-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," NBER Working Papers 23089, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Mary O. Borg & Stephen L. Shapiro, 1996. "Personality Type and Student Performance in Principles of Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 3-25, January.
    3. Pritika Reddy & Bibhya Sharma & Kaylash Chaudhary, 2020. "Digital Literacy: A Review of Literature," International Journal of Technoethics (IJT), IGI Global, vol. 11(2), pages 65-94, July.
    4. Gunnvald Svendsen & Jan-Are Johnsen & Live Almås-Sørensen & Joar Vittersø, 2013. "Personality and technology acceptance: the influence of personality factors on the core constructs of the Technology Acceptance Model," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 323-334.
    5. Edson C. Tandoc Jr. & Ryan J. Thomas & Lauren Bishop, 2021. "What Is (Fake) News? Analyzing News Values (and More) in Fake Stories," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 110-119.
    6. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 211-236, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Raúl Rodríguez-Ferrándiz & Cande Sánchez-Olmos & Tatiana Hidalgo-Marí & Estela Saquete-Boro, 2021. "Memetics of Deception: Spreading Local Meme Hoaxes during COVID-19 1st Year," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Leopoldo Fergusson & Carlos Molina, 2020. "Facebook Causes Protests," HiCN Working Papers 323, Households in Conflict Network.
    3. Dean Neu & Gregory D. Saxton & Abu S. Rahaman, 2022. "Social Accountability, Ethics, and the Occupy Wall Street Protests," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 17-31, September.
    4. Robbett, Andrea & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2018. "Partisan bias and expressive voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-120.
    5. Henrik Skaug Sætra, 2021. "AI in Context and the Sustainable Development Goals: Factoring in the Unsustainability of the Sociotechnical System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    6. Fathey Mohammed & Nabil Hasan Al-Kumaim & Ahmed Ibrahim Alzahrani & Yousef Fazea, 2023. "The Impact of Social Media Shared Health Content on Protective Behavior against COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-16, January.
    7. Bartosz Wilczek, 2020. "Misinformation and herd behavior in media markets: A cross-national investigation of how tabloids’ attention to misinformation drives broadsheets’ attention to misinformation in political and business," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-22, November.
    8. Joël Cariolle & Yasmine Elkhateeb & Mathilde Maurel, 2022. "(Mis-)information technology: Internet use and perception of democracy in Africa," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 22010, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    9. Barrera, Oscar & Guriev, Sergei & Henry, Emeric & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2020. "Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of post-truth politics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    10. Sumeet Kumar & Binxuan Huang & Ramon Alfonso Villa Cox & Kathleen M. Carley, 2021. "An anatomical comparison of fake-news and trusted-news sharing pattern on Twitter," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 109-133, June.
    11. Zazli Lily Wisker & Robert Neil McKie, 2021. "The effect of fake news on anger and negative word-of-mouth: moderating roles of religiosity and conservatism," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(2), pages 144-153, June.
    12. Roger D. Magarey & Christina M. Trexler, 2020. "Information: a missing component in understanding and mitigating social epidemics," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    13. Christoph March & Ina Schieferdecker, 2021. "Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky," CESifo Working Paper Series 9139, CESifo.
    14. Deena A. Isom & Hunter M. Boehme & Toniqua C. Mikell & Stephen Chicoine & Marion Renner, 2021. "Status Threat, Social Concerns, and Conservative Media: A Look at White America and the Alt-Right," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, July.
    15. Lohse, Johannes & McDonald, Rebecca, 2021. "Absolute groupishness and the demand for information," VfS Annual Conference 2021 (Virtual Conference): Climate Economics 242454, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    16. Seth C. Lewis & Logan Molyneux, 2018. "A Decade of Research on Social Media and Journalism: Assumptions, Blind Spots, and a Way Forward," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(4), pages 11-23.
    17. Germano, Fabrizio & Sobbrio, Francesco, 2020. "Opinion dynamics via search engines (and other algorithmic gatekeepers)," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    18. Felix Chopra & Ingar K. Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2019. "Do People Value More Informative News?," CESifo Working Paper Series 8026, CESifo.
    19. Donati, Dante, 2023. "Mobile Internet access and political outcomes: Evidence from South Africa," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    20. Scoles, Brooke & Nicodemo, Catia, 2022. "Doctors’ attitudes toward specific medical conditions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 182-199.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03172-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.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.