IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v106y2020icp288-303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Individualizing gamified systems: The role of trait competitiveness and leaderboard design

Author

Listed:
  • Höllig, Christoph E.
  • Tumasjan, Andranik
  • Welpe, Isabell M.

Abstract

The success of gamified systems depends on how user characteristics and behavior interact with system design. Prior research, however, has largely neglected this user-system interaction, thus limiting our understanding of gamification design. To addresses this limitation in the current literature, we investigate how users' trait competitiveness is related to the usage intention of a competitive gamified system. Based on our theoretical model, we hypothesize and test both direct and indirect effects (through perceived enjoyment), as well as whether and how system design moderates the effects of trait competitiveness. Results from structural equation modeling demonstrate an indirect-only mediated relationship between trait competitiveness and usage intention through perceived enjoyment. Moreover, we show evidence, that this mediated relationship interacts with system design, such that the relationship is strengthened when a team-based vs. a player-based leaderboard is employed. Our findings show the importance of designing gamified systems that provide appropriate user-system fit.

Suggested Citation

  • Höllig, Christoph E. & Tumasjan, Andranik & Welpe, Isabell M., 2020. "Individualizing gamified systems: The role of trait competitiveness and leaderboard design," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 288-303.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:106:y:2020:i:c:p:288-303
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.046
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296318305277
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.046?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. Kai Huotari & Juho Hamari, 2017. "A definition for gamification: anchoring gamification in the service marketing literature," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(1), pages 21-31, February.
    2. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    3. Wu, Kaiyang & Raab, Carola & Chang, Wen & Krishen, Anjala, 2016. "Understanding Chinese tourists' food consumption in the United States," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4706-4713.
    4. Peterson, Robert A. & Merunka, Dwight R., 2014. "Convenience samples of college students and research reproducibility," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 1035-1041.
    5. Sea-Jin Chang & Arjen van Witteloostuijn & Lorraine Eden, 2010. "From the Editors: Common method variance in international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 41(2), pages 178-184, February.
    6. Peter Mudrack & James Bloodgood & William Turnley, 2012. "Some Ethical Implications of Individual Competitiveness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 347-359, July.
    7. Hamari, Juho & Koivisto, Jonna, 2015. "Why do people use gamification services?," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 419-431.
    8. Sarv Devaraj & Robert F. Easley & J. Michael Crant, 2008. "Research Note ---How Does Personality Matter? Relating the Five-Factor Model to Technology Acceptance and Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 93-105, March.
    9. Radhika Santhanam & De Liu & Wei-Cheng Milton Shen, 2016. "Research Note—Gamification of Technology-Mediated Training: Not All Competitions Are the Same," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 453-465, June.
    10. Robert Peterson & Dwight Merunka, 2014. "Convenience samples of college students and research reproducibility," Post-Print hal-01822317, HAL.
    11. Eric Zimmerling & Patrick J. Höflinger & Philipp G. Sandner & Isabell M. Welpe, 2016. "A system framework for gamified Cost Engineering," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 1063-1084, December.
    12. Kieran Mathieson, 1991. "Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 173-191, September.
    13. Smith, Scott M. & Roster, Catherine A. & Golden, Linda L. & Albaum, Gerald S., 2016. "A multi-group analysis of online survey respondent data quality: Comparing a regular USA consumer panel to MTurk samples," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 3139-3148.
    14. Fuller, Christie M. & Simmering, Marcia J. & Atinc, Guclu & Atinc, Yasemin & Babin, Barry J., 2016. "Common methods variance detection in business research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 3192-3198.
    15. Hamari, Juho & Keronen, Lauri, 2017. "Why do people play games? A meta-analysis," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 125-141.
    16. Tojib, Dewi & Tsarenko, Yelena, 2012. "Post-adoption modeling of advanced mobile service use," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(7), pages 922-928.
    17. Xinshu Zhao & John G. Lynch & Qimei Chen, 2010. "Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 197-206, August.
    18. Jacob M. Montgomery & Brendan Nyhan & Michelle Torres, 2018. "How Conditioning on Posttreatment Variables Can Ruin Your Experiment and What to Do about It," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(3), pages 760-775, July.
    19. Peterson, Robert A, 2001. "On the Use of College Students in Social Science Research: Insights from a Second-Order Meta-analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(3), pages 450-461, December.
    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. Bitrián, Paula & Buil, Isabel & Catalán, Sara, 2021. "Enhancing user engagement: The role of gamification in mobile apps," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 170-185.
    2. Park, Jihye & Li, Wenhan, 2023. "“I got it FIRST†: Antecedents of competitive consumption of a new product," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Hammedi, Wafa & Leclercq, Thomas & Poncin, Ingrid & Alkire (Née Nasr), Linda, 2021. "Uncovering the dark side of gamification at work: Impacts on engagement and well-being," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 256-269.
    4. Dzandu, Michael D. & Hanu, Charles & Amegbe, Hayford, 2022. "Gamification of mobile money payment for generating customer value in emerging economies: The social impact theory perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).

    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. Hassan, Lobna & Dias, Antonio & Hamari, Juho, 2019. "How motivational feedback increases user’s benefits and continued use: A study on gamification, quantified-self and social networking," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 151-162.
    2. Waqar Nadeem & Mari Juntunen & Nick Hajli & Mina Tajvidi, 2021. "The Role of Ethical Perceptions in Consumers’ Participation and Value Co-creation on Sharing Economy Platforms," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 421-441, March.
    3. Koivisto, Jonna & Hamari, Juho, 2019. "The rise of motivational information systems: A review of gamification research," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 191-210.
    4. Vieira, Valter Afonso & Rafael, Diego Nogueira & Agnihotri, Raj, 2022. "Augmented reality generalizations: A meta-analytical review on consumer-related outcomes and the mediating role of hedonic and utilitarian values," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 170-184.
    5. Qin, Hong & Peak, Daniel Alan & Prybutok, Victor, 2021. "A virtual market in your pocket: How does mobile augmented reality (MAR) influence consumer decision making?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    6. Šerić, Maja & Ozretić-Došen, Đurđana & Škare, Vatroslav, 2020. "How can perceived consistency in marketing communications influence customer–brand relationship outcomes?," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 335-343.
    7. Weng Marc Lim & Gaurav Gupta & Baidyanath Biswas & Rohit Gupta, 2022. "Collaborative consumption continuance: a mixed-methods analysis of the service quality-loyalty relationship in ride-sharing services," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1463-1484, September.
    8. Melikşah Demir & Andrew Haynes & Marlyn Sanchez & Jennifer C. Parada, 2019. "Personal Sense of Uniqueness Mediates the Relationship Between Compassion for Others and Subjective Well-Being," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 1751-1773, August.
    9. Liu, Xiaohui & He, Xiaoyu & Wang, Mengmeng & Shen, Huizhang, 2022. "What influences patients' continuance intention to use AI-powered service robots at hospitals? The role of individual characteristics," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    10. Nadeem, Waqar & Al-Imamy, Saifeddin, 2020. "Do ethics drive value co-creation on digital sharing economy platforms?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    11. Agustín J. Sánchez-Medina & Juan Manuel Benítez-del-Rosario & Félix Blázquez-Santana, 2017. "Anomia and Displacement of Responsibility as Determinants of Tourist Company Managers’ Non-Involvement in Alleviating Poverty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-15, May.
    12. Robert A. Peterson & U. N. Umesh, 2018. "On the significance of statistically insignificant results in consumer behavior experiments," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 81-91, January.
    13. Heleen Venema & Ruan Spies & Leon T. De Beer, 2021. "Psychometric Properties of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Brief Form in an Undergraduate Sample of South African University Students," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    14. Allam, Hesham & Bliemel, Michael & Spiteri, Louise & Blustein, James & Ali-Hassan, Hossam, 2019. "Applying a multi-dimensional hedonic concept of intrinsic motivation on social tagging tools: A theoretical model and empirical validation," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 211-222.
    15. Peng, Zeyu & Sun, Yongqiang & Guo, Xitong, 2018. "Antecedents of employees’ extended use of enterprise systems: An integrative view of person, environment, and technology," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 104-120.
    16. James Agyei & Shaorong Sun & Eugene Abrokwah & Emmanuel Kofi Penney & Richmond Ofori-Boafo, 2020. "Mobile Banking Adoption: Examining the Role of Personality Traits," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(2), pages 21582440209, June.
    17. Nadeem, Waqar & Alimamy, Saifeddin & Ashraf, Abdul Rehman, 2023. "Navigating through difficult times with ethical marketing: Assessing consumers' willingness-to-pay in the sharing economy," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    18. Espinosa, Jennifer A. & Ortinau, David J., 2016. "Debunking legendary beliefs about student samples in marketing research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 3149-3158.
    19. Puncheva-Michelotti, Petya & Hudson, Sarah & Michelotti, Marco, 2018. "The role of proximity to local and global citizens in stakeholders' moral recognition of corporate social responsibility," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 234-244.
    20. Hwang, Jiyoung & Choi, Laee, 2020. "Having fun while receiving rewards?: Exploration of gamification in loyalty programs for consumer loyalty," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 365-376.

    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:eee:jbrese:v:106:y:2020:i:c:p:288-303. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    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.