IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v47y2016i1p73-102.html

Building Better Digital Badges

Author

Listed:
  • Rudy McDaniel
  • Joseph Fanfarelli

Abstract

Background. Digital badges are used in games and simulations for purposes such as incentivizing learning, identifying progress , increasing time on task, and credentialing . Designing effective badges is complicated by psychological factors mediating the processes of recognizing, orienting toward, and acquiring badges. Aim. This article analyzes digital badges through mechanics and psychology . This approach involves understanding the underlying logics of badges as well as the experiential nature of badges-in-use. The proposed model provides additional insight about badges and recommends design strategies to complement existing scholarship. Procedure. This article examines an existing model of completion logic for digital badges. This model is expanded upon by pairing these formal mechanics with relevant psychological theory, summarizing key principles that pertain to how people interact with badges. It then considers three dimensions of badges-in-use—social, cognitive, and affective—reviewing examples and analyzing the relationship of badging to debriefing. Outcome. Understanding the relationships between formal completion logics and the psychological experience of badging allows designers to better design, deploy, and critique badging systems, leading to more effective implementations within simulation and gaming contexts. A design matrix and a series of design recommendations for badging are derived from the presented perspectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Rudy McDaniel & Joseph Fanfarelli, 2016. "Building Better Digital Badges," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(1), pages 73-102, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:47:y:2016:i:1:p:73-102
    DOI: 10.1177/1046878115627138
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1046878115627138
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1046878115627138?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Crookall, 2010. "Serious Games, Debriefing, and Simulation/Gaming as a Discipline," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 41(6), pages 898-920, December.
    2. Kristina Hermann, 2015. "Field Theory and Working With Group Dynamics in Debriefing," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(2), pages 209-220, April.
    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. Jonna Koponen & Saara Julkunen, 2015. "Theoretical Principles of Simulation-Based Sales Communication Training," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(2), pages 137-147, April.
    2. Aad Slootmaker & Hans Hummel & Rob Koper, 2017. "Evaluating the Usability of Authoring Environments for Serious Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(4), pages 553-578, August.
    3. Frank Ulrich & Niels Henrik Helms, 2017. "CREATING EVALUATION PROFILES FOR GAMES DESIGNED TO BE FUN: An Interpretive Framework for Serious Game Mechanics," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(5), pages 695-714, October.
    4. David Kirschner & J. Patrick Williams, 2014. "Measuring Video Game Engagement Through Gameplay Reviews," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(4-5), pages 593-610, August.
    5. Korina Katsaliaki & Navonil Mustafee, 2015. "Edutainment for Sustainable Development," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(6), pages 647-672, December.
    6. Jop van den Hoogen & Julia Lo & Sebastiaan Meijer, 2016. "Debriefing Research Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(3), pages 368-388, June.
    7. Frederick M. C. van Amstel & Julia A. Garde, 2016. "The Transformative Potential of Game Spatiality in Service Design," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(5), pages 628-650, October.
    8. Tracey Ledoux & Melissa Griffith & Debbe Thompson & Nga Nguyen & Kathy Watson & Janice Baranowski & Richard Buday & Dina Abdelsamad & Tom Baranowski, 2016. "An Educational Video Game for Nutrition of Young People," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(4), pages 490-516, August.
    9. Magnuszewski Piotr & Hegadorn Chris & Szewczyk Katarzyna & Bertolozzi Caredio Daniele & Ciaian Pavel, 2026. "Operational framework for stress testing EU food security," JRC Research Reports JRC145765, Joint Research Centre.
    10. Lucy R. Zheng & Catherine M. Oberle & W. A. Hawkes-Robinson & Stéphane Daniau, 2021. "Serious Games as a Complementary Tool for Social Skill Development in Young People: A Systematic Review of the Literature," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 52(6), pages 686-714, December.
    11. Apinya Dhatsuwan & Monamorn Precharattana, 2016. "Blockyland," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(4), pages 445-464, August.
    12. Jonna Koponen & Eeva Pyörälä & Pekka Isotalus, 2014. "Communication Skills for Medical Students," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(2), pages 235-254, April.
    13. Jop van den Hoogen & Sebastiaan Meijer, 2015. "Gaming and Simulation for Railway Innovation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(5), pages 489-511, October.
    14. Peter Korfiatis & Robert Cloutier & Teresa Zigh, 2015. "Model-Based Concept of Operations Development Using Gaming Simulation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(5), pages 471-488, October.
    15. Dalia Majumdar & Pamela A. Koch & Heewon Lee Gray & Isobel R. Contento & Ana de Lourdes Islas-Ramos & Daniel Fu, 2015. "Nutrition Science and Behavioral Theories Integrated in a Serious Game for Adolescents," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(1), pages 68-97, February.
    16. Richard B. Powers & Kat Kirkpatrick, 2013. "Playing With Conflict," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 44(1), pages 51-72, February.
    17. Marcin Wardaszko & Błażej Podgórski, 2017. "Mobile Learning Game Effectiveness in Cognitive Learning by Adults: A Comparative Study," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(4), pages 435-454, August.
    18. Katelyn Procci & Shan Lakhmani & Talib S. Hussain & Clint A. Bowers, 2014. "Opening Cinematics," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(1), pages 93-124, February.
    19. Bride Mallon & Ronan Lynch, 2014. "Stimulating Psychological Attachments in Narrative Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(4-5), pages 508-527, August.
    20. Elizabeth Koh & Yeo Gee Kin & Bimlesh Wadhwa & John Lim, 2012. "Teacher Perceptions of Games in Singapore Schools," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(1), pages 51-66, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:simgam:v:47:y:2016:i:1:p:73-102. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.