skip to main content
10.1145/3569219.3569343acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmindtrekConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Storifying a Serious Mobile Game: Exploring Players’ Perception of Storification Features, Narrative Engagement, and Behavioral Intentions

Published:16 November 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Storifying gameful designs helps to engage players with desirable behavioral implications via enhanced narrative experience, the benefits of which are particularly prominent for developing serious mobile games to overcome their technical and contextual constraints. To understand the multifaceted nature of players’ narrative engagement with storified gameplay and provide guidance for future designs accordingly, in the present study, we conducted an online survey (N = 238) among users of eQuoo, a mobile app developed for improving users’ well-being with heavy storytelling components. With reflective-formative partial least squares modeling, we found participants’ evaluation of eQuoo’s storification features was positively associated with their narrative presence and identification in a statistically significant manner, which were further positively associated with their future use intention of and purchase intention on eQuoo. The findings with respect to the third dimension of narrative engagement examined in the study, suspension of disbelief, however, were comparatively inconsistent. Theoretical and design implications were discussed for future research and practice on storification and gamification on mobile platforms.

References

  1. Sanne Akkerman, Wilfried Admiraal, and Jantina Huizenga. 2009. Storification in History education: A mobile game in and about medieval Amsterdam. Computers & Education 52, 2 (2009), 449–459.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Sky LaRell Anderson. 2019. Touchscreen travelers: Hands, bodies, agency, and mobile game players. Convergence 25, 1 (2019), 77–94.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Isabella Aura, Lobna Hassan, and Juho Hamari. 2021. Teaching within a Story: Understanding storification of pedagogy. International Journal of Educational Research 106 (2021), 101728.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Helena Bilandzic and Rick Busselle. 2013. Narrative persuasion. The Sage handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice 2 (2013), 200–219.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Saskia Böcking. 2008. Limits of Fiction? From Suspension of Disbelief towards a Theory of Tolerance for the Usage of Fictional Films.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Saskia Böcking. 2008. Suspension of disbelief. The international encyclopedia of communication (2008).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Rick Busselle and Helena Bilandzic. 2008. Fictionality and perceived realism in experiencing stories: A model of narrative comprehension and engagement. Communication theory 18, 2 (2008), 255–280.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Rick Busselle and Helena Bilandzic. 2009. Measuring narrative engagement. Media psychology 12, 4 (2009), 321–347.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Yu-Hung Chien and Wen-Te Chang. 2015. Effects of message framing and exemplars on promoting organ donation. Psychological Reports 117, 3 (2015), 692–702.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Hyunyi Cho, Lijiang Shen, and Kari Wilson. 2014. Perceived realism: Dimensions and roles in narrative persuasion. Communication research 41, 6 (2014), 828–851.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Jonathan Cohen. 2001. Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass communication & society 4, 3 (2001), 245–264.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Sonya Dal Cin, Mark P Zanna, and Geoffrey T Fong. 2004. Narrative persuasion and overcoming resistance. Resistance and persuasion 2, 175-191 (2004), 4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Anneke De Graaf, Hans Hoeken, José Sanders, and Johannes WJ Beentjes. 2012. Identification as a mechanism of narrative persuasion. Communication research 39, 6 (2012), 802–823.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Sebastian Deterding. 2016. Make-believe in gameful and playful design. In Digital make-believe. Springer, 101–124.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Edward Downs, Nicholas D Bowman, and Jaime Banks. 2019. A polythetic model of player-avatar identification: Synthesizing multiple mechanisms.Psychology of popular media culture 8, 3 (2019), 269.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Monika Fludernik. 2002. Towards a’natural’narratology. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Jason Freeman, Lewen Wei, Hyun Yang, and Fuyuan Shen. 2022. Does in-Stream Video Advertising Work? Effects of Position and Congruence on Consumer Responses. Journal of Promotion Management 28, 5 (2022), 515–536.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Richard J Gerrig. 2018. Experiencing narrative worlds: On the psychological activities of reading. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. AM Graaf, JAL Hoeken, JM Sanders, and JWJ Beentjes. 2009. The role of dimensions of narrative engagement in narrative persuasion. Communications 34, 4 (2009), 385–405.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Melanie C Green and Timothy C Brock. 2000. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives.Journal of personality and social psychology 79, 5(2000), 701.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Melanie C Green and Timothy C Brock. 2003. In the mind’s eye: Transportation-imagery model of narrative persuasion. In Narrative impact. Psychology Press, 315–341.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Holly Grothues, Andrea Abney, and Ryan Boughter. 2022. Mobile Game Usability: Design and Research. Game Usability: Advice from the Experts for Advancing UX Strategy and Practice in Videogames (2022), 311.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Joseph F Hair Jr, G Tomas M Hult, Christian M Ringle, and Marko Sarstedt. 2021. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Joseph F Hair Jr, G Tomas M Hult, Christian M Ringle, Marko Sarstedt, Nicholas P Danks, and Soumya Ray. 2021. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Juho Hamari. 2007. Gamification. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology(2007), 1–3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Anne Hamby, David Brinberg, and James Jaccard. 2016. A conceptual framework of narrative persuasion. Journal of Media Psychology(2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Lobna Hassan, Sebastian Deterding, J Tuomas Harviainen, and Juho Hamari. 2019. Fighting Post-truth with Fiction: An Inquiry into Using Storification and Embodied Narratives for Evidence-Based Civic Participation. Storyworlds: A Journal of Narrative Studies 11, 1 (2019), 51–78.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Jörg Henseler, Christian M Ringle, and Marko Sarstedt. 2015. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science 43, 1 (2015), 115–135.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Kuo-Lun Hsiao and Chia-Chen Chen. 2016. What drives in-app purchase intention for mobile games? An examination of perceived values and loyalty. Electronic commerce research and applications 16 (2016), 18–29.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Richard Iannone. 2022. DiagrammeR: Graph/Network Visualization. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=DiagrammeR R package version 1.0.9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Moonkyoung Jang, Rumi Lee, and Byungjoon Yoo. 2021. Does fun or freebie increase in-app purchase?Information Systems and e-Business Management 19, 2(2021), 439–457.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Qihao Ji and Arthur A Raney. 2016. Examining Suspension of Disbelief, Perceived Realism, and Involvement in the Enjoyment of Documentary-Style Fictional Films. Projections 10, 2 (2016), 125–142.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Yahui Kang, Joseph Cappella, and Martin Fishbein. 2006. The attentional mechanism of message sensation value: Interaction between message sensation value and argument quality on message effectiveness. Communication Monographs 73, 4 (2006), 351–378.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Dong Dong Li, Albert Kien Liau, and Angeline Khoo. 2013. Player–Avatar Identification in video gaming: Concept and measurement. Computers in Human Behavior 29, 1 (2013), 257–263.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Silja Litvin, Rob Saunders, Markus A Maier, and Stefan Lüttke. 2020. Gamification as an approach to improve resilience and reduce attrition in mobile mental health interventions: a randomized controlled trial. PloS one 15, 9 (2020), e0237220.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. lucycrichton. 2018. The Seven Elements Of A Successful Story. https://www.thepeoplesfriend.co.uk/2018/09/13/the-seven-elements-of-a-successful-story/. Accessed: 2022-07-31.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. David R Michael and Sandra L Chen. 2005. Serious games: Games that educate, train, and inform. Muska & Lipman/Premier-Trade.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Emily Moyer-Gusé and Robin L Nabi. 2010. Explaining the effects of narrative in an entertainment television program: Overcoming resistance to persuasion. Human communication research 36, 1 (2010), 26–52.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Thanh-Thao Nguyen and Bianca Grohmann. 2020. The influence of passion/determination and external disadvantage on consumer responses to brand biographies. Journal of Brand Management 27, 4 (2020), 452–465.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Richard E Petty, Zakary L Tormala, and Derek D Rucker. 2004. Resisting persuasion by counterarguing: An attitude strength perspective.(2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Brian L Quick, Lijiang Shen, and James Price Dillard. 2013. Reactance theory and persuasion. The SAGE handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice (2013), 167–183.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. R Core Team. 2022. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Aina Ravoniarison and Cédric Benito. 2019. Mobile games: players’ experiences with in-app purchases. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Soumya Ray, Nicholas Patrick Danks, and André Calero Valdez. 2022. seminr: Building and Estimating Structural Equation Models. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=seminr R package version 2.3.2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Pauline Rooney. 2012. A theoretical framework for serious game design: exploring pedagogy, play and fidelity and their implications for the design process. International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL) 2, 4 (2012), 41–60.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. RStudio Team. 2022. RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA. http://www.rstudio.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Paschal Sheeran and Thomas L Webb. 2016. The intention–behavior gap. Social and personality psychology compass 10, 9 (2016), 503–518.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Miguel Sicart. 2008. Defining game mechanics. Game studies 8, 2 (2008), 1–14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Michael D Slater and Donna Rouner. 2002. Entertainment—education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion. Communication theory 12, 2 (2002), 173–191.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Ton AM Spil, Vincent Romijnders, David Sundaram, Nilmini Wickramasinghe, and Björn Kijl. 2021. Are serious games too serious? Diffusion of wearable technologies and the creation of a diffusion of serious games model. International journal of information management 58 (2021), 102202.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. PsycApps Ltd (UK). 2022. eQuoo. https://www.equoogame.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Viswanath Venkatesh, James YL Thong, and Xin Xu. 2012. Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly 36, 1 (2012), 157–178.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Peter Vorderer, Werner Wirth, Feliz Ribeiro Gouveia, Frank Biocca, Timo Saari, Lutz Jäncke, Saskia Böcking, Holger Schramm, Andre Gysbers, Tilo Hartmann, 2004. MEC Spatial Presence Questionnaire. (2004).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Patrick Weber and Werner Wirth. 2014. When and how narratives persuade: The role of suspension of disbelief in didactic versus hedonic processing of a candidate film. Journal of Communication 64, 1 (2014), 125–144.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Hadley Wickham, Mara Averick, Jennifer Bryan, Winston Chang, Lucy D’Agostino McGowan, Romain François, Garrett Grolemund, Alex Hayes, Lionel Henry, Jim Hester, Max Kuhn, Thomas Lin Pedersen, Evan Miller, Stephan Milton Bache, Kirill Müller, Jeroen Ooms, David Robinson, Dana Paige Seidel, Vitalie Spinu, Kohske Takahashi, Davis Vaughan, Claus Wilke, Kara Woo, and Hiroaki Yutani. 2019. Welcome to the tidyverse. Journal of Open Source Software 4, 43 (2019), 1686. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01686Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Kevin D Williams. 2010. The effects of homophily, identification, and violent video games on players. Mass Communication and Society 14, 1 (2010), 3–24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. Richard D. Yentes and Francisco Wilhelm. 2021. careless: Procedures for computing indices of careless responding. R package version 1.2.1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Boonghee Yoo and Naveen Donthu. 2001. Developing a scale to measure the perceived quality of an Internet shopping site (SITEQUAL). Quarterly journal of electronic commerce 2, 1 (2001), 31–45.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Storifying a Serious Mobile Game: Exploring Players’ Perception of Storification Features, Narrative Engagement, and Behavioral Intentions

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        Academic Mindtrek '22: Proceedings of the 25th International Academic Mindtrek Conference
        November 2022
        407 pages
        ISBN:9781450399555
        DOI:10.1145/3569219

        Copyright © 2022 Owner/Author

        This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 16 November 2022

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate110of207submissions,53%
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)223
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)23

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format