1 s2.0 S0268401215000420 Main

International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
International Journal of Information Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijinfomgt
Why do people use gamication services?

Juho Hamari a,b , Jonna Koivisto a,
a
b
Game Research Lab, School of Information Sciences, FIN-33014 University of Tampere, Finland
Aalto University School of Business, P.O. Box 21220, 00076 Aalto, Finland
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Available online 13 May 2015
Keywords:
Gamication
Online game
Persuasive technology
eHealth
Technology acceptance
a b s t r a c t
In recent years, technology has been increasingly harnessed for motivating and supporting people toward
various individually and collectively benecial behaviors. One of the most popular developments in this
eld has been titled gamication. Gamication refers to technologies that attempt to promote intrinsic
motivations toward various activities, commonly, by employing design characteristic to games. However,
a dearth of empirical evidence still exists regarding why people want to use gamication services. Based
on survey data gathered from the users of a gamication service, we examine the relationship between
utilitarian, hedonic and social motivations and continued use intention as well as attitude toward gamication. The results suggest that the relationship between utilitarian benets and use is mediated by the
attitude toward the use of gamication, while hedonic aspects have a direct positive relationship with
use. Social factors are strongly associated with attitude, but show only a weak further association with
the intentions to continue the use of a gamication service.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
In recent years, technology has been increasingly harnessed for
motivating people and providing support toward various individually and collectively benecial behaviors. Perhaps the most popular
development in this area has been gamication, which refers to
technologies that attempt to promote intrinsic motivations toward
various activities, commonly, by employing design characteristic to
games (Deterding, Dixon, Khaled, & Nacke, 2011; Hamari, Huotari,
& Tolvanen, 2015; Huotari & Hamari, 2012). Typical elements in
gamication include, for example, points, leaderboards, achievements, feedback, clear goals and narrative (see Hamari, Koivisto,
& Pakkanen 2014; Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, 2014 for reviews of
gamication and persuasion mechanics in related research). Gamication has thus far been implemented in a variety of contexts,
from exercise (Fitocracy) and overall wellbeing (Mindbloom), to
sustainable consumption (Recyclebank) and consumer behavior
(Foursquare). Gamication is a manifold socio-technological phenomenon with claimed potential to provide a multitude of benets
(Deterding et al., 2011; Huotari & Hamari, 2012) such as enjoyment
as well as social benets through communities and social interaction. Moreover, as the goal of gamication is often to progress
Corresponding author. Tel.: +358 50 318 73 63.
E-mail addresses: juho.hamari@uta. (J. Hamari), jonna.koivisto@uta.
(J. Koivisto).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.04.006
0268-4012/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
some external utilitarian goal, therefore, gamication also provides

utilitarian benets.
Denitions of gamication (Deterding et al., 2011; Hamari et al.,
2015; Huotari & Hamari, 2012) focus on the term gamefulness,
which implies that the main dening factor of gamication pertains
to, in a similar manner as games, the self-purposeful nature of activities. While gamication design, therefore, can be characterized as
aiming for self-purposeful and hedonistic use, the ultimate goals
of gamication are commonly related to utilitarian ends; i.e. gamication aims to support extrinsic and valuable outcomes outside
the gamication system. Moreover, it is common for gamication services to also include strong social features (e.g. Foursquare,
Fitocracy) common to various social media (see e.g. Ngai, Tao, and
Moon, 2015). Consequently, social factors have also been hypothesized and examined as determinants of the use of gamication (see
e.g. Hamari & Koivisto, 2015). Another factor discussed in the works
dening the concept (Deterding et al., 2011; Hamari et al., 2015;
Huotari & Hamari, 2012) has been whether gamication provides
more free-form, playful experiences (paidia) or more structured,
rule-driven experiences (ludus) (see Caillois, 1961 for more on the
continuum of ludus and paidia).
Although research has started to accumulate on the possible
outcomes of gamication (see Section 2 and Hamari, Koivisto,
& Sarsa, 2014 for a review), there is still a dearth of empirical evidence regarding which motivations would actually predict
why people use gamication services and what determines their
420
J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431
attitudes toward them. While obviously relevant from practical and

business perspectives, this problem is also connected to the lack of
theory and conception around gamication.
Therefore, this paper will focus on exploring what benets motivate people to use gamication services. The research model and
hypotheses are developed as a triangulation of the theories on
human motivations (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Lindenberg, 2001; Ryan
& Deci, 2000), technology adoption research (Davis, 1989; van
der Heijden, 2004; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000; Venkatesh, 1999,
2000), and previous research on games and gamication (see e.g.
Deterding et al., 2011; Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, 2014; Huotari &
Hamari, 2012; Ryan, Rigby, & Przybylski, 2006; Yee, 2006). Based
on this theoretical background, there is ample support for investigating three distinct areas to uncover predictors for the adoption
of gamication; utility, hedonism and social benet. On the basis
of survey data gathered from users of a gamication service, we
examine the relationship between these predictors and continued
use intentions as well as attitudes toward gamication. An empirical analysis of survey data using structural equation modeling was
performed.
2. Theory and hypotheses

While gamication has been considered to be a novel IT development, other different forms of information technology have also
been employed for persuasive and behavioral change purposes in
similar contexts, although potentially differing from gamication
in terms of their methods of affecting motivations and behavior
(Hamari et al., 2015). For example, systems such as persuasive technologies and behavior change support systems have been used
to inuence psychological states and behaviors. These systems
focus mainly on social and communicative persuasion and attitude
change (Fogg, 2003; Hamari, Koivisto, & Pakkanen, 2014; OinasKukkonen & Harjumaa, 2009; Oinas-Kukkonen, 2013). Similarly,
loyalty programs can resemble gamication via the use of collectibles and other redeemable points, although loyalty programs
place emphasis on economic incentives and customer loyalty as
their end goal (Sharp & Sharp, 1997). Most loyalty programs aim
to offer economic benets (redeemable by points) from the continuous use of services, and most likely invoke extrinsic motivations
(Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999). Furthermore, decision support systems can also be seen as aimed to affect the decisions and decision
processes (Sprague, 1980). While gamication too functions as
a type of decision support system, conceptual developments in
the decision support system space mostly focus on methods of
improving decision making by making information more readily
and effectively available, as well as by improving the analysis
of the data being used as the basis of the decision making process (Sprague, 1980). Gamication on the other hand, aims to
support decision making by means of affective rather than cognitive processes. Moreover, in many instances, gamication has
been employed to encourage people to make good decisions,
which relates the phenomenon to a concept of choice architecture dened in behavioral economics. This concept, which entails
an optimistic view to behavioral biases, is a form of soft paternalism that tries to inuence choices in a way that will make
choosers better off, as judged by themselves (Thaler & Sunstein,
2003). The perspective guides to design decision making situations in such a way that benecial biases could be amplied, while
harmful biases could be avoided (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008). In
summary, as a departure from other ISs aiming to change peoples behavior, gamication is aimed at invoking users intrinsic
motivations commonly through design reminiscent from games
(Deterding et al., 2011; Hamari et al., 2015; Huotari & Hamari,
2012).
Research on gamication particularly has been conducted in a

range of areas; e.g. in the domains of exercise (Hamari & Koivisto,
2014, 2015; Koivisto & Hamari, 2014), health (Jones, Madden,
& Wengreen, 2014), education (e.g. Bonde et al., 2014; Christy
& Fox, 2014; Marcos, Domnguez, Saenz-de-Navarrete, & Pags,
2014; Denny, 2013; Domnguez et al., 2013; Farzan & Brusilovsky,
2011; Filsecker & Hickey, 2014; Hakulinen, Auvinen, & Korhonen,
2013; Simes, Daz Redondo, & Fernndez Vilas, 2013), commerce
(Hamari, 2013, 2015a), intra-organizational communication and
activity (Farzan et al., 2008a, 2008b; Thom, Millen, & DiMicco,
2012), government services (Bista, Nepal, Paris, & Colineau, 2014),
public engagement (Tolmie, Chamberlain, & Benford, 2014), environmental behavior (Lee, Ceyhan, Jordan-Cooley, & Sung, 2013;
Lounis, Pramatari, & Theotokis, 2014), marketing and advertising
(Cechanowicz, Gutwin, Brownell, & Goodfellow, 2013; Terlutter
& Capella, 2013), and activities such as crowdsourcing (Eickhoff,
Harris, de Vries, & Srinivasan, 2012; Ipeirotis & Gabrilovich, 2014),
to name a few. A recent review on empirical works on gamication (Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, 2014) indicated that most
gamication studies reported positive effects from the gamication
implementations. Beyond investigating the effects and benets of
gamication, we still lack in understanding on which factors predict
why people use gamication services.
When investigating issues related to why people use certain
technologies or services, we deal with the questions of technology adoption and acceptance, on which a long vein of literature
exists among the information systems research eld. This technology adoption literature has traditionally distinguished between
services and systems based on their use objectives and functions;
services which aim to fulll objectives external to the service use
itself have been referred to as utilitarian (Davis, 1989; van der
Heijden, 2004), while services used for entertainment purposes and
for the sake of using the service itself have been titled hedonic (van
der Heijden, 2004). According to established literature (e.g. Davis,
1989; van der Heijden, 2004), utilitarian systems serve instrumental purposes, such as the productivity needs of performing tasks
efciently and with maximized ease. When an individual is intrinsically motivated, they are considered to perform an activity for
the sake of doing it, rather than for any external goals. The enjoyment derived from the behavior is thought to be enough to incite its
performance, and to create an optimal or autotelic experience (see
e.g. Cskszentmihlyi, 1990). Therefore, systems that aim at invoking these kinds of positive experiences are referred to as hedonic
systems. When we consider gamication from the perspective of
this system type dichotomy, it would be difcult to categorize it
as either utilitarian or hedonic since there is reason to believe
that gamication provides both benets; utilitarian benets such
as productivity, and hedonic benets such as enjoyment. Therefore, gamication poses an interesting class of systems from the
theoretical standpoint of classifying system types.
In a similar manner to system types, human motivation has been
commonly and popularly abstracted to stem from two sources,
external and internal. One of the most widely employed theories on
human motivation (self-determination theory) postulates that an
action may be extrinsically or intrinsically motivated (Deci & Ryan,
1985). Extrinsic motivation refers to motivations arising from outside goals or conditions such as being motivated to perform a task
in order to receive nancial compensation for it. Thus, the source
of motivation is external. Intrinsic motivation on the other hand,
refers to self-purposeful behavior and being internally motivated,
without external forces affecting the will to act. The more a behavior provides effects such as stimulation, behavioral conrmation of
self and others, or status and self-improvement for the individual,
the more it is experienced as enjoyable and the longer someone
will be willing to continue with it without any external reward
(Lindenberg, 2001). Consequently, being intrinsically motivated,
for example during training, has been considered as benecial for

the intervention outcomes (Deci, 1975; Venkatesh, 1999), and may
create more favorable circumstances for improvement than deriving ones motivation from external sources. This notion regarding
the positive association between intrinsic motivation and improvement in performance is a core reason why gamication is expected
to be efcient (Huotari & Hamari, 2012; Ryan et al., 2006).
Relating to the theory surrounding human motivations, the use
of utilitarian systems is commonly considered to be extrinsically
motivated (van der Heijden, 2004). This means that the extrinsically
motivated user has an external goal and the purpose of the service
is to make the goal more efciently attainable. Conversely, hedonic
services seek to make the system entertaining and to invoke enjoyment. In other words, hedonic systems seek to make the activity
intrinsically motivating and the user wishes to use the system simply for the sake of it. Consequently, the enjoyment of using the
service promotes prolonged use (van der Heijden, 2004), regardless of the potential utilitarian benets. Moreover, hedonic systems
such as games and game-like systems aim at inducing experiences
of autonomy, competence, and relatedness regarding the activity
(Ryan et al., 2006). These experiences increase the likelihood of a
task being or becoming intrinsically motivated (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
Therefore, gamication could be considered to aim at motivating the user toward utilitarian goals through hedonic, intrinsically
motivated behavior. Hence, gamication can be seen as a hedonic
tool for productivity.
In addition to the utilitarian and hedonic characteristics of gamied systems, an aspect commonly affecting contemporary systems
is the implementation of social features. Following the success
and popularity of social networking services, the power of social
interaction is being increasingly harnessed in both utilitarian and
hedonic-oriented systems in a variety of contexts. This development creates further blending between different system types and
their functions. The use of social features draws from the fact that
human beings are social creatures with the need to experience
relatedness, i.e. being a part of something and longing for acceptance (Deci & Ryan, 2000). When social features are implemented
in a system, the social community answers these needs of relatedness and further supports the core activities of the service through,
for example, the recognition and mutual benets derived from the
social interaction (Hamari & Koivisto, 2013).
Many of the theoretical frameworks mentioned above tend to
form strictly dened categories related to motivations and system types. However, it should be noted that several motivations
and motivational sources may inuence behavior at the same time.
According to Lindenberg (2001), the strongest motivation becomes
predominant, and affects how the behavior is framed. This further affects the cognitive processes relating to the behavior. The
weaker motivations do not disappear despite being secondary to
the predominant one, but instead, they continue to exert background inuence (Lindenberg, 2001). To exemplify, a behavior may
be mainly motivated by extrinsic motivations (such as nancial
compensation for the activity), but intrinsic motivations (such as
enjoyment) may still act as a secondary inuence. From the point
of view of gamication, this view of human motivation posits an
interesting perspective as it reminds us that several motivational
sources, extrinsic as well as intrinsic, may simultaneously act as
drivers for the behavior.
Furthermore, the various utilitarian, hedonic and social benets derived from the gamication may act as determinants of
attitude toward the acceptance and use of the technology. In general, attitudes are formed based on the belief that certain outcomes
are associated with certain behaviors. These beliefs and outcomes
are valued as either positive or negative (Ajzen, 1991). Moreover,
attitudes toward behaviors have been shown to be reliable predictors of behavioral intentions, along with social inuence (Ajzen,
421
1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). In a gamication context, an attitude toward the gamied service can be similarly be considered to
affect the intention to use it.
To investigate the factors that drive the use of gamication,
we examine the relationship between various antecedents and
user intentions of continuing the use of the system. The studied dependent variable is therefore continued use, which refers
to the intentions to continue using the system in the future
(Bhattacherjee, 2001). The benets of gamication are divided into
three categories: (1) utilitarian, operationalized as usefulness and
ease of use, (2) hedonic, operationalized as enjoyment and playfulness, and (3) social, operationalized as recognition and social
inuence. Furthermore, the relationship between attitude and continued use intentions is examined. See Fig. 1 for the research model
and hypotheses.
2.1. Utilitarian aspects
In literature related to technology use, the perceived utility of
systems has commonly been operationalized as perceived usefulness, which refers to the extent of the belief that a particular system
enhances the performance of a task (Davis, 1989). Prior research has
suggested that perceived usefulness mostly predicts the use intentions of a system (Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Venkatesh &
Davis, 2000), in contexts such as organizational and work environments where the system is used for utilitarian purposes and for
reaching outside goals. Conversely, in contexts with hedonic use
objectives, the usefulness of the system has been indicated to be a
less important determinant of usage intentions (van der Heijden,
2004). For example, when examined in the domain of online games,
a signicant, although weak relationship was found between usefulness and attitude, while the connection of usefulness and use
intentions was insignicant (Hsu & Lu, 2004). However, as gamied systems contain a utilitarian dimension in addition to the
hedonic design, then the usefulness of the system is presumed to
be essential for their continued use. Therefore, examining the relationship between usefulness and both attitude and use intentions
is essential and highly interesting.
If the gamication is perceived as easy to use, it may promote
senses of efciency as well as experiences of an obstacle-free use
of the system. These in turn may generate more a positive attitude
and an increased willingness to continue using the service. Ease of
use has especially been proliferated in technology acceptance literature as one of the main antecedents for technology adoption. It
refers to the individuals perception of the required effort to use
a system (Davis, 1989). Moreover, ease of use has been regarded
an important predictor of use for utilitarian information systems,
since perceiving the system as easy to use is considered to improve
the efciency of the humancomputer interaction, and therefore to
have a positive impact on the volume and quality of the utilitarian
output of that system. In other words, when other aspects are equal,
the ease of using a system may cause it to be perceived as more
useful (Venkatesh, 1999). Consistently with these considerations,
prior research has shown that ease of use has a positive effect on
the intentions to use a system (Davis et al., 1989; Venkatesh, 1999,
2000). Furthermore, ease of use has also been considered important for attitude formation (Davis, 1989). As gamication refers
to employing elements for gameful interactions, then gamication
may be considered to promote hedonic experiences, and consequently, hedonic use. In contexts with hedonic use, ease of use has
been shown to positively affect both attitude (Hsu & Lu, 2004; Wang
& Scheepers, 2012) and continued use intentions (Atkinson & Kydd,
1997; van der Heijden, 2004). As hedonically oriented services are
intended to be enjoyable to use, then interaction with the system
is highlighted and ease of use becomes central in determining the
user acceptance (van der Heijden, 2004).
422
H1.1
Ulitarian
Usefulness
Atude
H1.2
H2.1
Ease of use
H2.2
H3.1
Hedonic
Enjoyment
H3.2
H4.1
H7
Playfulness
H4.2
H5.1
Recognion
Social
H5.2
H6.1
Social
inuence
Connued
use
H6.1
Fig. 1. Hypothesis model.
Therefore, we propose the following hypotheses regarding the

relationships between the variables related to utilitarian benets
and dependent variables in the dataset:
H1.1.
Usefulness is positively associated with attitude.
H1.2.
Usefulness is positively associated with continued use.
H2.1.
Ease of use is positively associated with attitude.
H2.2.
Ease of use is positively associated with continued use.
2.2. Hedonic aspects

In the literature related to technology use, the hedonic user
experiences have often been operationalized as the abstract experience of perceived enjoyment. Perceived enjoyment refers to the
extent to which the use of the system is perceived as enjoyable on
its own (Davis, 1989). In the context of games, game-like systems
and other systems used for entertainment purposes, the enjoyment
of using the system has been shown to be an important factor affecting use intentions (See e.g. Atkinson & Kydd, 1997; Hamari, 2015b;
Mntymki & Riemer, 2014; Moon & Kim, 2001; van der Heijden,
2004; Venkatesh, 1999). Therefore, there is reason to assume that
similarly to games, enjoyment will positively inuence the use
intentions of a gamied service. Furthermore, it is to be expected
that if a service is perceived as enjoyable, then the attitude toward
the system is likely to be positive as well. A positive relationship
between enjoyment and attitude has been found in hedonically
oriented services such as mobile games (Ha, Yoon, & Choi, 2007),
online video games (Lin & Bhattacherjee, 2010), and social virtual
worlds (Mntymki & Salo, 2011; Mntymki, Merikivi, Verhagen,
Feldberg, & Rajala, 2014; Shin, 2009).
In addition to sheer enjoyment, gamication is often claimed
to aim at making use of systems more playful. The social contextual cues that frame the activity may affect how it is perceived
(Perry & Ballou, 1997; Webster & Martocchio, 1992). For example,
whether an activity is framed as work or play may have an inuence on the attitude formation toward the activity (Sandelands,
1988; Venkatesh, 1999; Webster & Martocchio, 1993; see also
Lieberoth, 2014). Moreover, when an activity is gamied, the gamication potentially proposes a new, creative way of approaching
the activity. The interaction with a gamication system may, therefore, create experiences of playfulness (on playfulness, see e.g.
Lieberman, 1977; Venkatesh, 1999; Webster & Martocchio, 1992).
In the context of computer use, the concept of playfulness has been
dened as cognitive spontaneity in interactions with the system
(Martocchio & Webster, 1992). In other words, playfulness refers to
explorative and creative behavior when interacting with the system. Inducing playful interaction and experiences from system use
has been shown to be benecial, for example, in training contexts.
Playful interactions have also been considered to promote creative
and exploratory behavior, which benets the learning process and
leads to better learning results (Perry & Ballou, 1997).
Therefore, we posit the following hypotheses regarding the relationships between the variables related to the hedonic benets and
dependent variables in the dataset:
H3.1.
Enjoyment is positively associated with attitude.
H3.2.
Enjoyment is positively associated with continued use.
H4.1.
Playfulness is positively associated with attitude.
H4.2.
Playfulness is positively associated with continued use.
2.3. Social aspects

In the literature surrounding technology adoption, the social
aspects are commonly operationalized as social inuence, which
refers to an individuals perception of how important others regard
the target behavior and whether they expect one to perform that
behavior (Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Similarly to other
environments, in the context of gamication, such social inuence can be expected to be an important factor affecting attitudes
and use intentions (Ajzen, 1991; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). In the
service examined in this study, the target behavior is the use of
gamication to motivate oneself (to exercise). Social inuence is
then likely to reect the users perceptions of how other users perceive the use of the service. In line with Bock, Zmud, Kim, and Lee
(2005), Lewis, Agarwal, and Sambamurthy (2003) and Venkatesh

and Davis (2000), we propose that the social inuence directly
affects attitude, as well as those behavioral intentions that are
mediated by attitude.
Furthermore, on a general level, human beings inherently long
for relatedness and acceptance from those near them (Deci &
Ryan, 2000). The social interaction facilitated within a service may
potentially satisfy these social needs (Zhang, 2008). Such social
interaction may also create, for example, a sense of recognition,
which refers to the social feedback users receive on their behaviors (Hernandez, Montaner, Sese, & Urquizu, 2011; Hsu & Lin,
2008). When interacting with the community, a user potentially
receives recognition from the other users when interacting with
them (Cheung, Chiu, & Lee, 2011; Lin, 2008). In consequence, the
service is potentially more positively conceived when it produces
a sense of recognition from others (Preece, 2001), thus positively
affecting the users attitude toward using the service.
Therefore, we hypothesize the following regarding the relationships between the variables related to the social benets and
dependent variables in the dataset:
H5.1.
Recognition is positively associated with attitude.
H5.2.
Recognition is positively associated with continued use.
H6.1.
Social inuence is positively associated with attitude.
H6.2. Social inuence is positively associated with continued use.
2.4. Attitude
In this study, attitude toward service use refers to the overall
evaluation of the systems usage, be it favorable or unfavorable (Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). A strong relationship
between attitude and use intentions has been shown in several studies (e.g. Baker & White, 2010; Bock et al., 2005; Lin &
Bhattacherjee, 2010; Mntymki et al., 2014). Consequently, in a
gamication context, the relationship of attitude and continued use
is suspected to be similar.
Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis regarding the
relationship between attitude and continued use in the dataset:
H7.
Attitude positively inuences continued use.
423
3. Data and methods

3.1. Data
The data was gathered via a questionnaire from the users of
Fitocracy, an online service that gamies exercise. The service
enables the tracking of ones exercise and the user enters their exercise details into the system. Gamication is further incorporated
into the service by rewarding the user with a point value allocated
to a given exercise. When a user logs an activity, the system calculates the point value that the user gains with the exercise. The point
value is adjusted based on applicable details, such as number of repetitions, distance, time, intensity or weights, provided by the user.
For example, lifting heavier weights yields more points than lifting
lighter weights, or running for 30 min gives more points than running for 20 min. However, a greater number of repeats with lighter
weights may ultimately result in a higher point value than fewer
repeats with heavier weights, etc.
Based on the points gained by the user, the service reports
the prole level the user has reached. By gaining more points,
the service enables level-ups. Furthermore, the service enables
achievements (Hamari & Eranti, 2011) for ones actions, along with
completing quests with pre-set exercise conditions. Other service
users can provide comments and likes, and thus offer encouragement on the exercise reports, achievements, and level-ups of
other users. The service bears similarities to popular social networking services such as Facebook, as it offers a venue for social
activity such as group-forming and communication, incorporates
prole-building and also the possibility of sharing content (see e.g.
Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Lin & Lu, 2011). At the time of gathering the
data, the service could be used with an iPhone application or via a
Web browser. An Android application was released while the data
gathering neared its completion.
The survey was conducted by posting a description of the study
and the survey link on a related discussion forum and in groups
within the service. The survey was accessible only to users of the
service. The survey was active for three months during which 200
usable responses were recorded. Respondents were entered into a
prize draw for one $50 Amazon gift certicate.
Table 1 outlines the demographic details of the respondents. As
can be seen, the gender divide of the sample was fairly equal. Ages
between 20 and 29 are more represented in the data than other
age groups, however, the age distribution is wide with respondents
Table 1
Demographic information of respondents, including gender, age, time using the service and exercise information.
Frequency
Frequency
Percent
51
49
Length of experience
Less than 1 month
13 months
24
38
12
19
(mean = 29.5, median = 27.5)

9
51
54
41
22
4.5
25.5
27
20.5
11
36 months
69 months
912 months
1215 months
1518 months
More than 18 months
29
26
33
38
7
5
14.5
13
16.5
19
3.5
2.5
16
3
4
8
1.5
2
Exercise sessions per week

14
59
1014
15 or more
(mean = 5.3, median = 5.0)

83
41.5
106
53.0
6
3.0
5
2.5
Exercise hours per week

14
59
1014
15 or more
(mean = 7.2, median = 6.0)

51
25.5
99
49.5
40
20.0
10
5.0
Gender
Female
Male
102
98
Age
Less than 20
2024
2529
3034
3539
4044
4549
50 or more
Percent
424
Table 2
Measurement instrument.
Construct
Name
Included/total items
Adapted from
ATT
CUI
ENJ
EOU
PLAY
USE
REC
Attitude
Continuance intentions for system use
Enjoyment
Ease of use
Playfulness
Usefulness
Recognition
4/4
4/4
4/4
4/4
7/9
5/5
4/4
SI
Social inuence
4/4
Ajzen (1991)
Bhattacherjee (2001)
van der Heijden (2004)
Davis (1989)
Webster and Martocchio (1992)
Davis (1989)
Hernandez et al. (2011), Hsu and Lin (2008), Lin and
Bhattacherjee (2010), and Lin (2008)
Ajzen (1991)
featuring in all of the categories. The lengths of experience with the

service reported by the respondents are distributed rather evenly.
The details of the amounts of exercise reported by respondents are
also described in Table 1.
3.2. Measurement instrument
All variables contained 4 items, except for one which contained
9 items and one containing 5 items. Each variable was measured
with a 7-point Likert scale (strongly disagree strongly agree). All
operationalizations of the psychometric constructs were adapted
from previously published sources (see Table 2). The questionnaire
items can be found in Appendix A.
3.3. Validity and reliability
The model-testing was conducted via the component-based
PLS-SEM in SmartPLS 2.0 M3 (Ringle, Wende, & Will, 2005). Compared to co-variance-based structural equation methods (CB-SEM),
the key advantage of component-based PLS (PLS-SEM) estimation
is that it is non-parametric, and therefore makes no restrictive
assumptions about the distributions of the data. Secondly, PLS-SEM
is considered to be a more suitable method for prediction-oriented
studies (such as the present study), while co-variance-based SEM
is better suited to testing which models best t the data (Anderson
& Gerbing 1988; Chin, Marcolin, & Newsted, 2003).
Convergent validity (see Table 3) was assessed with three
metrics: average variance extracted (AVE), composite reliability
(CR) and Cronbachs alpha (Alpha). All of the convergent validity
metrics were clearly greater than the thresholds cited in relevant
literature (AVE should be >0.5, CR >0.7 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981),
and Cronbachs alpha >0.7 (Nunnally, 1978)). Only well-established
measurement items were used (see Appendix A). There was no
missing data, so no imputation methods were used. We can therefore conclude that the convergent requirements of validity and
reliability for the model were met.
Discriminant validity was assessed, rstly, through the comparison of the square root of the AVE of each construct to all of the
correlations between it and other constructs (see Fornell & Larcker,
1981), where all of the square root of the AVEs should be greater
than any of the correlations between the corresponding construct
and another construct (Chin, 1998; Jreskog & Srbom, 1996).
Secondly, in accordance with the work of Pavlou, Liang, and Xue

(2007), we determined that no inter-correlation between constructs was higher than 0.9. Thirdly, we assessed the discriminant
validity by conrming that each item had the highest loading with
its corresponding construct (see Appendix B). All three tests indicated that the discriminant validity and reliability was acceptable.
In addition, in order to reduce the likelihood of common method
bias, we randomized the order of the measurement items on the
survey to limit the respondents ability to detect patterns between
the items (Cook, Campbell, & Day, 1979). Common method bias
refers to a situation where there is variance that is attributable to
the measurement method rather than to the constructs the measures represent (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003).
Nevertheless, we tested whether common method bias existed in
our data by controlling for the effects of an unmeasured latent
methods factor as proposed by Podsakoff et al. (2003), and in the
same manner as practically demonstrated in a PLS-SEM environment by Liang, Saraf, Hu, and Xue (2007). According to Williams,
Edwards, and Vandenberg (2003), if the loadings of the method
factor are statistically insignicant and/or considerably low in
comparison to indicator loadings of the substantive factors, there
is no evidence of common method bias. Additionally, the square of
the loadings represents the percentage of the variance explained.
Common method bias test was also run to provide evidence that
possible high inter-correlations between constructs is not caused
by a systematic error caused by the measurement instrument. As
reported in Appendix C, we found a few signicant loadings on the
method factor, however, they explain a negligibly small share of
the variance (0.009 on average). The indicator loadings however,
explain 0.726 of variance on average in substantive factors. Therefore, we could be condent that common method bias is not likely
to be an issue.
The sample size satises different criteria for the lower bounds
of sample size for PLS-SEM: (1) ten times the largest number of
structural paths directed at a particular construct in the inner
path model (therefore, the sample size threshold for the model
in this study would be 70 cases) (Chin, 1998) and (2) according
to Anderson and Gerbing (1984, 1988), a threshold for any type
of SEM is approximately 150 respondents for models where constructs comprise of three or four indicators. (3) The sample size
also satises stricter criteria relevant for variance-based SEM: for
example, Bentler and Chou (1987) recommend a ratio of 5 cases
Table 3
Convergent and discriminant validity.
ATT
CUI
ENJ
EOU
PLAY
USE
REC
SI
AVE
CR
Alpha
ATT
CUI
ENJ
EOU
PLAY
USE
REC
SI
0.795
0.735
0.779
0.752
0.568
0.713
0.804
0.735
0.939
0.917
0.934
0.923
0.901
0.925
0.943
0.917
0.914
0.880
0.905
0.887
0.870
0.899
0.919
0.879
0.892
0.658
0.672
0.473
0.444
0.791
0.587
0.666
0.857
0.677
0.521
0.429
0.655
0.397
0.490
0.883
0.620
0.410
0.737
0.566
0.568
0.867
0.294
0.500
0.371
0.393
0.754
0.447
0.267
0.434
0.844
0.464
0.636
0.897
0.461
0.857
Ulitarian
Usefulness
.513***
Atude
.122
Ease of use
425
.031
.126*
Enjoyment
.015
Hedonic
.327***
.309**
.056
Playfulness
.104
.226***
Social
Recognion
-.085
Connued
use
.190***
Social
inuence
-.035
Fig. 2. The research model with signicant relationships: * p < 0.1, * * p < 0.05, * * * p <0.01.
per observed variable (therefore, the sample size threshold for the
model in this study would be 175).
The independent variables were tested for multicollinearity
issues. No multicollinearity between the variables existed.
Table 5
Hypothesis support.
H#
Description
Supported
H1.1
Usefulness is positively associated with

attitude.
Usefulness is positively associated with
continued use.
Ease of use is positively associated
with attitude.
Ease of use is positively associated
with continued use.
Enjoyment is positively associated
with attitude.
Enjoyment is positively associated
with continued use.
Playfulness is positively associated
with attitude.
Playfulness is positively associated
with continued use.
Recognition is positively associated
with attitude.
Recognition is positively associated
with continued use.
Social inuence is positively associated
with attitude.
Social inuence is positively associated
with continued use.
Attitude is positively associated with
continued use.
Yes
H1.2
4. Results
H2.1
The path model could account for 71.6% of variance for attitudes toward the gamication service and 56.4% of variance of
the intentions to continue using the service. The results indicate
that utilitarian benets are positively associated with attitude and
continued use. In particular, the perceived usefulness is positively
associated with attitude ( = .513***), as well as indirectly associated with continued use ( = .280***) through attitude. Ease of
use was only associated with continued use directly ( = .126*).
For hedonic predictors, perceived playfulness did not signicantly
predict either of the dependent variables directly, but did have a
weak signicant association with continued use as mediated by
attitude ( = .122*), whereas enjoyment had a positive direct relationship with use ( = .327***, total effect = .331***). Interestingly,
the social factors in the study had a relatively strong direct relationship with attitude ( = .226*** for recognition and = .190***
H2.2
H3.1
H3.2
H4.1
H4.2
H5.1
H5.2
H6.1
H6.2
H7
Table 4
Direct and indirect effects.
Direct effects
Attitude
Usefulness
Ease of use
Enjoyment
Playfulness
Recognition
Social inuence
*
**
***
p < 0.1.
p < 0.05.
p < 0.01.
Total effects (direct

effect + mediated
effect via attitude)
Attitude
Continued use
n/a
0.513***
0.031
0.015
0.056
0.226***
0.190***
**
0.309
0.122
0.126*
0.327***
0.104
0.085
0.035
Continued use
0.309**
0.280***
0.136*
0.331***
0.122*
0.015
0.024
Indirectly
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Indirectly
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
for social inuence), however, they were not further associated

with intentions to continue the use of the gamied service. Furthermore, attitude signicantly predicted continued use intentions
( = 0.309**).
See Table 4 and Fig. 2 for details of the results and Table 5 for a
summary of the hypothesis support.
5. Discussion
In this paper, we examined what motivates people to use
gamication services. We investigated which benets (utilitarian, hedonic or social) are associated with attitudes toward
426
gamication and the intentions to continue using gamied services.

The ndings have several theoretical and practical implications,
which are discussed in detail below.
5.1. Conclusions and implications of the ndings
If we consider gamication from the perspective of the technology acceptance literature (Davis, 1989; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000),
and particularly through the established perception of seeing information systems as being either utilitarian (Davis, 1989; van der
Heijden, 2004) or hedonic (van der Heijden, 2004), the results of
the study provide interesting insights. The established literature
on technology acceptance suggests that the use of utilitarian systems is mainly motivated by perceived usefulness (Davis, 1989;
Venkatesh & Davis, 2000), while the use of hedonic information
systems is motivated by perceived enjoyment (van der Heijden,
2004). The results of this paper, however, suggest that gamication lingers somewhere in the middle of these polar ends (on mixed
systems, see e.g. Gerow, Ayyagari, Thatcher, & Roth, 2013), or alternatively offers the benets of both systems since according to our
results the use of gamication is strongly driven by both utilitarian and hedonic benets/motivations. These ndings conrm the a
priori beliefs and hypotheses set forth at the outset of this research
that, indeed, both utilitarian and hedonic aspects are strong determinants for gamication acceptance. This notion could indicate
potential further research questions about the nature and position
of gamication within the continuum between purely utilitarian
and purely self-purposeful hedonic systems.
However, as the results suggest that the use of gamied services is driven by both utilitarian and hedonic factors, there is an
interesting distinction in their effects. The results show that the
more affective, non-calculating frame of enjoyment has a direct
relationship with how much people are willing to use gamication
services, whereas the more cognitive, utility-seeking factor of usefulness is mediated by attitudes toward the gamied system (see
Zaichkowsky, 1994 on affective vs. cognitive involvement). These
ndings may suggest that enjoyment functions on a less conscious,
less cognitive and less direct level in determining use behavior,
whereas usefulness is more consciously realized and calculated,
and therefore, also manifests in more positive attitudes toward the
behavior of using gamication.
In a similar vein, the direct inuence of ease of use is an interesting deviation from how it is traditionally perceived in the literature
on the acceptance of utilitarian systems. Ease of use is commonly
dened in terms of a systems effectiveness in reaching utilitarian outcomes through requiring little effort or resources to use
the given system (Davis, 1989). However, ease of use can also
be unavoidably seen as a factor that diminishes negative affective experiences such as the frustration caused by a complex user
interface (see also van der Heijden, 2004). From this perspective,
whereas enjoyment measures gaining positive affective experiences, then ease of use could measure the lack of negative affective
experiences stemming from the user interface of the system. This
is why, in the context of gamication, it might not be so surprising
that enjoyment and ease of use behave similarly as determinants
for the continued use of gamication services; they both have a
direct relationship with use but no clear relationship with attitude
formation. In previous research on technology adoption, strong
support for the effect of ease of use on continued use intentions has
been shown (Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1992; Venkatesh, 2000).
In organizational and utilitarian contexts, previous studies have
shown ease of use to affect attitude only in the post-adoption phase
(Davis et al., 1989). However, in the contexts of hedonic use such
as online and video games, ease of use has been reported to be a
signicant determinant to attitude (Ha et al., 2007; Hsu & Lu, 2004;
Wang & Scheepers, 2012).
Another empirically and theoretically interesting nding concerning gamication is that no direct relationship between
perceived playfulness and either of the dependent variables of attitude or use intention could be established, although a slight indirect
relationship with use intentions as mediated by attitude could be
found. A couple of different interpretations could be considered
for the lack of the direct associations. First, the nding of playfulness having no direct relationship with attitude or use intentions
could result from how the gamication is perceived by the users in
terms of utility or play (Perry & Ballou, 1997; Venkatesh, 1999;
Webster & Martocchio, 1993). If the service is framed and conceived as serving the purposes of utility rather than the purposes of
play, then the perceived playfulness might not constitute an important benet to be derived from the service, and therefore would
not affect either attitude or use intentions signicantly. Secondly,
we suggest that this nding might be an indicator of the actual
nature of what gamication creates in terms of hedonic experiences. According to theorists on play and games, play (paidia) and
games (ludus) (see Caillois, 1961) can be situated at the opposite
ends of a continuum paidia representing free-form activity that
is spontaneous, unstructured and not governed by rules, and ludus
representing structured activity that contains explicit rules that
need to be adhered to. The question of whether gamication offers
more structured experiences as opposed to more explorative and
free-form playfulness has also been an important vein of discussion
in theorizing and conceptualizing gamication (see e.g. Deterding
et al., 2011; Huotari & Hamari, 2012). Our ndings provide further
empirically derived evidence on this issue, at least in the context of
the type of gamication investigated in this study. Fitocracy can be
seen as a rather traditional form of gamication, where the gamifying service design is mostly related to goals, progress and rewards.
These mechanics are prone to provide structure to the activities,
rather than enticing users to independently explore and experiment. Therefore, gamication potentially needs to be considered
more in terms of the ludus perspective, as a system with rules and
structure, which does not necessarily invoke playful experiences.
However, regardless of how gamication is dened, some affordances are more likely to invoke playfulness than others. Also, as
literature on playfulness suggests, individual differences in the tendency of playfully experiencing interactions also exist (Koivisto &
Hamari, 2014; Lieberman, 1977; Webster & Martocchio, 1992).
The results indicated that social factors had no signicant association with use intentions, but positively inuenced attitude toward
the system. The social inuence having no association with use
intentions could potentially be explained by the use context of
gamication, which is mostly voluntary. This nding is in line with
previous research suggesting that when the use of the system is
voluntary, then social inuence does not necessarily directly affect
the intentions to use the system (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). When
adopting mandatory systems however, explicit social inuence in
the form of compliance has been considered to affect use intentions
(Hamari & Koivisto, 2015; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). Compliance
refers to behavior that is performed due to normative reasons, i.e.
the source of inuence has the possibility of rewarding or punishing the individual (Kelman, 1958; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000).
Conversely, in the case of voluntary system use, the social inuence functions primarily through processes of internalization and
identication (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000), that is, the user may internalize the suggestions and opinions of respected peers or consider
their system use as promoting a certain image, and therefore wish
to identify with it (Kelman, 1958; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). These
processes may have an effect on the perceptions regarding the
system, and thus, affect the attitude toward it. Accordingly, several different veins of literature have highlighted the relationship
between social inuence and attitude, such as the theory of reasoned action (Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), discussions
on social proof (Cialdini, 2001) and social comparison (Festinger,

1954).
In addition, research has also indicated that while social
inuence may have a positive effect on attitude, a so-called
attitude-behavior gap (also value-action gap) might exist in many
differing contexts. This refers to a situation where people are willing
to convey a socially favorable image of themselves by communicating a positive attitude toward the same issues as their peers and
immediate important others, while at the same time not comprehensively increasing the related behavior (e.g. Blake, 1999; Flynn,
Bellaby, & Ricci, 2010). One possible explanation for the results concerning the relationship of social factors, attitude and behavioral
intention could stem from such a phenomenon. Ultimately, exploring whether this is the case with gamication exceeds the bounds
of this study, however, it could provide an interesting further line
of inquiry.
In summary, the results of the study suggest that social and
utilitarian aspects are more prone to positively reect on attitude
formation, whereas the hedonic, less cognitive factors have a positive direct relationship with behavior, but a negligible relationship
with attitudes. Moreover, the relationship between perceived usefulness and continued use was shown to be mediated through
attitude. Consequently, the results suggest that hedonic aspects (i.e.
the intrinsic motivators) drive the actual use, whilst utilitarian and
social aspects (i.e. the extrinsic motivators) affect the attitude, and
through attitude, have an effect on use intentions.
5.2. Limitations and avenues for future research
As is commonplace with studies conducted by online surveys,
the data is self-reported and the respondents are self-selected.
Using self-reported data may affect the ndings as the users
responding are potentially more actively engaged with the service
and therefore willing to participate in activities related to it. Thus,
the results possibly disregard the perceptions and intentions of
less active and unengaged users of the service. These issues could
be addressed in future studies, as well as the reasons for not
being/becoming involved in the service. Future research should
427
combine survey data with actual usage data and proper experiments, in order to increase the robustness of research on the topic.
This study was conducted in the context of gamifying physical exercise. While there are no a priori obvious reasons to expect
that the context of gamication would have a clear direct effect on
the results, it is feasible that the results might be, to some degree,
context-dependent. Here the context is voluntary, self-directed
and aimed at motivating the user toward an activity that individuals often have difculties carrying out without support. In this
vein, gamication can be perceived as a kind of self-help method.
Furthermore, the users of the service have decided to use the gamication service themselves by registering with the service. In a case
where the gamication would have been, for example, imposed on
the users, the results might be different. For example, in a study of a
gamied e-commerce service (Hamari, 2013; Hamari, 2015a,b), the
gamication was implemented on an existing service and the users
had obviously registered without prior knowledge of the gameful
interaction to come. Further research could therefore be conducted
in comparing these types of results across different contexts (see
Hamari, Koivisto, & Pakkanen, 2014; Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, 2014
for contexts studied in the current body of research).
Prior research has demonstrated that individual differences in
how benets from gamication are perceived do exist. However,
future research could also consider the effects of personality differ a,
ences and player types (Hamari & Tuunanen, 2014; Kallio, Mayr
& Kaipainen, 2011; Yee, 2006) on the use and experiences relating to gamication. Furthering this line of research could rene the
understanding of how moderating demographic and user related
factors may impact upon the topic.
Acknowledgements
The research has been partially supported by individual study
grants for both authors from the Finnish Cultural Foundation as well
as carried out as part of research projects (40134/13, 40111/14,
40107/14) funded by the Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation
(TEKES). Both authors have contributed to this article equally.
Appendix A.
Survey constructs, items, and sources.
Construct
Item
Loading
Adapted from
Attitude
All things considered, I nd using Fitocracy to be a wise

thing to do.
All things considered, I nd using Fitocracy to be a
good idea.
All things considered, I nd using Fitocracy to be a
positive thing.
All things considered, I nd using Fitocracy to be
favorable.
0.871
Ajzen (1991)
Continued use intentions
Enjoyment
I predict that I will keep using Fitocracy in the future at

least as much as I have used it lately.
I intend to use Fitocracy at least as often within the
next three months as I have previously used.
I predict that I will use Fitocracy more frequently
rather than less frequently.
It is likely that I will use Fitocracy more often rather
than less often during the next couple months.
I nd the experience of the exercise and the related
Fitocracy use enjoyable.
Fitocracy use pleasant.
Fitocracy use exciting.
Fitocracy use interesting.
0.914
0.896
0.884
0.850
Venkatesh and Davis (2000)

and Bhattacherjee (2001)
0.833
0.871
0.875
0.909
0.871
0.852
0.898
van der Heijden (2004)
428
Appendix A (Continued )
Construct
Item
Loading
Adapted from
Ease of use
Using Fitocracy interface does not require a lot of

mental effort.
The interaction with Fitocracy is clear and
understandable.
I nd Fitocracy easy to use.
I nd it easy to get the interface of Fitocracy to do what
I want it to do.
0.690
Davis (1989)
0.926
0.939
0.890
Playfulness
Uninventive (reversed)
Unoriginal (reversed)
Unimaginative (reversed)
Playful
Curious
Creative
Flexible
Experimenting
Spontaneous
0.797
0.858
0.738
0.651
Dropped (<0.6)
0.850
0.725
0.624
Dropped (<0.6)
Webster and Martocchio

(1992)
Usefulness
Using Fitocracy makes it easier for me to start

exercising
Using Fitocracy is useful for purposes of exercise.
Using Fitocracy enables me to accomplish more with
regards to exercise.
I feel more effective with regards to exercise when
using Fitocracy.
I nd Fitocracy useful.
0.807
Davis (1989)
Recognition
Social inuence
0.808
0.867
0.901
0.836
I feel good when my achievements in Fitocracy are

noticed.
I like it when other Fitocracy users comment and like
my exercise.
I like it when my Fitocracy peers notice my exercise
reports.
It feels good to notice that other user has browsed my
Fitocracy feed.
0.880
People who inuence my attitudes would recommend

Fitocracy.
People who are important to me would think
positively of me using Fitocracy.
People who I appreciate would encourage me to use
Fitocracy.
My friends would think using Fitocracy is a good idea.
0.783
Hernandez et al. (2011), Hsu and Lin

(2008), Lin and Bhattacherjee (2010),
and Lin (2008)
0.898
0.939
0.869
Ajzen (1991)
0.890
0.894
0.858
Appendix B.
Factor loadings.
ATT
ATT
ATT
ATT
CUI
CUI
CUI
CUI
ENJ
ENJ
ENJ
ENJ
EOU
EOU
EOU
EOU
PLAY
PLAY
PLAY
PLAY
PLAY
PLAY
PLAY
USE
USE
USE
ATT
CUI
ENJ
EOU
PLAY
USE
REC
SI
0.914
0.896
0.871
0.884
0.567
0.557
0.580
0.550
0.634
0.593
0.573
0.571
0.410
0.417
0.482
0.304
0.326
0.305
0.344
0.350
0.295
0.370
0.338
0.693
0.609
0.623
0.642
0.595
0.529
0.579
0.833
0.850
0.871
0.875
0.597
0.611
0.591
0.593
0.458
0.478
0.554
0.253
0.306
0.268
0.359
0.286
0.276
0.371
0.372
0.632
0.536
0.443
0.577
0.614
0.548
0.654
0.564
0.634
0.593
0.529
0.909
0.871
0.852
0.898
0.567
0.567
0.617
0.349
0.269
0.243
0.346
0.326
0.234
0.368
0.345
0.684
0.615
0.524
0.375
0.423
0.385
0.499
0.481
0.485
0.456
0.363
0.562
0.595
0.444
0.586
0.939
0.890
0.926
0.690
0.167
0.158
0.300
0.151
0.190
0.300
0.252
0.500
0.461
0.279
0.403
0.394
0.408
0.380
0.308
0.379
0.411
0.369
0.376
0.337
0.386
0.349
0.267
0.273
0.292
0.166
0.850
0.624
0.725
0.651
0.738
0.797
0.858
0.427
0.336
0.261
0.738
0.656
0.749
0.681
0.515
0.510
0.635
0.582
0.683
0.601
0.633
0.686
0.435
0.441
0.498
0.341
0.321
0.345
0.416
0.363
0.255
0.331
0.313
0.901
0.808
0.807
0.480
0.576
0.440
0.594
0.389
0.374
0.333
0.262
0.464
0.540
0.545
0.449
0.298
0.348
0.362
0.274
0.153
0.160
0.279
0.261
0.077
0.253
0.192
0.389
0.413
0.312
0.585
0.536
0.638
0.617
0.318
0.361
0.536
0.454
0.476
0.474
0.528
0.529
0.342
0.363
0.374
0.275
0.343
0.240
0.336
0.350
0.267
0.390
0.336
0.587
0.456
0.490
429
Appendix B (Continued )
USE
USE
REC
REC
REC
REC
SI
SI
SI
SI
ATT
CUI
ENJ
EOU
PLAY
USE
REC
SI
0.762
0.635
0.476
0.607
0.502
0.506
0.594
0.593
0.574
0.520
0.591
0.544
0.329
0.410
0.272
0.394
0.422
0.443
0.441
0.370
0.686
0.582
0.528
0.552
0.436
0.506
0.517
0.485
0.500
0.443
0.504
0.338
0.299
0.377
0.305
0.341
0.360
0.304
0.375
0.310
0.435
0.405
0.250
0.268
0.207
0.228
0.361
0.427
0.416
0.274
0.836
0.867
0.423
0.455
0.360
0.415
0.558
0.551
0.589
0.479
0.461
0.369
0.880
0.939
0.898
0.869
0.441
0.424
0.404
0.302
0.565
0.577
0.349
0.444
0.383
0.466
0.858
0.894
0.890
0.783
Appendix C.
Common method bias test.
Item
Construct
Substantive factor loading
t-Value
Variance explained
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
ATT
ATT
ATT
ATT
CUI
CUI
CUI
CUI
ENJ
ENJ
ENJ
ENJ
EOU
EOU
EOU
EOU
PLAY
PLAY
PLAY
PLAY
PLAY
PLAY
PLAY
USE
USE
USE
USE
USE
REC
REC
REC
REC
SI
SI
SI
SI
0.761
0.891
0.931
0.98
0.829
0.789
0.861
0.949
0.767
0.846
0.955
0.956
0.966
0.852
0.778
0.869
0.765
0.92
0.832
0.569
0.638
0.597
0.892
0.816
1.013
0.914
0.611
0.867
0.924
0.883
0.980
0.798
0.811
0.879
0.890
0.851
10.124
12.311
13.734
22.585
13.768
12.454
13.926
25.759
9.721
11.221
13.900
13.749
39.900
25.606
11.441
22.565
10.239
28.287
11.115
7.350
6.679
6.606
26.955
9.486
14.129
17.175
7.564
13.742
20.579
27.467
33.308
18.250
10.706
19.827
19.616
11.383
0.579
0.794
0.867
0.960
0.687
0.623
0.741
0.901
0.588
0.716
0.912
0.914
0.933
0.726
0.605
0.755
0.585
0.846
0.692
0.324
0.407
0.356
0.796
0.666
1.026
0.835
0.373
0.752
0.854
0.780
0.960
0.637
0.658
0.773
0.792
0.724
On average:
0.726
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50(2), 179211.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-t indices for maximum likelihood
conrmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49(2), 155173.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice:
A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3),
411423.
Atkinson, M., & Kydd, C. (1997). Individual characteristics associated with World
Wide Web use: An empirical study of playfulness and motivation. The DATA
BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 28(2), 5362.
Baker, R. K., & White, K. M. (2010). Predicting adolescents use of social networking
sites from an extended theory of planned behaviour perspective. Computers in
Human Behavior, 26(6), 15911597.
Bentler, P. M., & Chou, C. P. (1987). Practical issues in structural modelling. Sociological Methods and Research, 16(1), 78117.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An
expectationconrmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351370.
Method factor loading

0.140
0.022
0.04
0.075
0.026
0.105
0.035
0.096
0.101
0.027
0.056
0.065
0.046
0.050
0.092
0.071
0.063
0.100
0.121
0.104
0.113
0.022
0.037
0.010
0.242
0.049
0.257
0.041
0.054
0.072
0.108
0.091
0.056
0.015
0.006
0.084
t-Value
Variance explained
1.947
0.314
0.542
1.492
0.419
1.416
0.476
1.753
1.253
0.325
0.748
0.815
1.217
1.150
1.439
1.565
0.851
2.141
1.858
1.528
1.413
0.268
0.755
0.130
3.060
0.802
3.045
0.593
1.219
1.925
3.482
2.006
0.739
0.277
0.115
1.089
0.020
0.000
0.002
0.006
0.001
0.011
0.001
0.009
0.010
0.001
0.003
0.004
0.002
0.003
0.008
0.005
0.004
0.010
0.015
0.011
0.013
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.059
0.002
0.066
0.002
0.003
0.005
0.012
0.008
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.007
On average:
0.009
Blake, J. (1999). Overcoming the value-action gap in environmental policy: Tensions

between national policy and local experience. Local Environment, 4(3), 257278.
Bista, S. K., Nepal, S., Paris, C., & Colineau, N. (2014). Gamication for online communities: A case study for delivering government services. International Journal of
Cooperative Information Systems, 23(2).
Bock, G.-W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y.-G., & Lee, J.-N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators,
social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1),
87111.
Bonde, M. T., Makransky, G., Wandall, J., Larsen, M., Morsing, V., Jarmer, M., et al.
(2014). Improving biotech education through gamied laboratory simulations.
Nature Biotechnology, 32(7), 694697.
Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Denition, history, and
scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210230.
Cechanowicz, J., Gutwin, C., Brownell, B., & Goodfellow, L. (2013). Effects of gamication on participation and data quality in a real-world market research domain.
In Proceedings of Gamication 13 Stratford, Ontario, Canada, October 24, (pp.
5865).
Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Harnessing the science of persuasion. Harvard Business Review,
79(9), 7279.
430
Caillois, R. (1961). Les jeux et les homes. New York, NY: Free Press.
Cheung, C. M. K., Chiu, P.-Y., & Lee, M. K. O. (2011). Online social networks: Why do
students use Facebook? Computers in Human Behavior, 27(4), 13371343.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach for structural equation
modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp.
295336). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent
variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a
Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study.
Information Systems Research, 14(2), 189217.
Christy, K. R., & Fox, J. (2014). Leaderboards in a virtual classroom: A test of stereotype threat and social comparison explanations for womens math performance.
Computers and Education, 78, 6677.
Cook, T. D., Campbell, D. T., & Day, A. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and
analysis issues for eld settings. Boston: Houghton Mifin.
Cskszentmihlyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York:
Harper and Row.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance
of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319340.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer
technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8),
9821002.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation
to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14),
11111132.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.
Deci, E., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments
examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological
Bulletin, 125(6), 627668.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Self-determination. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons
Inc.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The what and why of goal pursuits: Human
needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4),
227268.
de-Marcos, L., Domnguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., & Pags, C. (2014). An empirical
study comparing gamication and social networking on e-learning. Computers
and Education, 75, 8291.
Denny, P. (2013). The effect of virtual achievements on student engagement. In
Proceedings of CHI 2013: Changing perspectives Paris, France, April 27May 2,
2013, (pp. 763772).
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements
to gamefulness: dening gamication. In Proceedings of the 15th international
academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments Tampere,
Finland, September 2830, 2011, (pp. 915).
Domnguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., de-Marcos, L., Fernndez-Sanz, L., Pags, C., &
Martnez-Herriz, J.-J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers and Education, 63, 380392.
Eickhoff, C., Harris, C. G., de Vries, A. P., & Srinivasan, P. (2012). Quality through ow
and immersion: Gamifying crowdsourced relevance assessments. In Proceedings
of the 35th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in
information retrieval Portland, Oregon, USA, August 1216, 2012, (pp. 871880).
Farzan, R., & Brusilovsky, P. (2011). Encouraging user participation in a course recommender system: An impact on user behavior. Computers in Human Behavior,
27(1), 276284.
Farzan, R., DiMicco, J. M., Millen, D. R., Brownholtz, B., Geyer, W., & Dugan, C. (2008a).
When the experiment is over: Deploying an incentive system to all the users. In
Symposium on Persuasive Technology Aberdeen, Scotland, April, 2008.
Farzan, R., DiMicco, J. M., Millen, D. R., Brownholtz, B., Geyer, W., & Dugan, C. (2008b).
Results from deploying a participation incentive mechanism within the enterprise. In Proceedings of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference on human factors
in computing systems Florence, Italy, April 510, 2008, (pp. 563572).
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2),
117140.
Filsecker, M., & Hickey, D. T. (2014). A multilevel analysis of the effects of external
rewards on elementary students motivation, engagement and learning in an
educational game. Computers and Education, 75, 136148.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction
to the theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Flynn, R., Bellaby, P., & Ricci, M. (2010). The value-action gap in public attitudes
towards sustainable energy: The case of hydrogen energy. In B. Carter, & N.
Charles (Eds.), Nature, society and environmental crisis (pp. 159180). Malden,
MA/Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Fogg, B. J. (2003). Persuasive technology: Using computers to change what we think and
do. Boston: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 3950.
Gerow, J. E., Ayyagari, R., Thatcher, J. B., & Roth, P. L. (2013). Can we have fun @
work? The role of intrinsic motivation for utilitarian systems. European Journal
of Information Systems, 22(3), 360380.
Ha, I., Yoon, Y., & Choi, M. (2007). Determinants of adoption of mobile games under
mobile broadband wireless access environment. Information and Management,
44(3), 276286.
Hakulinen, L., Auvinen, T., & Korhonen, A. (2013). Empirical study on the effect of
achievement badges in TRAKLA2 online learning environment. In Proceedings of
learning and teaching in computing and engineering (LaTiCE) conference Macau,
March 2124, 2013, (pp. 4754).
Hamari, J. (2013). Transforming homo economicus into homo ludens: A eld experiment on gamication in a utilitarian peer-to-peer trading service. Electronic
Commerce Research and Applications, 12(4), 236245.
Hamari, J. (2015a). Do badges increase user activity? A eld experiment on effects
of gamication. Computers in Human Behavior.
Hamari, J. (2015b). Why do people buy virtual goods? Attitude towards virtual good
purchases versus game enjoyment. International Journal of Information Management, 35(3), 299308.
Hamari, J., & Eranti, V. (2011). Framework for designing and evaluating game
achievements. In Proceedings of the DiGRA 2011 conference: Think design play
Hilversum, The Netherlands, September 2011, (pp. 1417).
Hamari, J., Huotari, K., & Tolvanen, J. (2015). Gamication and economics. In S. P.
Walz, & S. Deterding (Eds.), The gameful world: Approaches, issues, applications.
Cambridge, MA, London: MIT Press.
Hamari, J., & Koivisto, J. (2014). Measuring Flow in Gamication: Dispositional Flow
Scale-2. Computers in Human Behavior, 40, 133143.
Hamari, J., & Koivisto, J. (2015). Working out for likes: An empirical study on social
inuence in exercise gamication. Computers in Human Behavior.
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Pakkanen, T. (2014). Do persuasive technologies persuade?
A review of empirical studies. In A. Spagnolli, L. Chittaro, & L. Gamberini
(Eds.), Persuasive technology, LNCS 8462 (pp. 118136). Switzerland: Springer
International Publishing.
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamication work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamication. In Proceedings of the 47th
Hawaii international conference on system sciences Hawaii, USA, January 69,
2014.
Hamari, J., & Tuunanen, J. (2014). Player types: A meta-analysis. Transactions of the
Digital Games Research Association, 1(2), 2953.
Hernandez, B., Montaner, T., Sese, F. J., & Urquizu, P. (2011). The role of social motivations in e-learning: How do they affect usage and success of ICT interactive
tools? Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 22242232.
Huotari, K., & Hamari, J. (2012). Dening gamication A service marketing perspective. In Proceedings of the 16th international academic MindTrek conference
Tampere, Finland, 35 October, 2012, (pp. 1722).
Hsu, C.-L., & Lin, J. C.-C. (2008). Acceptance of blog usage: The roles of technology
acceptance, social inuence and knowledge sharing motivation. Information and
Management, 45(1), 6574.
Hsu, C.-L., & Lu, H.-P. (2004). Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM
with social inuences and ow experience. Information and Management, 41(7),
853868.
Ipeirotis, P. G., & Gabrilovich, E. (2014). Quizz: targeted crowdsourcing with a billion (potential) users. In Proceedings of WWW 14 Seoul, Korea, April 711, (pp.
143154).
Jones, B. A., Madden, G. J., & Wengreen, H. J. (2014). The FIT game: Preliminary evaluation of a gamication approach to increasing fruit and vegetable consumption
in school. Preventive Medicine, 68, 7679.
Jreskog, K. G., & Srbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8 users reference guide. Scientic Software.
Kallio, K. P., Myr, F., & Kaipainen, K. (2011). At least nine ways to play: Approaching
gamer mentalities. Games and Culture, 6(4), 327353.
Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identication, and internalization three processes
of attitude change. Journal of Conict Resolution, 2(1), 5160.
Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2014). Demographic differences in perceived benets from
gamication. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 179188.
Lee, J. J., Ceyhan, P., Jordan-Cooley, W., & Sung, W. (2013). GREENIFY: A real-world
action game for climate change education. Simulation and Gaming, 44(23),
349365.
Lewis, W., Agarwal, R., & Sambamurthy, V. (2003). Sources of inuence on beliefs
about information technology use: An empirical study of knowledge workers.
MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 657678.
Liang, H., Saraf, N., Hu, Q., & Xue, Y. (2007). Assimilation of enterprise systems: The
effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS
Quarterly, 31(1), 5987.
Lieberman, J. N. (1977). Playfulness: Its relationship to imagination and creativity. New
York: Academic Press.
Lieberoth, A. (2014). Shallow gamication: Testing psychological effects of framing an activity as a game. Games and Culture, 120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
1555412014559978
Lin, C.-P., & Bhattacherjee, A. (2010). Extending technology usage models to interactive hedonic technologies: A theoretical model and empirical test. Information
Systems Journal, 20(2), 163181.
Lin, H.-F. (2008). Determinants of successful virtual communities: Contributions
from system characteristics and social factors. Information and Management,
45(8), 522527.
Lin, K.-Y., & Lu, H.-P. (2011). Why people use social networking sites: An empirical
study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Computers in
Human Behavior, 27(3), 11521161.
Lindenberg, S. (2001). Intrinsic motivation in a new light. Kyklos, 54(23), 317342.
Lounis, S., Pramatari, K., & Theotokis, A. (2014). Gamication is all about fun: The
role of incentive type and community collaboration. In Proceedings of ECIS 2014
Tel Aviv, Israel, June 911, (pp. 114).
Martocchio, J. J., & Webster, J. (1992). Effects of feedback and cognitive playfulness on
performance in microcomputer software training. Personnel Psychology, 45(3),
553578.
Moon, J.-W., & Kim, Y.-G. (2001). Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context.
Information and Management, 38(4), 217230.

Mntymki, M., Merikivi, J., Verhagen, T., Feldberg, F., & Rajala, R. (2014). Does a
contextualized theory of planned behavior explain why teenagers stay in virtual
worlds? International Journal of Information Management, 34(5), 567576.
Mntymki, M., & Riemer, K. (2014). Digital natives in social virtual worlds: A multimethod study of gratications and social inuences in Habbo Hotel. International
Journal of Information Management, 34(2), 210220.
Mntymki, M., & Salo, J. (2011). Teenagers in social virtual worlds: Continuous use
and purchasing behavior in Habbo Hotel. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6),
20882097.
Ngai, E. W. T., Tao, S. S. C., & Moon, K. K. L. (2015). Social media research: Theories, constructs, and conceptual frameworks. International Journal of Information
Management, 35(1), 3344.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Oinas-Kukkonen, H. (2013). A foundation for the study of behavior change support
systems. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17(6), 12231235.
Oinas-Kukkonen, H., & Harjumaa, M. (2009). Persuasive systems design: Key issues,
process model, and system features. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 24(1), 485500.
Pavlou, P. A., Liang, H. G., & Xue, Y. J. (2007). Understanding and mitigating uncertainty in online exchange relationships: A principal-agent perspective. MIS
Quarterly, 31(1), 105136.
Perry, E. L., & Ballou, D. J. (1997). The role of work, play, and fun in microcomputer software training. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 28(2),
93112.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method
biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879903.
Preece, J. (2001). Sociability and usability in online communities: Determining and
measuring success. Behaviour and Information Technology, 20(5), 347356.
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, A. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0 M3. [scientic software]. http://
www.smartpls.de/ (accessed 18.12.14)
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist,
55(1), 6878.
Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S., & Przybylski, A. (2006). The motivational pull of video games:
A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion, 30(4), 344360.
Sandelands, L. E. (1988). Effects of work and play signals on task evaluation. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 18(12), 10321048.
Sharp, B., & Sharp, A. (1997). Loyalty programs and their impact on repeat-purchase
loyalty patterns. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 14(5), 473486.
Shin, D. (2009). The evaluation of user experience of the virtual world in relation
to extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. International Journal of HumanComputer
Interaction, 25(6), 530553.
Simes, J., Daz Redondo, R., & Fernndez Vilas, A. (2013). A social gamication
framework for a K-6 learning platform. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(2),
345353.
Sprague, R. (1980). A framework for the development of decision support systems.
MIS Quarterly, 4(4), 125.
Terlutter, R., & Capella, M. L. (2013). The gamication of advertising: Analysis and
research directions of in-game advertising, advergames, and advertising in social
network games. Journal of Advertising, 42(2-3), 95112.
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. American Economic
Review, 93(2), 175179.
431
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth,
and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Thom, J., Millen, D., & DiMicco, J. (2012). Removing gamication from an enterprise
SNS. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative
work Seattle, Washington, USA, February 1115, 2012, (pp. 10671070).
Tolmie, P., Chamberlain, A., & Benford, S. (2014). Designing for reportability: Sustainable gamication, public engagement, and promoting environmental debate.
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 18(7), 17631774.
van der Heijden, H. (2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS
Quarterly, 28(4), 695704.
Venkatesh, V. (1999). Creating favorable user perceptions: Exploring the role of
intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly, 23(2), 239260.
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating perceived
behavioral control, computer anxiety and enjoyment into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342365.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology
acceptance model: Four longitudinal eld studies. Management Science, 46(2),
186204.
Wang, Z., & Scheepers, H. (2012). Understanding the intrinsic motivations of user
acceptance of hedonic information systems: Towards a unied research model.
Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 30, 255274.
Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. (1992). Microcomputer playfulness: Development of
a measure with workplace implications. MIS Quarterly, 16(2), 201226.
Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. (1993). Turning work into play: Implications for microcomputer software training. Journal of Management, 19(1), 11271146.
Williams, L., Edwards, J., & Vandenberg, R. (2003). Recent advances in causal
modeling methods for organizational and management research. Journal of Management, 29(6), 903936.
Yee, N. (2006). Motivations for play in online games. Journal of Cyberpsychology and
Behavior, 9(6), 772775.
Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1994). The personal involvement inventory: Reduction, revision,
and application to advertising. Journal of Advertising, 23(4), 5970.
Zhang, P. (2008). Motivational affordances: Reasons for ICT design and use. Communications of the ACM, 51(11).
Juho Hamari (D.Sc. Econ) is a post-doctoral researcher at the Game Research Lab,
University of Tampere and at the Aalto University School of Business. His research is
focused on the intersection of economic and psychological phenomena in gameful
environments. He has authored several seminal empirical and theoretical scholarly articles on gamication and games from perspectives of consumer behavior,
human-computer interaction and information technology. Hamaris research has
been published in a variety of respected journals such as Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, International Journal of Information
Management, Computers in Human Behavior, Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social
Networking, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Simulation & Gaming
as well as in books published by e.g. MIT Press. http://juhohamari.com
Jonna Koivisto is a researcher and a doctoral candidate at the Game Research Lab,
University of Tampere. Her research concentrates on the use of motivational and
gameful elements in various systems. Koivistos research has been published on
venues such as Computers in Human Behavior, European Conference on Information
Systems Science and Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. http://
jonnakoivisto.com

1 s2.0 S0268401215000420 Main

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

1 s2.0 S0268401215000420 Main

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Information Management

Why do people use gamication services?

some external utilitarian goal, therefore, gamication also provides

J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

attitudes toward them. While obviously relevant from practical and

2. Theory and hypotheses

Research on gamication particularly has been conducted in a

J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

for example during training, has been considered as benecial for

J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

Fig. 1. Hypothesis model.

Therefore, we propose the following hypotheses regarding the

Usefulness is positively associated with attitude.

Usefulness is positively associated with continued use.

Ease of use is positively associated with attitude.

Ease of use is positively associated with continued use.

2.2. Hedonic aspects

Enjoyment is positively associated with attitude.

Enjoyment is positively associated with continued use.

Playfulness is positively associated with attitude.

Playfulness is positively associated with continued use.

2.3. Social aspects

J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

(2005), Lewis, Agarwal, and Sambamurthy (2003) and Venkatesh

Recognition is positively associated with attitude.

Recognition is positively associated with continued use.

Social inuence is positively associated with attitude.

H6.2. Social inuence is positively associated with continued use.

Attitude positively inuences continued use.

3. Data and methods

(mean = 29.5, median = 27.5)

Exercise sessions per week

(mean = 5.3, median = 5.0)

Exercise hours per week

(mean = 7.2, median = 6.0)

J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

featuring in all of the categories. The lengths of experience with the

Secondly, in accordance with the work of Pavlou, Liang, and Xue

J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

Usefulness is positively associated with

Total effects (direct

for social inuence), however, they were not further associated

J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

gamication and the intentions to continue using gamied services.

J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

on social proof (Cialdini, 2001) and social comparison (Festinger,

All things considered, I nd using Fitocracy to be a wise

Continued use intentions

I predict that I will keep using Fitocracy in the future at

Venkatesh and Davis (2000)

van der Heijden (2004)

J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

Using Fitocracy interface does not require a lot of

Webster and Martocchio

Using Fitocracy makes it easier for me to start

I feel good when my achievements in Fitocracy are

People who inuence my attitudes would recommend

Hernandez et al. (2011), Hsu and Lin

J. Hamari, J. Koivisto / International Journal of Information Management 35 (2015) 419431

Substantive factor loading

Method factor loading