skip to main content
10.1145/2858036.2858563acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Operationalising and Evaluating Sub-Optimal and Optimal Play Experiences through Challenge-Skill Manipulation

Authors Info & Claims
Published:07 May 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

The study examines the relationship of challenge-skill balance and the player experience through evaluation of competence, autonomy, presence, interest/enjoyment, and positive and negative affect states. To manipulate challenge-skill balance, three video game modes -- boredom (low challenge), balance (medium challenge), and overload (high challenge) -- were developed and experimentally tested (n = 45). The study showed that self-reported positive affect, autonomy, presence, and interest/enjoyment differed between the levels. The balance condition generally performed well in terms of positive player experiences, confirming the key role challenge-skill balance plays in designing for optimal play experiences. Interestingly, the study found significantly lower negative affect scores when playing the boredom condition. Greater feelings of competence were also reported for the boredom condition than the balance and overload conditions. Finally, some measures point to overload as a more enjoyable experience than boredom, suggesting possible player preference for challenge > skill imbalance over skill > challenge imbalance. Implications for design and future research are presented.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Sami Abuhamdeh and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 2012. The Importance of Challenge for the Enjoyment of Intrinsically Motivated, Goal-Directed Activities. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 38, 3: 317330.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Justin T. Alexander, John Sear, and Andreas Oikonomou. 2013. An investigation of the effects of game difficulty on player enjoyment. Entertainment Computing 4, 1: 53--62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Alexander Baldwin, Daniel Johnson, Peta Wyeth, and Penelope Sweetser. 2013. A framework of Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment in competitive multiplayer video games. In 2013 IEEE International Games Innovation Conference (IGIC), 16--19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Nicholas D. Bowman. 2008. A PAT on the Back: Media Flow Theory Revis(it)ed. Rocky Mountain Communication Review 4, 1: 27--39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Elizabeth A. Boyle, Thomas M. Connolly, Thomas Hainey and James M. Boyle. 2012. Engagement in digital entertainment games: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior 28, 3: 771--780. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Tom Cole, Paul Cairns, and Marco Gillies. 2015. Emotional and Functional Challenge in Core and Avant-grade Games. In Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play (CHI PLAY '15), 121--126. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2793107.2793147 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Anna L. Cox, Paul Cairns, Pari Shah, and Michael Carroll. 2012. Not Doing But Thinking: The Role of Challenge in the Gaming Experience. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Humans Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12), 79--88. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2207676.2207689 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 1990. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper Perennial.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan. 2000. The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Humans needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry 11, 4: 227--268.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Xiaowen Fang, Susy Chan, Jacek Brzezinski and Chitra Nair. 2010. Development of an Instrument to Measure Enjoyment of Computer Game Play. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 26, 9: 868--886.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Carlton Fong, Diana Zaleski, and Jennifer Leach. 2014. The challenge-skill balance and antecedents of flow: a meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Positive Psychology 10, 5: 425--446.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. International Society for Presence Research. 2000. The Concept of Presence: Explication Statement. Retrieved September 18, 2015 from http://ispr.info/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Charlene Jennett, Anna L. Cox, Paul Cairns, Samira Dhoparee, Andrew Epps, Tim Tijs and Alison Walton. 2008. Measuring and Defining the Experience of Immersion in Games. Internation Journal of Human-Computer Studies 66, 9: 641--661. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Daniel M. Johnson and John Gardner. 2010. Personality, Motivation and Video Games. In 22nd Conference of the Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group of Australia on Computer-Human Interaction (OZCHI '10), 276--279. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1952222.1952281 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Johannes Keller and Herbert Bless. 2008. Flow and regulatory compatibility: An experimental approach to the flow model of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34, 2: 196--209.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Madison Klarkowski, Daniel Johnson, Peta Wyeth, Simon Smith, and Cody Phillips. 2015. Operationalising and Measuring Flow in Video Games. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Australian Special Interest Group for Computer Human Interaction (OzCHI '15), 114--118. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2838739.2838826 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Derek Lomas, Kishan Patel, Jodi L. Forlizzi, and Kenneth R. Koedinger. 2013. Optimizing Challenge in an Educational Game Using Large-Scale Design Experiments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13), 89--98. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2470654.2470668 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Matthew Lombard and Theresa Ditton. At the Heart of It All: The Concept of Presence. 1997. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 3, 2: 0.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Regan L. Mandryk and M. Stella Atkins. 2007. A fuzzy physiological approach for continuously modelling emotion during interaction with play technologies. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65, 4: 329--347. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Lennart Nacke and Craig A. Lindley. 2008. Flow and immersion in first-person shooters: measuring the player's gameplay experience. In Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Future Play: Research, Play, Share (Future Play '08), 81--88. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1496984.1496998 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Andrew K. Przybylski, Netta Weinstein, Kou Murayama, Martin F. Lynch and Richard M. Ryan. 2012. The Ideal Self at Play: The Appeal of Video Games That Let You Be All You Can Be. Psychological Science 23, 1: 69--76.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Niklas Ravaja, Mikko Salminen, Jussi Holopainen, Timo Saari, Jari Laarni, and Aki Järvinen. 2004. Emotional Response Patterns and Sense of Presence during Video Games: Potential Criterion Variables for Game Design. In Proceedings of the Third Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (NordiCHI '04), 339--347. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1028014.1028068 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Niklas Ravaja, Timo Saari, Mikko Salminen, Jari Laarni and Kari Kallinen. 2006. Phasic emotional reactions to video game events: a psychophysiological investigation. Media Psychology 8, 4: 343--367.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Falko Rheinberg, Regina Vollmeyer and Stefan Engeser. 2003. Die Erfassung des Flow-Erlebens {The assessment of flow experience}. In Diagnostik von Selbstkonzept, Lernmotivation und Selbstregulation {Diagnosis of Motivation and Self-Concept}, 261--279.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Scott Rigby and Richard Ryan. 2007. The Player Experience of Needs Satisfaction (PENS): An applied model and methodology for understanding key components of the player experience. Retrieved from immersyve.com/PENS_Sept07.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Richard M. Ryan. 1982. Control and Information in the Intrapersonal Sphere: An Extension of Cognitive Evaluation Theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 43, 3: 450--461.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Richard Ryan., Rigby, C. Scott Rigby, and Andrew Przybylski. 2006. The Motivational Pull of Video Games: A Self-Determination Theory Approach. Motivation and Emotion 30, 4: 347--363.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Muniba Saleem, Craig A. Anderson, and Douglas A. Gentile. 2012. Effects of Prosocial, Neutral, and Violent Video Games on College Students' Affect. Aggressive Behavior 38, 4: 263--271.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. John L. Sherry. 2004. Flow and Media Enjoyment. Communication Theory 14, 4: 328--347.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Andrew Sims. 1988. Symptoms in the Mind: An Introduction to Descriptive Psychopathology. Saunders Ltd.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Paul Skalski, Francis Dalisay, Matthew Kushin and Yung-I Liu. 2012. Need for Presence and Other Motivations for Video Game Play across Genres. In Proceedings of the Presence Live! International Society for Presence Research Annual Conference (ISPR '12).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Kellie Vella, Daniel M. Johnson, and Leanne Hides. 2013. Positively playful: When videogames lead to player wellbeing. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Gameful Design, Research and Applications (Gamification '13), 99--102. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2583008.2583024 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Peta Wyeth, Daniel M. Johnson, and Penelope Sweetser. 2012. Conceptualising, operationalising and measuring the player experience in video games. In Extended Proceedings of the Fun and Games Conference 2012 (Fun and Games '12), 90--93.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Operationalising and Evaluating Sub-Optimal and Optimal Play Experiences through Challenge-Skill Manipulation

    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 Conferences
      CHI '16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2016
      6108 pages
      ISBN:9781450333627
      DOI:10.1145/2858036

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 7 May 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '16 Paper Acceptance Rate565of2,435submissions,23%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      Upcoming Conference

      CHI '24
      CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 11 - 16, 2024
      Honolulu , HI , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader