Artificial Intelligence in Virtual Health Care
Scott Rigby and co-Author Dr. Richard Ryan's new book
Glued to Games (available for on Amazon.com) deals primarily with the past decade of research into the motivational properties of gaming. Glued to Games also offers a chapter on the application of intrinsic motivation and games and apply them into non-entertainment applications.
Combining what is known from years of research, Scott Rigby contends that these ideas are "... taking principals of motivation and using them in the clinic in order to bring about healthy behavior change. Smoking, weight loss, diabetes prevention, etc." He continues, "How do you reach a large population of people?” Scott feels that the Gamification of these treatments, through virtual, artificially intelligent care provider programs, will appeal to a large population and motivate participants to continue the treatment.
This is a real world step toward realizing the world Jesse Schell alluded to during his DICE talk on Gamification. Schell feels that real work is being done to provide intrinsically motivating feedback through our increasingly connected world.
Psychologists like Scott Rigby, who also spent a number of years as a full time game designer, are using their knowledge of user engagement and psychological needs fulfillment to design highly customized, highly individualized and highly supportive exchanges with patients to provide continued support once they leave the doctor's office. The research, sponsored by the National Institute of Health, is ongoing but the outlook is optimistic.
Asking Critical Questions about Gamification
Jonathan Blow
Gamification, tethered to Self Determination Theory, appears to be the norm for the future, or at least a major part of it. With government grants supporting game-styled motivation for social programs, businesses reaping the massive financial rewards of game-mechanics and the ever increasing need to maintain user engagement, it seems Gamification in its various forms is here to stay.
This doesn't sit well with everyone, however, and Gamification is certainly not without critics. Part of the criticism stems from the corporate tendency to codify and simplify objectives. Scott Rigby is cautious of oversimplification. He commented that too often designers will simply impose game elements on a campaign or game, and in doing so they're not only making games worse but they're failing to properly capitalize on the benefits of motivation theory.
Eminent designer Jonathan Blow is candid, “...as a game designer, I am offended in general by the 'gamification' movement and the kind of thing Jesse is talking about...”
Jonathan Blow's colleague and one of the designer's for the breakthrough virtual environment in Spore, Chris Hecker echoes Rigby and Blow's concern over reward based design. Specific issue is taken with
Achievements, as seen in the Xbox Live community. Both Rigby and Hecker warn that for this type of reward system to be effective all rewards should be informational and unexpected. Rewards should directly relate to your actions and avoid manipulation- “You killed five enemies!” or “You jogged five miles today!” rather than, “You killed five enemies just like you should have!” or “You jogged the five miles we said you should have!” Achievements should coincide with intrinsically motivating rewards rather than try to motivate in and of themselves. As Scott Rigby said, "Informational feedback is useful for intrinsic motivation- if rewards are not framed in a way that's manipulating my behavior..." An unexpected reward that naturally results from something you accomplish is motivating.
Criticisms aren't limited to the type of motivation employed by designers and marketing agencies in Gamification, however. Jonathan Blow questions the wisdom of motivation theory as a form of social motivation, or control, “The most obvious question to ask, though, is who is building the reward systems and what are they trying to get from the people subjected to those systems? Look at the history of America (especially recent history) and extrapolate to answer that question honestly...”
Jonathan Blow warns, “In fact we already have a number of these systems in existence today...They don't in fact make anyone's life better; they are only about fooling people into thinking they are getting a good deal, and thus are heavily-manipulative leech-like entities.”
Theory are scientific concepts and thus innately neutral. The fundamental question Jonathan asks with his criticism is not, “Is Gamification any good?” but, “Are we sure the Government will only use these theories for health or education?
And nothing else?”
Sandwich Unlocked! The Future of Games?
Read The Future Unlocked: Gamification Part I
