important considerations including the best methods for designing citizen science games, or data quality implications. B
Gaming for good: Exploring the potential and pitfalls of citizen science games Anne E. Bowser University College London Co-Director, Commons Lab 66-72 Gower Street - London - WC1E 6BT Woodrow Wilson International Center for Email: anna.cox (at) ucl.ac.uk Scholars 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC Marisa Ponti 20004, United States Assistant Professor Email: Anne.Bowser (at) wilsoncenter.org Department of Applied Information Technology Anna L. Cox University of Gothenburg Deputy Director of UCLIC Gothenburg, Sweden Reader in Human-Computer Interaction marisa.ponti (at) ituniv.se Description: The list of citizen science games that people can play while contributing to science is growing. Games, and gamified websites or applications, take a range of forms within citizen science. Some projects, like MalariaSpot, include just a few game elements such as points, badges, and leaderboards. Other projects, like Foldit and Eyewire, are full immersive experiences. Still others, such as Forgotten Island, are beginning to use narrative-based gamification approaches. These methods are sometimes viewed as easy ways to attract entice large numbers of citizens to contribute their time and skills to solve hard-to-automate tasks such as protein folding or image recognition. However, the convergence between games and science may stir controversy, as the two can be seen as separate - and even incompatible - paradigms. On one side, some researchers emphasize the great potential and benefits of games with a purpose for harnessing human skills for data collection and/or other forms of research. But by pointing to questions around data quality and the ethical implications of participation, others argue that games and gamification are flawed mechanisms for involving participants in citizen science. The aims of this 90-minute- session are to: - Offer an overview of the state of the art in the ways in which games and gamification are being incorporated in citizen science projects;; - Advance a research agenda by discussing the benefits (including engagement) and challenges (such as leveling up by ‘gaming’ the system) of using games and gamification for initiating and maintaining on-going engagement. - Network a wide range of ECSA researchers and practitioners with an interest in citizen science games. Keywords:
games, gamification, engagement, motivation, validation Session type: Split session Paper session (30mins): The workshop will begin with the presentation of an overview of the submissions by the organizers, including a description of the range of ways in which game elements are being used. The submissions will then be presented by session participants. The order will be curated so that participant presentations are integrated into the overview presentation. Where possible, video clips of the games will be incorporated into the presentations. Roundtable #1 (25mins): The positives: gamification & engagement: Following the paper session, we will begin with a roundtable discussing the positive aspects of gamification and engagement, including the extent to which different game mechanics are effective at initiating and sustaining engagement. Roundtable #2 (25mins): The negatives: gamification, ethics, and quality control: During a second roundtable we will discuss the potential negative aspects of games and gamification, including the extent to which the critical set of research principles for solving a task, which are embedded in a game structure, can control data quality. Conclusion and next steps (10 minute): At the conclusion of the workshop, the organizers and participants will take ten minutes to craft a summary of the discussion, and outline next steps for advancing the use of games in citizen science. Call for abstracts We welcome abstracts describing participants’ positions on the use of games in citizen science. Prospective participants can include researchers, practitioners, game designers and citizen scientists. All abstracts should include an abstract title (brief and concise), author(s) + affiliation(s), abstract text, and preference (Talk/ Poster). The abstract text should be max 300 words. Abstracts may refer to current or planned game approaches in citizen science projects, or raise important considerations including the best methods for designing citizen science games, or data quality implications. By supplementing these abstracts with a literature review, session chairs will create an overview of how game elements are being utilized in citizen science, and a list of important research questions.
Please submit your abstract online, by February 22, 2016 https://conference.ufz.de/frontend/index.php?folder_id=418
