| Literature DB >> 34366420 |
Masamitsu Kamada1, Hana Hayashi, Koichiro Shiba, Masataka Taguri2, Naoki Kondo3, I-Min Lee, Ichiro Kawachi4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Gamification, the use of game design elements in nongame contexts, in combination with insights from behavioral economics, has been applied increasingly to behavior change interventions. However, little is known about the effectiveness or scalability of this approach, especially in the long term. We tested a large-scale smartphone-based intervention to encourage physical activity among Japanese baseball fans using gamification techniques that leveraged fandom and interteam competition inherent in sports.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 34366420 PMCID: PMC8677610 DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002770
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc ISSN: 0195-9131 Impact factor: 5.411
Key features of the Pa-League Walk app and the relevant behavioral theories and techniques.
| Fandom-based gamification | 1. Team-based steps competition: (GM no. 6: social connectivity, no. 7: fun and playfulness) |
| Other (general) behavior change techniques | 7. Feedback on behavior (BCT no. 2.2, CT): Displaying stats and ranking based on steps. |
Gamification strategies, choice architecture techniques (nudging), and other behavior change techniques are categorized based on previous literature (numbers in parentheses above correspond to these articles) (6,9,20).
BCT, behavior change techniques; CA, choice architecture; CT, control theory; GM, gamification; OC, operant conditioning; SCogT, social-cognitive theory; SCompT, social comparison theory.
FIGURE 1Flowchart and matching scheme of the participants. A, Flowchart of the sampling. *Invalid Apple devices include iPad and old iPhone models without motion coprocessor. **Less than 500 steps per day. ***Less than 500 steps per day or <4 valid days each before and after the installation date. B, Matching scheme of the participants. Sex- and age group–matched controls (X′ and Y′) were asked to upload screenshots of their iPhone steps data retrospectively for a period defined by the date of app installation of the corresponding matched users (X and Y, respectively).
Baseline characteristics of participants for DID analysis (n = 887).
| User ( | Control ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean (SD), yr | 42.3 (10.7) | 41.4 (10.8) | 0.27 |
| 18–29 | 40 (14.6) | 112 (18.3) | |
| 30–39 | 63 (23.0) | 151 (24.6) | |
| 40–49 | 93 (33.9) | 190 (31.0) | |
| 50–59 | 68 (24.8) | 139 (22.7) | |
| 60–68 | 10 (3.6) | 21 (3.4) | |
| Sex, female | 108 (39.4) | 239 (39.0) | 0.96 |
| BMI, mean (SD), kg·m−2 | 23.7 (4.0) | 22.6 (3.7) | <0.001 |
| ≥25 | 93 (33.9) | 140 (22.8) | 0.001 |
| Education | 0.92 | ||
| High school or less | 60 (21.9) | 142 (23.2) | |
| Vocational/technical school or junior college | 55 (20.1) | 122 (19.9) | |
| 4-yr college or higher | 159 (58.0) | 349 (56.9) | |
| Equivalized income, | 0.003 | ||
| ≤3,000,000 | 81 (29.6) | 235 (38.3) | |
| 3,000,001–4,999,999 | 91 (33.2) | 215 (35.1) | |
| ≥5,000,000 | 102 (37.2) | 163 (26.6) | |
| Population density, ≥1000 person·km−2 | 181 (66.1) | 294 (48.0) | <0.001 |
| Frequency of stadium visits, times per year | <0.001 | ||
| 0 | 14 (5.1) | 356 (58.1) | |
| 1–5 | 92 (33.6) | 233 (38.0) | |
| 6–10 | 55 (20.1) | 14 (2.3) | |
| ≥11 | 113 (41.2) | 10 (1.6) | |
| Year of app installation, | 113 (41.2) | 243 (39.6) | NA |
| Frequency of app usage | NA | ||
| Less than once a day | 83 (30.3) | 197 (32.1) | |
| Once a day | 78 (28.5) | 173 (28.2) | |
| More than once a day | 113 (41.2) | 243 (39.6) | |
| Valid days of step measurement, | 374 (229–543) | 105 (95–109) | NA |
Values are n (%) unless stated otherwise.
Calculated by dividing household annual income by the square root of the number of household members. Approximately 110 yen is equivalent to 1 US dollars.
Control participants were categorized based on the responses of the corresponding matched users.
Days with at least 500 steps. Maximum recorded days were limited to 680 for users and 110 d for controls per study design. The DID analysis used the data 3 wk before installation date through 13 wk after installation both in users and controls (max 112 d).
IQR, interquartile range.
FIGURE 2Histograms of daily steps for users and controls before (A) and after (B) the introduction of 10,000-step reward system (14,673 users and 370 controls, 2016 season). Y axis represents the proportion of the observations (one observation per participant-day) that falls within the bin (relative frequency).
FIGURE 3Adjusted daily steps before and after installation of the Pa-League Walk app based on the DID model. A, Primary analysis with 274 users vs 613 controls (n = 887). B, Subsamples of the matched pairs with <1000-step-per-day difference at baseline (n = 193, 89 users vs 104 controls). Error bars are 95% CI, adjusted for potential confounders. Baseline period was 3 wk before app installation. Triangle tick marks indicate average steps among all users (n = 20,052) for only the period after app installation.
FIGURE 4Long-term trend in average daily steps among users (n = 274). *P < 0.05 compared with baseline (steps before app installation). Bars indicate 95% CI. Adjusted for sex, age, BMI, income, education, population density, calendar month, and year of app installation. †Expected maximum sample size in each month based on the distribution of installation dates. The earlier the app was installed, the longer was the evaluation period. Some users did not have valid data in the first month but did in the following months. An observed sample size less than 274 in the first month does not indicate that some users had no valid data throughout the postperiod.