Abstract
One of the most important tools utilized by the marketing research industry is the consumer survey. This self-reported data is the foundation of many currently applied methodologies for measuring the success of marketing campaigns and strategies. As such, suppliers in the marketing research industry rely on the engagement and attentiveness of the individuals who participate in their research and respond to their surveys. Keeping these respondents engaged is important for reducing the drop-off rate (the rate at which respondents quit before completing a survey), increasing time spent on surveys (which is linked to the quality and quantity of responses), and improving respondents’ subjective enjoyment (since a happy respondent is more likely to complete future surveys). There is evidence to suggest that engagement has an influence on data quality as well, since bored or inattentive respondents produce lower quality data (Cape, 2009). Keeping respondents engaged and willing to participate in research is critical both to industry providers and to clients who use the results of the research for their decision making.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adamou, B. (n.d.a). Using gamification in youth surveys. Retrieved from http://rwconnect.esomar.org/2012/07/17/using-gamification-in-surveys-for-children/
Adamou, B. (n.d.b). Giving research the NOS effect. Proceedings of 2012 Net Gain 6.0 MRIA Conference.
Brown, J. (2003). Survey metrics ward off problems. Marketing News, 17, 17–20.
Cape, P. (2009). Questionnaire length, fatigue effects and response quality revisited. SSI white paper.
Carson, R., Louviere, J., Anderson, D., Arabie, P., Bunch, D., Hensher, D., et al. (1994). Experimental analysis of choice. Marketing Letters, 5(4), 351–368.
Center for Game Science at University of Washington: Foldit. Retrieved from http://www.fold.it
Chao, D. (2001). Doom as an interface for process management. Proceedings of CHI 2001 (pp. 152–157).
Chrons, O., & Sundell, S. (2011) Digitalkoot. Making old archives accessible using crowdsourcing. Proceedings of HCOMP.
Chrzan, K., & Terry E. (1995). Partial profile choice experiments: A choice based approach for handling large numbers of attributes. 1995 Advanced Research Techniques Conference Proceedings. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Nacke, L., O’Hara, K., & Sicart, M. (2011). Gamification: Using game design elements in non-gaming contexts. CHI 2011 Ext. Abstracts.
Deutskens, E., de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., & Oosterveld, P. (2004). Response rate and response quality of internet-based surveys: An experimental study. Marketing Letters, 15(1), 21–36.
Dignan, A. (2011). Game frame: Using games as a strategy for success. New York: Free Press.
Evans, J. R., & Mathur, A. (2005). The value of online surveys. Internet Research, 15(2), 195–219.
Flatla, D. R., Gutwin, C., Nacke, L. E., Bateman, S., & Mandryk, R. L. (2011). Calibration games: Making calibration tasks enjoyable by adding motivating game elements. Proceedings of UIST 2011 (pp. 403–412).
Greenbook Industry Trends Report (2013, Winter).
Guin, T. D., Baker, R., Mechling, J., & Ruylea, E. (2012). Myths and realities of respondent engagement in online surveys. International Journal of Market Research, 54(5), 613–633.
Herzog, A. R., & Bachman, J. G. (1981). Effects of questionnaire length on response quality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45, 549–559.
Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., & Zubek, R. (2004). MDA: A formal approach to game design and game research. Proceedings of AAAI04 WS on Challenges in Game AI (pp. 1–5).
Johnson, R., & Orme, B. (1996). How many questions should you ask in choice-based conjoint studies? Sawtooth software research paper series
Jung, J., Schneider, C., & Valacich, J. (2010). Enhancing the motivational affordance of information systems: The effects of real-time performance feedback and goal setting in group collaboration environments. Management Science, 56(4), 724–742.
Korn, O. (2012). Industrial playgrounds: How gamification helps to enrich work for elderly or impaired persons in production. Proceedings of EICS 2012 (pp. 313–316).
Lewis, C., Wardrip-Fruin, N., & Whitehead, J. (2012). Motivational game design patterns of ‘ville games. Proceedings of FDG 2012 (pp. 172–179).
Luce, R. D., & Tukey, J. W. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new scale type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1(1), 1–27. doi:10.1016/0022-2496(64)90015-X.
Malinoff, B. (2010). Sexy questions, dangerous answers. Proceedings of CASRO 2010 Technology Conference.
Mason, A., Michalakidis, G., & Krause, P. (2012). Tiger nation: Empowering citizen scientists. Proceedings of IEEE DEST.
Mekler, D., Brühlmann, F., Opwis, K., & Tuch, N. (2013). Disassembling gamification: The effects of points and meaning on user motivation and performance. CHI 2013.
Nikkila, S., Byrne, D., Sundaram, H., Kelliher, A., & Linn, S. (2013). Taskville: Visualizing tasks and raising awareness in the workplace. CHI 2013 Ext. Abstracts.
O’Brien, H. L., & Toms, E. G. (2010). The development and evaluation of a survey to measure user engagement. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 50–69.
Orme, B. (2010). Getting started with conjoint analysis: Strategies for product design and pricing research (2nd ed.). Glendale, CA: Research Publishers LLC.
Porter, S., & Whitcomb, M. (2003). The impact of contact type on web survey response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(4), 579–588.
Puleston, J., & Sleep, D. (2011). The game experiments: Researching how gaming techniques can be used to improve the quality of feedback from online research. Proceedings of ESOMAR Congress.
Ray, N. M., & Tabor, S. W. (2003). Cyber surveys come of age. Marketing Research, 15, 32–37.
Reeves, B., & Read, J. (2009). Total engagement: Using games and virtual worlds to change the way people work and businesses compete. Boston: Harvard Business Press.
Research through gaming: Pimple crisis. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s63gLuO-W0
Research through gaming: The Playspondent House. Retrieved from http://www.researchthroughgaming.com/
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), 347–363.
Sawtooth Software Inc. (1993). The CBC system for choice-based conjoint analysis—Version 8. Sawtooth software technical paper series
Shneiderman, B. (2004). Designing for fun: How can we design user interfaces to be more fun? Interactions, 11(5), 48–50.
Sweetser, P., & Wyeth, P. (2005). GameFlow: A model for evaluating player enjoyment in games. Computers in Entertainment, 3(3), 1–24.
Thomas, R., Bremer, J., Terhanian, G., & Couper, M. P. (2007). Truth in measurement: Comparing web-based interview techniques. Proceedings of ESOMAR Congress.
Von Ahn, L., & Dabbish, L. (2008). Designing games with a purpose. Communications of the ACM, 51(8), 58–67.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brownell, B., Cechanowicz, J., Gutwin, C. (2015). Gamification of Survey Research: Empirical Results from Gamifying a Conjoint Experiment. In: Reiners, T., Wood, L. (eds) Gamification in Education and Business. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10208-5_29
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10208-5_29
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-10207-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-10208-5
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)