The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gamified crowdsourcing: Conceptualization, literature review, and future agenda
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Two parallel phenomena are gaining attention in human–computer interaction research: gamification and crowdsourcing. Because crowdsourcing's success depends on a mass of motivated crowdsourcees, crowdsourcing platforms have increasingly been imbued with motivational design features borrowed from games; a practice often called gamification. While the body of literature and knowledge of the phenomenon have begun to accumulate, we still lack a comprehensive and systematic understanding of conceptual foundations, knowledge of how gamification is used in crowdsourcing, and whether it is effective. We first provide a conceptual framework for gamified crowdsourcing systems in order to understand and conceptualize the key aspects of the phenomenon. The paper's main contributions are derived through a systematic literature review that investigates how gamification has been examined in different types of crowdsourcing in a variety of domains. This meticulous mapping, which focuses on all aspects in our framework, enables us to infer what kinds of gamification efforts are effective in different crowdsourcing approaches as well as to point to a number of research gaps and lay out future research directions for gamified crowdsourcing systems. Overall, the results indicate that gamification has been an effective approach for increasing crowdsourcing participation and the quality of the crowdsourced work; however, differences exist between different types of crowdsourcing: the research conducted in the context of crowdsourcing of homogenous tasks has most commonly used simple gamification implementations, such as points and leaderboards, whereas crowdsourcing implementations that seek diverse and creative contributions employ gamification with a richer set of mechanics.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 54,599
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 · Cited by 43,925
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627 · Cited by 7,176 · cited 2×
“that extrinsic rewards (such as money) can potentially decrease intrinsic motivation (Deci, 1971; Deci et al., 1999), Massung et al.”
BackgroundDoes Gamification Work? -- A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014) · 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.1109/hicss.2014.377 · Cited by 5,201
Self-citationEffects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation.
Deci, E. L. (1971) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0030644 · Cited by 4,170
Gamification in theory and action: a survey
Seaborn, K., & Fels, D. I. (2015) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.006 · Cited by 2,515 · cited 7×
“We first provide an integrated conceptual framework for gamified crowdsourcing systems (Figure 3), based on the extant literature on crowdsourcing (Geiger and Schader, 2014; Prpić et al., 2015) and gamification (Hamari et al., 2014; Seaborn and Fels 2015).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialEllis, P. D. (2010) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511761676 · Cited by 2,461
Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045 · Cited by 1,713
Self-citationLintott, C. J., Schawinski, K., Slosar, A., Land, K., Bamford, S., Thomas, D., Raddick, M. J., Nichol, R. C., Szalay, A., Andreescu, D., et al. (2008) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13689.x · Cited by 1,488
Cited by
The state of immersive technology research: A literature analysis
Suh, A., & Prophet, J. (2018) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.019 · Cited by 841
Ratinho, E., & Martins, C. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19033 · Cited by 221
How to explain AI systems to end users: a systematic literature review and research agenda
Laato, S., Tiainen, M., Najmul Islam, A. K. M., & Mäntymäki, M. (2022) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/intr-08-2021-0600 · Cited by 155
Min, T., Wang, H., Guo, Y., & Cai, W. (2019) · 2019 IEEE Conference on Games (CoG) · doi:10.1109/cig.2019.8848111 · Cited by 124
Does gamification engage users in online shopping?
García-Jurado, A., Torres-Jiménez, M., Leal-Rodríguez, A. L., & Castro-González, P. (2021) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2021.101076 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- Morschheuser, B., Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Maedche, A.
- Venue
- International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-10
- Volume
- 106
- Pages
- 26-43
- ISSN
- 1071-5819 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2615593621
- Cited by
- 297
- References
- 20
- FWCI
- 39.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gamified crowdsourcing: Conceptualization, literature review, and future agenda. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.04.005
- The paper
- Morschheuser, B., Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Maedche, A. (2017). Gamified crowdsourcing: Conceptualization, literature review, and future agenda. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.04.005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.