Self-Determination Theory in HCI Games Research: Current Uses and Open Questions
Open accessAbstract
Self-Determination Theory (SDT), a major psychological theory of human motivation, has become increasingly popular in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) research on games and play. However, it remains unclear how SDT has advanced HCI games research, or how HCI games scholars engage with the theory. We reviewed 110 CHI and CHI PLAY papers that cited SDT to gain a better understanding of the ways the theory has contributed to HCI games research. We find that SDT, and in particular, the concepts of need satisfaction and intrinsic motivation, have been widely applied to analyse the player experience and inform game design. Despite the popularity of SDT-based measures, however, prominent core concepts and mini-theories are rarely considered explicitly, and few papers engage with SDT beyond descriptive accounts. We highlight conceptual gaps at the intersection of SDT and HCI games research, and identify opportunities for SDT propositions, concepts, and measures to more productively inform future work.
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A review of 110 CHI and CHI PLAY papers confirmed growing interest from online game design and player experience studies in self-determination theory and the concepts of intrinsic motivation and need satisfaction.
“Furthermore, a review of 110 CHI and CHI PLAY papers confirmed the growing interest from online game design and player experience studies in the SDT and the theoretical concepts of intrinsic motivation and need satisfaction (Tyack & Mekler, 2020).”
From Development and Validation of a Basic Psychological Needs Scale for Technology Use (2024) · cites this paper as Tyack & Mekler, 2020
The Abstract says the authors reviewed 110 CHI and CHI PLAY papers citing SDT and found that intrinsic motivation and need satisfaction were widely applied to player-experience analysis and game design. It describes increasing interest in HCI research on games and play, but does not specifically establish the claim about online games. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1104_01 · Cited by 34,210 · see citing works
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 · Cited by 18,666 · cited 2× · see citing works
“As pictured in Figure 2, SDT broadly differentiates three types of motivation [157]: Intrinsic motivation denotes activity pursued for its inherently interesting or enjoyable qualities.”
BackgroundToward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
Vallerand, R. J. (1997) · Advances in experimental social psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60019-2 · Cited by 3,198 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation [185], which conceptualises relationships between motivation and need satisfaction at situational, contextual, and global levels, could inform existing HCI games research concerned with sustained engagement (e.”
BackgroundGamification 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 · see citing works
Sailer, M., Hense, J. U., Mayr, S. K., & Mandl, H. (2017) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.033 · Cited by 2,064 · see citing works
Chirkov, V., Ryan, R. M., Kim, Y., & Kaplan, U. (2003) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.97 · Cited by 1,425 · cited 2× · see citing works
“[37] Valery Chirkov, Richard M Ryan, Youngmee Kim, and Ulas Kaplan.”
BackgroundA Motivational Model of Video Game Engagement
Przybylski, A. K., Rigby, C. S., & Ryan, R. M. (2010) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0019440 · Cited by 1,422 · cited 3× · see citing works
“In fact, the original papers on SDT and games by Ryan, Rigby and Przybylski [144, 166] have been cited over 3000 times on Google Scholar.”
BackgroundBartholomew, K. J., Ntoumanis, N., Ryan, R. M., Bosch, J. A., & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C. (2011) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167211413125 · Cited by 1,064 · see citing works
Mekler, E. D., Brühlmann, F., Tuch, A. N., & Opwis, K. (2017) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.048 · Cited by 990 · cited 2× · see citing works
“To date, these mini-theories have received limited attention within games-related research, with only COT having been studied in the context of gamification [125, 198].”
BackgroundSelf-citationWhat is intrinsic motivation? A typology of computational approaches
Oudeyer, P.-Y. (2007) · Frontiers in Neurorobotics · doi:10.3389/neuro.12.006.2007 · Cited by 811 · see citing works
Designing for Motivation, Engagement and Wellbeing in Digital Experience
Peters, D., Calvo, R. A., & Ryan, R. M. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00797 · Cited by 797 · see citing works
Haerens, L., Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Soenens, B., & Van Petegem, S. (2015) · Psychology of Sport and Exercise · doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.08.013 · Cited by 747 · see citing works
Markland, D., & Ingledew, D. K. (1997) · British Journal of Health Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8287.1997.tb00549.x · Cited by 431 · see citing works
Peng, W., Lin, J.-H., Pfeiffer, K. A., & Winn, B. (2012) · Media Psychology · doi:10.1080/15213269.2012.673850 · Cited by 426 · see citing works
Edmunds, J., Ntoumanis, N., & Duda, J. L. (2007) · Psychology of Sport and Exercise · doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2006.07.006 · Cited by 275 · see citing works
Richardson, C. R., Buis, L. R., Janney, A. W., Goodrich, D. E., Sen, A., Hess, M. L., Mehari, K. S., Fortlage, L. A., Resnick, P. J., Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., et al. (2010) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1338 · Cited by 239 · see citing works
Like bees around the hive: a comparative study of a mobile augmented reality map
Morrison, A., Oulasvirta, A., Peltonen, P., Lemmela, S., Jacucci, G., Reitmayr, G., Näsänen, J., & Juustila, A. (2009) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1518701.1518991 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hadi Mogavi, R., Deng, C., Juho Kim, J., Zhou, P., D. Kwon, Y., Hosny Saleh Metwally, A., Tlili, A., Bassanelli, S., Bucchiarone, A., Gujar, S., et al. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100027 · Cited by 369 · see citing works
How does HCI Understand Human Agency and Autonomy?
Bennett, D., Metatla, O., Roudaut, A., & Mekler, E. D. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3580651 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
“Future research might focus on underused resources such as Organismic Integration Theory [138], and Cognitive Evaluation Theory [137] which might bring clarity to understandings of longer term autonomy, users’ integration of values, and wider contextual factors which might impact on autonomy [9, 160].”
BackgroundSelf-citationSelf-Determination Theory and HCI Games Research: Unfulfilled Promises and Unquestioned Paradigms
Tyack, A., & Mekler, E. D. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3673230 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Self-citationGrasse, K. M., Kreminski, M., Wardrip-Fruin, N., Mateas, M., & Melcer, E. F. (2022) · Frontiers in Virtual Reality · doi:10.3389/frvir.2022.847120 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Development and Validation of a Basic Psychological Needs Scale for Technology Use
Moradbakhti, L., Leichtmann, B., & Mara, M. (2024) · Psychological Test Adaptation and Development · doi:10.1027/2698-1866/a000062 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tyack, A., & Mekler, E. D.
- Affiliations
- Queensland University of Technology (AU)
- Aalto University (FI)
- ORCID
- Mekler, Elisa D.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2020-04-21
- Pages
- 1-22
- OpenAlex
- W3031421239
- Cited by
- 280
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 45 · 2025: 88 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 11
- FWCI
- 54.47
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- research.aalto.fi
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- Aaltodoc (Aalto University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- IT University Of Copenhagen (IT University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
- Keywords
- self-determination theory, game design, player experience, intrinsic motivation, need satisfaction, play, conceptual gaps
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
