Cited by 280Educational Games and GamificationDigital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Gamification in apps and Technologies for Improving Mental Health and Well-Being: systematic review

Open access
Cheng, Vanessa Wan Sze, Davenport, Tracey, Johnson, Daniel, Vella, Kellie, Hickie, Ian B·2019·JMIR Mental Health

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is little research on the application of gamification to mental health and well-being. Furthermore, usage of gamification-related terminology is inconsistent. Current applications of gamification for health and well-being have also been critiqued for adopting a behaviorist approach that relies on positive reinforcement and extrinsic motivators. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze current applications of gamification for mental health and well-being by answering 3 research questions (RQs). RQ1: which gamification elements are most commonly applied to apps and technologies for improving mental health and well-being? RQ2: which mental health and well-being domains are most commonly targeted by these gamified apps and technologies? RQ3: what reasons do researchers give for applying gamification to these apps and technologies? A systematic review of the literature was conducted to answer these questions. METHODS: We searched ACM Digital Library, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, IEEE Explore, JMIR, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science for qualifying papers published between the years 2013 and 2018. To answer RQ1 and RQ2, papers were coded for gamification elements and mental health and well-being domains according to existing taxonomies in the game studies and medical literature. During the coding process, it was necessary to adapt our coding frame and revise these taxonomies. Thematic analysis was conducted to answer RQ3. RESULTS: The search and screening process identified 70 qualifying papers that collectively reported on 50 apps and technologies. The most commonly observed gamification elements were levels or progress feedback, points or scoring, rewards or prizes, narrative or theme, personalization, and customization; the least commonly observed elements were artificial assistance, unlockable content, social cooperation, exploratory or open-world approach, artificial challenge, and randomness. The most commonly observed mental health and well-being domains were anxiety disorders and well-being, whereas the least commonly observed domains were conduct disorder and bipolar disorders. Researchers' justification for applying gamification to improving mental health and well-being was coded in 59% (41/70) of the papers and was broadly divided into 2 themes: (1) promoting engagement and (2) enhancing an intervention's intended effects. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the current application of gamification to apps and technologies for improving mental health and well-being does not align with the trend of positive reinforcement critiqued in the greater health and well-being literature. We also observed overlap between the most commonly used gamification techniques and existing behavior change frameworks. Results also suggest that the application of gamification is not driven by health behavior change theory, and that many researchers may treat gamification as a black box without consideration for its underlying mechanisms. We call for the inclusion of more comprehensive and explicit descriptions of how gamification is applied and the standardization of applied games terminology within and across fields.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/13717

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Many internet interventions use interactive elements to maintain motivation and reinforce the desired effect of the intervention.

    “Many internet interventions use interactive elements to maintain motivation and reinforce the desired effect of the intervention (60).”

    From Improving mental well-being in psychocardiology—a feasibility trial for a non-blended web application as a brief metacognitive-based intervention in cardiovascular disease patients (2023) · cites this paper as [60]

    In the Discussion (Research Question 3; page unavailable), the review reports that gamification was used to encourage engagement in 31 of 41 papers and to encourage intended behaviors in 14. This supports the stated purposes of interactive features, but the review covers gamified mental-health and well-being apps and technologies, not internet interventions generally; it also says their effects need further study. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. [3]Schmidt R Emmerich K Schmidt B Chorianopoulos K Divitini M Baalsrud Hauge J Jaccheri L Malaka R Applied games – in search of a new definition Entertainment Computing - ICEC 2015. ICEC 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 9353 2015 Cham Springer
  2. [9]Rigby C Walz SP Deterding S Gamification and motivation The Gameful World 2014 Massachusetts MIT Press 113 38
  3. [12]Deterding S Dixon D Khaled R Nacke L From game design elements to gamefulness: defining Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments; Tampere, Finland 2011 New York ACM 9 15
  4. [16]Ryan RM Deci EL Deci EL Ryan RM Overview of self-determination theory: an organismic dialectical perspective Handbook of Self-Determination Research 2002 Rochester, NY, US University of Rochester Press 3 33
  5. [19]Bogost I Walz SP Deterding S Why gamification is bullshit The Gameful World 2014 Massachusetts MIT Press 65 80
  6. [32]Caillois R Man, Play And Games 2001 Urbana, Ill University Of Illinois Press
  7. [33]Deterding S Walz SP Deterding S The ambiguity of games: histories and discourses of a gameful world The Gameful World 2014 Massachusetts MIT Press 23 64

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cheng, V. W. S., Davenport, T., Johnson, D., Vella, K., & Hickie, I. B.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Queensland University of Technology (AU)
Corresponding author
Cheng, Vanessa Wan Sze
Venue
JMIR Mental Health
Published
2019-06-26
Volume
6
Issue
6
Pages
e13717
ISSN
2368-7959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2947812004
Cited by
280
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 3
FWCI
5.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Mental Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Movember Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
gamification, mental health apps, well-being, game elements, behaviour change interventions, positive reinforcement, extrinsic motivation, behaviorism, user engagement, anxiety disorders, conduct disorder, bipolar disorder, digital health interventions, progress feedback, user-centered design, user satisfaction

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