Cited by 74Educational Games and GamificationDigital Mental Health InterventionsInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Recommendations for implementing gamification for mental health and wellbeing

Open access
Cheng, Vanessa Wan Sze·2020·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

Gamification is increasingly being proposed as a strategy to increase engagement for mental health and wellbeing technologies. However, its implementation has been criticized as atheoretical, particularly in relation to behavior change theory and game studies theories. Definitions of the term "gamification" vary, sometimes widely, between and within academic fields and the effectiveness of gamification is yet to be empirically established. Despite this, enthusiasm for developing gamified mental health technologies, such as interventions, continues to grow. There is a need to examine how best to implement gamification in mental health and wellbeing technologies in a way that takes quick production cycles into account while still emphasizing empirical investigation and building a rigorous evidence base. With reference to game studies and the medical (eHealth/mHealth) literature, this article interrogates gamification for mental health and wellbeing by examining core properties of the game form. It then explores how gamification can best be conceptualized and implemented for mental health and wellbeing goals from conceptualization through to iterative co-development and evaluation that accommodates software development schedules. Finally, it summarizes its conceptual analysis into recommendations for researchers and designers looking to do so. These recommendations are: (1) assess suitability, (2) implement to support, (3) assess acceptability, (4) evaluate impact, and (5) document comprehensively. These recommendations aim to encourage clear language, unified terminology, the application and evaluation of theory, comprehensive and constant documentation, and transparent evaluation of outcomes.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.586379

Cites

89 of 89 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?

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

1 of the 90 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Caillois R. (1958/2001). Man, Play, and Games. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
  2. Deterding S. (2013). “ Skill atoms as design lenses for user-centered gameful design,” in Proceedings of CHI ‘13 Workshop “Designing Gamification, (Hamburg: Hans Bredow Institute for Media Research).
  3. Meeker M. (2017). “ Internet trends 2017,” in Proceedings of the Code Conference, (Los Angeles, CA: Kleiner Perkins).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cheng, V. W. S.
Affiliations
The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Cheng, Vanessa Wan Sze
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2020-12-07
Volume
11
Pages
586379-586379
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3111987006
Cited by
74
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7
FWCI
1.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Movember Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
gamification, mental health, well-being, gamified interventions, behaviour change theory, game studies, e-health, mobile health, user engagement, co-development, implementation guidelines, terminology

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