Design Thinking and Gamification: User

Centered Methodologies

Eva Villegas1(&), Emiliano Labrador1, David Fonseca1,

Sara Fernández-Guinea2, and Fernando Moreira3

La Salle – Universitat Ramon Llull, 08022 Barcelona, Spain

1

{eva.villegas,emiliano.labrador,fonsi}@salle.url.edu
2
Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
[email protected]
3
Universidade Portucalense, Porto, Portugal
[email protected]

Abstract. The article presents the analysis of two systems of participatory

design that allow to understand collaborative learning as a method of creating
strategies and products. Two methodologies are described in order to discuss the
possibilities and challenges of its application. The text begins by defining a user
experience methodology designed to create with the participation of the user and
continues with the definition of Design Thinking, which enhances empathy with
the user through active techniques and a proficiency created to enhance the
participation of people through the game Gamification. For this, the theoretical
basis of each of the systems has been taken into account, the two Frameworks
on which they are based on are compared and the design of the sessions with
consumers is used as a starting point. It shows a first approximation of the
comparison of the two systems through the sample of frameworks in study that
mixes the user experience with Gamification. Through this analysis, it is
affirmed that the emotional behavior of the user is key to define strategies and
products, therefore, it must be designed for the user with the user.

Keywords: Design thinking
Gamification
User centered design

Constructivism paradigm
Creativity
User experience

1 Introduction

The user-centered design is a philosophy that allows the user to be part of the devel-
opment process, providing motivations, needs and desires during all its stages. The
methods used today in which they require this participation, are based mainly on
projective techniques [1]. This type of techniques allow emotional connection with the
user and active participation in the session. For this, a constructivist paradigm is used
[2], leaving all the protagonism to the user and allowing him to build his own thought.
The study shown below is based on the analysis of two systems that allow us to work
with the emotions of the users who participate in the session and therefore promote a
participatory design.

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

P. Zaphiris and A. Ioannou (Eds.): HCII 2019, LNCS 11590, pp. 115–124, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21814-0_10
116 E. Villegas et al.

On the one hand, Design Thinking is a methodology that is normally applied in the
creation of new products or strategies. On the other hand is Gamification which can be
applied in any development or creation process that requires a solution or measurable
result with the introduction of a playful attitude [3–5]. In both, it must be based on a
working hypothesis and some insights or project objectives. The aim of this study is to
analyze the two methodologies, their definitions, phases and objectives, so that their
similarities and differences are understood in order to understand which Gamification
frameworks are centered on the user and how they apply it.

2 Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework includes a brief description of the two methodologies used
in the study: Gamification and Design thinking, and the two systems in which they are
related: participatory design and the constructivist paradigm.
The Gamification [6] is a methodology that is defined as the application of game
strategies in non-recreational environments [7]. In 2008, the term was used for the first
time, although several documents indicate the use of this system previously by creating
several games that were born as a reflection of real life. Nick Pelling in 2002 was the
first to use the term as such, but it is not until 2010 that it is disseminated more
extensively.
Of the many definitions of the term, it is work with those that are based on the
design of the system [8], that is, with those that link the implementation of
elements/game components with the requirements or aims to be taken into account in
the system. The definition of the method is based in mind by means of three compo-
nents described by the authors Hunike, Leblanc and Zubec in 2004, the MDA [9]:
(M) Mechanics, (D) Dynamics and (A) Aesthetics. Mechanics as rules that define the
game system, Dynamics as the relation of the interaction that is established between the
system and the users and Aesthetics as the perceptions of the users during the session.
The Design thinking [10] is a methodology that was started, in the case of Gam-
ification in 2008, but it wasn’t until in 2009 Tim Brown of IDEO in his book Change
by Design [11] that popularized the term. It is a methodology that focuses processes on
people and is used mainly to create/define strategies, products or services, so that
creativity is enhanced. The participants can be multidisciplinary profiles involved in the
proposal allowing them to work in a transversal way.
The two methodologies are based on a participatory design [12] that promotes the
active participation of multidisciplinary teams focused on the product to be created or
evaluated. In this, it is tried to validate that all the profiles are covered and have
contributed their needs and motivations as an important part of the creation process.
For this, the constructivist paradigm that conceives knowledge can be used [13] as a
construction of the user.
 Design Thinking and Gamification: User Centered Methodologies 117

3 Design Frameworks

In the case of Gamification there is no consensus among the authors and it works using
different frameworks. Normally, large companies or professionals have published their
frameworks and the rest of the community uses them, although there is no record of
which is the most used. Below are some of the most commonly used and known
frameworks in the field.

3.1 Gamification Design Framework

Gamification Design Framework de Andrej Marczewski

The Gamification design framework is based on establishing the necessary processes to
be able to create a gamified system [14] (see Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Gamification design framework overview [14]

This framework starts from the definition of three components that will be the basis
on which the whole system will be built: The definition of the problem, the definition of
the users and the definition of the objectives. Within these axes the rest of the elements
are included, such as the level of immersion (Discovery/On-boarding/Immersion/
Mastery/Replay), the definition of the mechanics that will modify the behaviors,
motivators and emotions, and finally, the activities what the users will have to do, as
well as the feedback that will be received.
In this type of system, importance is given to three phases: discovery, design and
redefine. In the first phase, the problem or aims are defined, the users who will be part
of the session and the register of success. In the second phase, the session is designed
taking into account the possible motivations and the applicable game mechanics. The
final phase works on the actions to act or to give feedback and then, in an iterative way,
118 E. Villegas et al.

the necessary improvements can be made. Therefore, we work in a sequential process

but iteration is applied when necessary.
Gamification Model Canvas Framework
The Gamification Model Canvas Framework was developed by Sergio Jiménez from
the MDS framework and the Business Model Canvas by Alex Osterwalder [15].

Fig. 2. Gamification Model Canvas by Sergio Jiménez

Like its model the Business Model Canvas (see Fig. 2), this framework bases its
structure on the different elements based on when designing a gamified system.
Although it takes users into account, it is not a framework centered on the user itself, so
it is subsequently redesigned.
The new framework [16] is based on the evolution of Sergio Jiménez’s Gamification
Model Canvas [17]. In this case, it is worked on the creation of an intrinsic motivation
framework for users, the FBM (Fogg Behavior Model). On the one hand, the profiles
are analyzed from a difficulty level point of view. In the next step, the types of
motivators in which to work with the users are analyzed, and finally the dynamics to be
performed are selected. In the following figure (see Fig. 3) the diagram can be
visualized.
Gamification Project Design Framework
The framework shown below (see Fig. 4) is based on the process carried out in projects
[18]. In the first phase of the process, the objectives of the project are indicated and it is
decided if it is appropriate or not to apply Gamification, information is sought about the
company for which it is going to work and finally, the target is decided from a possible
point of view of the behavior of the user according to certain actions. In the second
phase the possible motivators are defined according to what has been studied and
decided in the previous phase. In the final phase, the prototype is created and tested
with users, it is produced. Moreover, it is still being tested and once the project is
delivered, it will be reviewed and possible errors will be solved.
 Design Thinking and Gamification: User Centered Methodologies 119

Fig. 3. Gamification Model Canvas Framework [16]

Fig. 4. How to run a successful gamification project [18]

Fun Experience Design Framework

The Fun Experience Design methodology (FED) is an iterative Gamification
methodology developed by Emiliano Labrador and Eva Villegas [19] which consists of
four phases. One regarding the knowledge of the users to which the system is directed
120 E. Villegas et al.

to gamify through surveys or other means, one of design, one of implementation and
new data collection and lastly, a redesign phase where those mechanics that have not
worked well are adjusted or improved (see Fig. 5) [4, 5, 20].

Fig. 5. Framework of four steps of Fun Experience Design methodology

3.2 Design Thinking Framework

Design thinking is a methodology that has a unique framework that responds to the
evaluation processes necessary to carry out the application of the methodology. Below
is the Design thinking framework of Norman Nielsen Group [14]. The methodological
process to be followed is indicated: empathize, define, ideate, prototype, test, and
implement (see Fig. 6). The first two phases allow us to know more closely the user
profiles and identify any point to be taken into account during the session, they are
included in the Understand phase. In the next two phases, that of Ideate and Prototype,
the first results associated with the project in which one is working within the
Exploration phase begin to be given. The next two phases, those of test and imple-
mentation, allow the results to be materialized.
The phases are worked sequentially, but iterating among them as the results of the
project require it.

3.3 Comparative
Based on the definitions above, it can be determined that both Design thinking and
Gamification use systems based on sequential work processes, but giving consultants
the freedom to adapt each of the steps to the needs of the project and according to the
results of the projects in previous steps, it can be agreed on that they take into account
 Design Thinking and Gamification: User Centered Methodologies 121

Fig. 6. Design thinking, Norman Nielsen Group

the user, although in different measures where the main objective of the process, the
work through the motivators of user behavior is a key point that must always be taken
into account. For this, the user profile, the project objective and the insights to be
achieved are worked on in the initial phase, which the two methodologies define as the
discovery phase. Once the parameters are established, the design and development
phase of the process is continued. The exploration phase of the design produced, once
there is a defined based on the needs and desires of the users is finalized with a phase of
evaluation or testing [21]. This is possibly the most iterative of all since it depends on a
large extent on the results of the tests and the opinions of the users. Below is a
comparative table of the three phases defined in each of the methodologies (Table 1).

Table 1. Comparison of the phases of the two frameworks

Gamification design framework Design thinking framework
Discovery Understand
Design Explore
Redesign Materialize

Although all Gamification frameworks have a similar structure, and in turn are
somewhat similar to the Design thinking framework, some differences have been
observed, as it can be seen in Table 2.
122 E. Villegas et al.

Table 2. Design thinking framework, Gamifications frameworks, and new framework

Design Andrej Gamification Gamification Fun
thinking Marczewski Model Project Experience
framework Framework Canvas Design Design
Framework
Empathize X X
Define X X X X X
Ideate X X X X X
Prototype X X X
Test X X X
Implement X X X X X

All the frameworks take into account the users whom they call Players, since they
define their characteristics not by the traditional demographic and social parameters but
by their behavior in a playful environment [22, 23]. However, not all of them define or
treat them equally, and above all, they do not explicitly indicate how this information
can be obtained. For this, it is not clear what has to be done to have knowledge of one
of its central pillars.
In addition, almost none of them explicitly defines the testing phase. This has also
been observed in numerous success stories that can be found in the literature, where all
the phases of the design and implementation of a gamified system are explained, except
for its testing. Thus, a lack of documentation in gamified systems has been detected in a
key phase of Design thinking, which turns it into an iterative methodology based on the
results of the project.

4 Conclusions

In conclusion, the purpose of the study is to identify the common and divergent points,
strengths and weaknesses of two systems that enhance the participatory design. The
main point of the two is to situate the user as the key to be able to make a successful
design. All frameworks make it clear that it is essential to know who you are designing
for, their needs, motivations and above all their behavior. However, a greater consensus
is lacking in allowing users to be those who, through their knowledge or action,
provide a very real vision of design. Being normally multidisciplinary work teams that
develop these systems, the opinions, needs and desires are identified and work from
several points of view.
Constructivist psychology helps to understand how people get involved in user
experience processes. To do this, the new methodologies shown, that are still in the
study phase, enhance user participation through explicit knowledge of the profiles and a
session design based on the results obtained. This knowledge should be generated in
every design, and therefore all frameworks should incorporate it and also indicate how
to obtain this data.
 Design Thinking and Gamification: User Centered Methodologies 123

Gamification is an axis that enhances emotional behavior. The user experience is a

philosophy of rigor in the collection of data and evaluation of results. The results of the
projects that are made through the union of these systems can be used as systems that
enhance the emotions and creativity of users, allowing designs to be created from the
needs and desires.
As a future line, it will be worked on the detail of knowing in depth the emotional
behavior of the user, the time of attention during the session and the empathy of the
facilitator with the participants through the analysis of: number of items that are
extracted, quality of ideas based on the aim and intervention times. All this by creating
a single session target with two different user groups. Intergroup and intragroup.

Acknowledgment. With the support of the Secretaria d’Universitats i Recerca of the Depart-
ment of Business and Knowledge of the Generalitat de Catalunya with the help of 2017 SGR
934.

References
1. Lilienfeld, S.O., Wood, J.M., Garb, H.N.: The scientific status of projective techniques.
Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 1, 27–66 (2000)
2. Dagar, V., Yadav, A.: Constructivism: a paradigm for teaching and learning. Arts Soc. Sci.
J. 7, 200 (2016)
3. Villegas, E., Labrador, E., Fonseca, D., Fernández-Guinea, S.: Mejora de las metodologías
de experiencia de usuario mediante la aplicación de gamificación. Metodología I’m In. In:
13th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), pp. 1–6,
Cáceres (2018). e-ISBN 978-989-98434-8-6, Print-ISBN 978-1-5386-4885-8
4. Labrador, E., Villegas, E.: Unir Gamificación y Experiencia de Usuario para mejorar la
experiencia docente. RIED. Rev. Iberoam. Educ. a Distancia. 19, 125 (2016)
5. Fonseca, D., Torres-Kompen, R., Labrador, E., Villegas, E.: Technology-Enhanced
Learning: Good Educational Practices. IGI-Global, Hershey (2018)
6. Prowting, F.: Gamification: Engaging Your Workforce. Prowting, F. (ed.). Ark Group
(2014)
7. Deterding, S., Sicart, M., Nacke, L., O’Hara, K., Dixon, D.: Gamification: using game-
design elements in non-gaming contexts. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference
Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI EA 2011 (2011)
8. Gabe, Z., Cunningham, C.: Gamification By Design. O’Reilly, Newton (2011)
9. Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., Zubek, R.: MDA: a formal approach to game design and game
research. In: Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence
Workshop on Challenges in Game AI, AAAI 2004 (2004)
10. Brown, T., Wyatt, J.: Design thinking for social innovation. Dev. Outreach 12, 29–43 (2010)
11. Brown, T.: Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and
Inspires Innovation. HarperCollins Publishers, New York (2009)
12. Spinuzzi, C.: The methodology of participatory design. Tech. Commun. 52, 163–174 (2005)
13. Harlow, S., Cummings, R., Aberasturi, S.M.: Karl Popper and Jean Piaget: a rationale for
constructivism. Educ. Forum. 71, 41–48 (2006)
14. Marczewski, A.: Gamification: A Simple Introduction. Marczewski, A. (ed.) (2013)
15. Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., Smith, A.: Business Model Generation. Booksgooglecom
(2010). https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0307-10.2010
124 E. Villegas et al.

16. Escribano, F., Moretón, J., Jimenez, S.: Gamification Model Canvas Framework. Evolution
(2016). https://gecon.es/gamification-model-canvas-framework-evolution-1/
17. Ruizalba, J., Navarro, F., Jiménez, S.: Gamificación como estrategia de marketing interno.
Intang. Cap. 9(4), 1113–1144 (2013)
18. Hamari, J., Koivisto, J.: Why do people use gamification services? Int. J. Inf. Manag. (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.04.006
19. Labrador, E., Villegas, E.: Fun experience design applied to learning. In: ICEILT
International Congress on Education, Innovation and Learning (2014)
20. Villegas, E., Pifarré, M., Fonseca, D.: Methodological design of user experience applied to
the field of accessibility. In: Proceedings of the 5th Iberian Conference on Information
Systems and Technologies, CISTI 2010 (2010)
21. Fonseca, D., Conde, M.Á., García-Peñalvo, F.J.: Improving the information society skills: is
knowledge accessible for all? Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 17, 229–245 (2018)
22. Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., Sarsa, H.: Does gamification work?-a literature review of empirical
studies on gamification. In: HICSS, vol. 14, pp. 3025–3034, January 2014
23. Hartmann, T., Klimmt, C., Hamari, J., Tuunanen, J.: Player types: a meta-synthesis. Trans.
Digit. Games Res. Assoc. 1(2), 29–53 (2014)