Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29167090›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2017

Attrition from Web-Based Cognitive Testing: A Repeated Measures Comparison of Gamification Techniques.

Jim Lumsden, Andy Skinner, David Coyle, Natalia Lawrence, Marcus Munafo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jim LumsdenUK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, School of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6817-6449
Andy SkinnerUK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, School of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7019-163X
David CoyleSchool of Computer Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-5103-0379
Natalia LawrenceSchool of Psychology, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1969-6637
Marcus MunafoUK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, School of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4049-993X

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_12013/6Medical Research Council MC_UU_12013/7
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prospect of assessing cognition longitudinally and remotely is attractive to researchers, health practitioners, and pharmaceutical companies alike. However, such repeated testing regimes place a considerable burden on participants, and with cognitive tasks typically being regarded as effortful and unengaging, these studies may experience high levels of participant attrition. One potential solution is to gamify these tasks to make them more engaging: increasing participant willingness to take part and reducing attrition. However, such an approach must balance task validity with the introduction of entertaining gamelike elements.

objectiveThis study aims to investigate the effects of gamelike features on participant attrition using a between-subjects, longitudinal Web-based testing study.

methodsWe used three variants of a common cognitive task, the Stop Signal Task (SST), with a single gamelike feature in each: one variant where points were rewarded for performing optimally; another where the task was given a graphical theme; and a third variant, which was a standard SST and served as a control condition. Participants completed four compulsory test sessions over 4 consecutive days before entering a 6-day voluntary testing period where they faced a daily decision to either drop out or continue taking part. Participants were paid for each session they completed.

resultsA total of 482 participants signed up to take part in the study, with 265 completing the requisite four consecutive test sessions. No evidence of an effect of gamification on attrition was observed. A log-rank test showed no evidence of a difference in dropout rates between task variants (χ

conclusionsOur findings raise doubts about the ability of gamification to reduce attrition from longitudinal cognitive testing studies.

Indexed as

CognitionCognitive Behavioral TherapyComputersFemaleHumansInternetMaleResearch Designbehavioral research/methodsboredomcognitioncomputersexecutive functiongames, experimentalinhibition (psychology)Internetplay and playthings/psychologytask performance and analysis

Identifiers

PMID29167090
PMCPMC5719230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.