Refine
Document Type
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (3)
Keywords
- Acceptance (3) (remove)
Institute
Open Access
- Open Access (3)
- Diamond (1)
- Hybrid (1)
Gamification is increasingly successful in the field of education and health. However, beyond call-centers and applications in human resources, its utilization within companies remains limited. In this paper, we examine the acceptance of gamification in a large company (with over 17,000 employees) across three generations, namely X, Y, and Z. Furthermore, we investigate which gamification elements are suited for business contexts, such as the dissemination of company principles and facts, or the organization of work tasks. To this end, we conducted focus group discussions, developed the prototype of a gamified company app, and performed a large-scale evaluation with 367 company employees. The results reveal statistically significant intergenerational disparities in the acceptance of gamification: younger employees, especially those belonging to Generation Z, enjoy gamification more than older employees and are most likely to engage with a gamified app in the workplace. The results further show a nuanced range of preferences regarding gamification elements: avatars are popular among all generations, badges are predominantly appreciated by Generations Z and Y, while leaderboards are solely liked by Generation Z. Drawing upon these insights, we provide recommendations for future gamification projects within business contexts. We hope that the results of our study regarding the preferences of the gamification elements and understanding generational differences in acceptance and usage of gamification will help to create more engaging and effective apps, especially within the corporate landscape.
In the last years, social robots have become a trending topic. Indeed, robots which communicate with us and mimic human behavior patterns are fascinating. However, while there is a massive body of research on their design and acceptance in different fields of application, their market potential has been rarely investigated. As their future integration in society may have a vast disruptive potential, this work aims at shedding light on the market potential, focusing on the assistive health domain. A study with 197 persons from Italy (age: M = 67.87; SD = 8.87) and Germany (age: M = 62.15; SD = 6.14) investigates cultural acceptance, desired functionalities, and purchase preferences. The participants filled in a questionnaire after watching a video illustrating some examples of social robots. Surprisingly, the individual perception of health status, social status as well as nationality did hardly influence the attitude towards social robots, although the German group was somewhat more reluctant to the idea of using them. Instead, there were significant correlations with most dimensions of the Almere model (like perceived enjoyment, sociability, usefulness and trustworthiness). Also, technology acceptance resulted strongly correlated with the individual readiness to invest money. However, as most persons consider social robots as “Assistive Technological Devices” (ATDs), they expected that their provision should mirror the usual practices followed in the two Countries for such devices. Thus, to facilitate social robots’ future visibility and adoption by both individuals and health care organisations, policy makers would need to start integrating them into official ATDs databases.
This article presents a study of cultural differences affecting the acceptance and design preferences of social robots. Based on a survey with 794 participants from Germany and the three Arab countries of Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, we discuss how culture influences the preferences for certain attributes. We look at social roles, abilities and appearance, emotional awareness and interactivity of social robots, as well as the attitude toward automation. Preferences were found to differ not only across cultures, but also within countries with similar cultural backgrounds. Our findings also show a nuanced picture of the impact of previously identified culturally variable factors, such as attitudes toward traditions and innovations. While the participants’ perspectives toward traditions and innovations varied, these factors did not fully account for the cultural variations in their perceptions of social robots. In conclusion, we believe that more real-life practices emerging from the situated use of robots should be investigated. Besides focusing on the impact of broader cultural values such as those associated with religion and traditions, future studies should examine how users interact, or avoid interaction, with robots within specific contexts of use.