Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh

Full length article

Examining the impact of gamification on intention of engagement and

brand attitude in the marketing context
Yang Yang a, Yousra Asaad b, *, Yogesh Dwivedi a
a
School of Management, Swansea University, Bay Campus, Fabian Way, Swansea, SA1 8EN, United Kingdom
b
Business School, London Campus, Newcastle University, London, E1 7EZ, United Kingdom

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The development of multiple applications with features of games has brought about a new trend e
Received 21 December 2016 gamification. Gamification has become a fast-emerging practice in the business world, with a growing
Received in revised form number of organizations adopting gaming techniques and game-style rewards in order to increase
29 March 2017
customer engagement. Despite this growing trend and the potential role played by gamification, the
Accepted 31 March 2017
Available online 3 April 2017
marketing literature lacks models that explain the use of gamification in the marketing context, cus-
tomers' perceptions of gamification and its effects on their attitudes towards the brand. This study ad-
dresses this omission by adopting the TAM framework in a gamification context. Similar to TAM,
Keywords:
Gamification
gamification finds its roots in the technology and information systems literature. Drawing on TAM, this
TAM study presents a model that examines the effects of gamification on customers' intention to engage in the
Brand attitude gamification process and their attitudes toward the brand. Using a quantitative methodology, the results
Engagement provide empirical support for perceived usefulness and perceived enjoyment as predictors to intention of
engagement and brand attitude. However, perceived ease of use was surprisingly found not to be
significantly related to people's intention of engagement with the gamification process and their brand
attitude. In addition, perceived social influence was found not to be related to people's intention of
engagement, but was related to their brand attitude. The findings of this research have theory and
practical implications.
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction 2014). In other words, a conceptualisation of gamification for a

specific purpose has rarely been provided when people have un-
The concept of gamification and its mechanics in non-gaming dertaken academic research in gamification in various contexts.
environments has become a fast-emerging practice in business, Second, since gamification is a relatively new concept, it is largely
especially in marketing. Though in its infancy, the dynamics and unclear how an effective design can be realised (Deterding, Dixon,
techniques of gamification have been found to be easily trans- Khaled, & Nacke, 2011) for a specific purpose. Burk (2013) noted
ferrable from their gaming software origins into the world of that there are often unrealistic expectations of success, and
commerce. The use of gamification tools and methods has the po- consequently many businesses are implementing gamification
tential to benefit organizations from all industries because of their without a proper examination of whether or not gamification is the
fundamental potential to shape and influence behaviors and atti- right instrument to improve their business processes. Due to poor
tudes. A growing number of organizations are adopting gaming design of gamification, some practices have failed in reaching
techniques and game-style rewards in order to increase customer business objectives (Gartner Research, 2012). Furthermore, there is
engagement (Gartner Research, 2011). Despite the practical no uniform approach to developing and successfully implementing
importance of gamification, current gamification literature remains gamification aspects in an existing process. This means that there is
anecdotal and lacks academic rigour (Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, limited knowledge on how gamification can be structurally applied
in many processes. It is also unknown if gamification is appropriate
for changing people's behavior or attitude in all types of business
* Corresponding author.
processes (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004). Third, academic evidence of
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (Y. Yang), [email protected]. the effects or benefits of gamification is lacking.
uk (Y. Asaad), [email protected] (Y. Dwivedi). Gamification is regarded as a new technology-based system

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.066
0747-5632/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
460 Y. Yang et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469

which has been applied to different areas. In the field of informa- even recruiting friends to join the community (Meloni & Gruener,
tion systems, technology acceptance theories have examined the 2012). Therefore, a particularly compelling, dynamic and sus-
adoption of technology-based systems. In particular, the technol- tained gamification experience can be used to accomplish a variety
ogy acceptance model (TAM) is a well-established, robust and of marketing goals. Pioneering participants include Coca-Cola,
parsimonious model for predicting user acceptance. However, the McDonalds, Nike and Sony.
model has been criticised for disregarding other important aspects In this paper, the authors refer to gamification as a system
(e.g. social aspects) that may predict technology acceptance. The applying game design elements to a non-game context in order to
model is also said to overlook other types of behavioral intentions generate playful experiences and influence users' attitude and/or
or attitudes specific to particular contexts. Through an extension of behavior. Gamification can be perceived as a form of service pack-
the TAM model, this study aims to examine the concept of gami- aging, where a core service is enhanced by a rule-based service
fication in the marketing context through and its effects on users' system that provides feedback and interaction mechanisms to the
engagement intention and attitude towards the brand. user with the aim of facilitating and supporting the users' overall
behavior or attitude change. In this case, the core service can also be
2. Literature review a game that can be further gamified (Huotari & Hamari, 2011).

2.1. Gamification 2.3. Motivations and effects of gamification

Gamification is a relatively new term, especially when it is used 2.3.1. Motivations of gamification
in relation to the internet, but it is not a new concept. The roots of There are generally two types of human motivation: intrinsic
gamification originate in the digital media industry (Deterding and extrinsic. Extrinsic motivation involves doing something for its
et al., 2011) and started out with the term “funware” (Tahashi, external rewards, like money, praise or other tangibles. Intrinsic
2008). Gabe Zichermann first employed this term. The author motivation, on the other hand, drives behaviors that result in in-
defined it as “the art and science of turning your customer's ternal achievement or perception, like enjoyment or other positive
everyday interactions into games that serve your business pur- feelings (Denny, 2014). Traditionally, it was believed that intrinsic
poses” (Zichermann & Linder, 2010, p. 20). Gamification gained motivation was more desirable if it resulted in a better learning
widespread recognition in the 2010s, when several industry players outcome (Deci, Koestelr, & Ryan, 1999). As gamification marketing
popularised it (Deterding, 2011). Companies like Bunchball and process is normally committed to instil products or brands infor-
Badgeville created platforms for integrating game elements into mation to users, it is a drive for participants to learn the information
sites. and further join or continue an action e in our case, engaging with
Gamification is perceived as a system applying game design gamification e because of the effects it has. Therefore, when people
elements to a non-game context to change people's behavior are intrinsically motivated, they have a genuine desire for the ac-
(Bunchball, 2010). Gamification is viewed as an entertainment tivity itself and enjoy it tremendously. Two main intrinsic motiva-
system based on technologies which combine wireless devices tion theories guided the understanding of psychological aspects
with communication forms (Lule, Omwansa, & Waema, 2012). In associated with participation or engagement behavior. The theory
the past few years, gamification has been applied to numerous of 16 basic desires (Reiss, 2000) was employed to understand
applications across diverse areas, such as information systems and innate human desires along with foundations for collaborative
social sciences. Gamification describes a number of design princi- engagement in business, providing utility for analyzing and pre-
ples, processes and systems used to influence, engage and motivate dicting human behavior, which includes Order, Power, Indepen-
individuals, groups and communities to drive behaviors (in- dence, Curiosity, Acceptance, Saving, Idealism, Honor, Social
tentions) or generate the desired effect (Deterding et al., 2011; Contact, Family, Status, Vengeance, Romance, Eating, Physical Ac-
Glover, 2013; Nicholson, 2012). tivity, and Tranquility. In addition, Self-Determination Theory (SDT)
(Deci & Ryan, 1985) framed a motivation model for understanding
2.2. Gamification for marketing what and how human behavior is initiated and regulated. It rec-
ognizes social and environmental conditions that affect personal
Due to the rise and popularity of games in marketing activities, volition and engagement in activities. This theory also combines
the new trend of gamification has attracted the attention of mar- both psychological needs and cognition motivations describing
keters. It is slowly being embedded in the minds of marketing ex- needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Hence, it is
ecutives, and the gamification market is expected to grow to $2.8 interesting to note that both of these theories modelled a close
billion in 2016 (Meloni & Gruener, 2012). In a 2013 survey, more association between people's basic desire, social aspects and
than 70% of Forbes Global 2000 companies stated that they planned cognitional factors. In the context of gamification for marketing, if
to use gamification for marketing and customer retention purposes the social needs and cognitive motives are inherently intertwined
(Park & Bae, 2014). with “play”, users may be affected by those factors in behavior or
Due to improvements in the productivity and development of attitude.
technologies, customers are becoming more and more selective in In addition, in game studies, it is evident that the motivational
how and where they spend their money and time. Accordingly, and emotional involvement during playing can be immense. The
companies are pressurized to find new ways to adapt their mar- basic idea of gamification is to use this motivational power of
keting strategies in order to attract customers' attention and keep games for other purposes not solely related to the entertaining
them engaged in the process. The marketing area is highly inno- purposes of the game itself. As some recent research illustrates,
vative and sophisticated in deploying new ideas and phenomena, gamification systems are currently used with aims as diverse as
so many companies have used gamification in the marketing area influencing behavior or attitude, motivating for physical workout,
for branding, including earning points, badges and free products fostering safe driving behavior, and enhancing learning in educa-
through playing games or joining competitive activities. Companies tion (e.g. McGonigal, 2011). However, although gamification is
can also take back control of the brand experience by engaging often supposed to be an effective instrument to foster motivation,
users, encouraging them to join a community, driving active researches and investigations about the motivational pull of
participation, sharing with friends outside the community and gamification are scarce, especially for marketing use.
 Y. Yang et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469 461

According to previous game studies, scholars also found that 2006), showing that gamification have an increasingly important
social needs and emotional factors especially positive emotions can role in engaging trainees. More and more companies are adopting
encourage people to play games. For example, in O'Neill, Wainess gamification in the hope of driving improved business perfor-
and Baker's (2005) study on the cognitive demands of playing mance. In games, players aim to obtain in-game awards, such as
games, social collaboration and communication were highlighted rare items and virtual currency, or to gain admiration and recog-
in achieving complex goals and making further progress in the nition from other players, and those can represent extrinsic moti-
game among all five factors. Koo (2009) found that enjoyment was vation (Lafreniere, Verner-filion, & Vallerand, 2012).
an important motivator of online game playing. Based on that, Gamification is also likely to influence people's behavior and
although gamification is usually used for non-game context, which attitudes. According to Anderson and Dill (2000), games have
is different from games, it has adopted the applications of game considerable effects on players' behaviors and thoughts. Similarly,
elements, so social factors or enjoyment are likely to be the influ- gamification, which has been used in different contexts, is argued
encers in the context of gamification use. to have positive effects on behavior and attitude in practice
(Domínguez et al., 2013; Rughinis, 2013). In addition, games and
2.3.2. Effects of gamification gamification are both goal-directed systems with rewards like
As for the effects of gamification, according to previous research, points, levels or badges, which can lead to changes in beliefs, or
the exposure to the brands placed in video games impacts on efforts to attain the rewards or bonus, illustrated in the expectancy
gamers' memory for the brands (Grigorovici & Constantin, 2004; value theory (Shepperd, 2001). Therefore, users are likely to change
Nelson, 2002). In addition, marketing or advertising interactions their behavior or thoughts due to the reward systems in gamifi-
can be classified into two receptive contexts: passive interaction cation process.
and active interaction. Most TV programs and movies are classified
as passive-interactive media, which are relatively difficult to
receive audiences' immediate responses. Video games are active- 2.4. TAM
interactive media because players are able to have and are even
required to have spontaneous interactions, responses and actions According to TAM and drawing from the theory of reasoned
(Lee & Faber, 2007). People by nature are more impressed with and action (TRA) (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), one's actual use of a tech-
interested in active interaction rather than passive interaction nology system is influenced directly or indirectly by the user's
(Acar, 2007). In this case, like games, gamification with multi-media behavioral intentions, attitude, perceived usefulness and perceived
can also have special characteristics of interactivity among users ease of the system. Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw (1989) found that
and sensory immersion, which makes it livelier and closer to au- perceived usefulness was the strongest predictor of an individual's
diences than other media. Also, it can be easier and more efficient intention to use an information technology or system. As the most
for marketers to produce and place targeted brands in the process. important determinant in TAM that may influence system use,
Compared with traditional marketing tools, gamification can be perceived usefulness is defined as “the degree to which a person
an innovative platform to incorporate branding messages. It is believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job
possible that gamification would represent an enjoyable way to performance” (Davis et al., 1989, p. 985).
enable consumers to accept branding messages (Xu, 2010). In Perceived ease of use is beneficial for initial acceptance of an
addition, gamification for marketing can allow repetition of the innovation and is essential for adoption and continued use (Davis
branding message during the process. Compared with traditional et al., 1989). It has been examined extensively in understanding
marketing tools, gamification has no time or space limitation in user acceptance of technology (Venkatesh, 2000). Similar to
branding products or services. Some other traditional media are perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use has been empirically
generally for a one-time propagation so people have less chance to shown to be a critical component of the adoption process (e.g., Lin,
be exposed to the marketing message. In addition, gamification has Shih, & Sher, 2007).
the interactive entertainment just like games. With a strong The model posits that actual usage is determined by users'
interaction, gamification can enhance people's sense of belonging behavioral intention to use, which in turn is influenced by their
and identification to a brand. When interacting with the system or attitude and the belief of perceived usefulness. The behavioral
other participants in the gamification process, users will have intention construct as a proxy to predicting the actual usage is also
various types of emotions and different experiences. This will a very important element in TAM.
directly or indirectly influence the evaluation of brand (Herrewijn In the application of information systems, TAM has been suc-
& Poels, 2013). Finally, people enjoy competing, playing games cessfully used by many researchers to predict behavioral intent
and winning. In gamification, they can also compete and win re- towards the use of information technology (e.g. Legris, Ingham, &
wards as well as revel in watching other people compete. People Collerette, 2003; Ramayah & Jantan, 2003; Ramayah, Lam, &
relish the process of participating in a competing activity with re- Sarkawi , 2003). TAM has become the most influential theory in
wards, even if the prizes are small, symbolic or virtual. Gamification the information systems field. It has been asserted that TAM ap-
takes advantages of the game characteristics and applies them into pears to be able to account for 40%e50% of user acceptance (Park,
marketing use. People's willingness to compete and win rewards 2009). Li (2014) maintains that TAM is a well-accepted theory in
during that process can be a catalyst to improving their loyalty to a the context of IS acceptance that explains online consumer
brand, product or service. behavior in the context of individual acceptance or rejection of a
Gamification has the potential to boost people' engagement, but technology.
few scholars have put it into practical research, especially in mar- However, some researchers (e.g. Davis et al., 1989; Davis, 1993;
keting context. A research about employees found that gamification Benbasat & Barki, 2007; Li, 2014) have critiqued TAM for its
can make the work process fun and that when workers combine incompleteness and called for extending TAM to specific contexts
games with work, they are more likely to be actively engaged and and including specific variables. We aim to respond to this call by
entertained. By the same token, the use of game-like designed examining a model that explains gamification in marketing while
training can also promote engaging work in a dynamic environ- taking into account the role of social influence and perceived
ment. Game-like designed training was taken as a common method enjoyment along other factors in explaining consumers' intention
of delivering training to teams or individuals (Fletcher & Tobias, to engage in the game and in turn their brand attitude.
462 Y. Yang et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469

2.5. Research model and hypotheses gamified process. Hence, we hypothesize:

H1. Perceived usefulness will have a positive effect on customers'
The original TAM suggests that system acceptance is determined
intention to engage in gamification.
by perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, but it was crit-
icized by latter scholars due to the lack of specific factors under Marketing activities like advertising, which engage customers
specific contexts which limited its explanatory and predictive po- with gamified activities, have been found to be useful tools to raise
wer. In game studies, social aspects are proposed to predict players' brand awareness, change customers' brand attitude and finally
attitudes and intentions, and enjoyment is considered the most affect customers' intention to purchase (MacKenzie, Lutz & Belch,
important motivational aspect for gameplay (Hsu & Lu, 2007; Li, 1986; Tsai & Chang, 2007). Perceived usefulness from the gamifi-
2014). In this research, social influence and enjoyment are cation marketing process can also affect people's brand attitude.
included in the conceptual model as additional factors for the study Perceived usefulness is also one of two basic determinants to pre-
of gamification use. Moreover, the relationships between attitude dict people's attitude towards a new system or technology, and
toward using and behavior intention to use have already been people's attitude towards advertising is significantly related to
validated by past research on TAM and TRA. Also, brand attitude people's attitude towards the brand (Biehal, Stephens, & Curlo,
was found to be closely related to purchase decision (Adis & Jun, 1992; Sallam & Algammash, 2016). Therefore, we infer that:
2013). In this study, unlike TAM or TRA, the research model is
H2. Perceived usefulness will have a positive effect on customers'
developed to explore the relationship between behavior intention
brand attitude.
of engagement and brand attitude in order to examine the mar-
keting benefits of gamification. Hence, the research model can be Research in information systems maintain that the easier users
shown as below: perceive a new technology, the more likely they would be to adopt
This study aims to examine gamification in a marketing context. that technology (Teo, Lim, & Lai, 1999). Perceived ease of use is also
Hence, we propose a model with brand attitude as a dependant considered to be an important factor that influences people's
variable. The main objectives of this research are not only to behavioral intention or attitude. It can be concluded from previous
investigate the antecedents of the behavioral intention to engage studies that the main feature of perceived ease of use is
with gamification, but also to examine the relationship between “simplicity”, whether in comprehension, interaction, accessibility
behavioral intention of engagement and brand attitude. It is worth or operation (Ndubisi & Jantan, 2003; Rogers, 1995). It has been
noting that studies based on TRA found strong support for using found in previous researches that perceived ease of use can influ-
attitude to predict intentions (e.g. Sheppard, Hartwick & Warshaw, ence behavior or attitude in information technology adoption (e.g.
1988), but this model uses intention to predict attitude. The Hsu & Lu, 2004; Rodrigues, Costa, & Oliveira, 2013). Ramayah, Lam,
intention and attitude in TRA studies are both towards the system, et al. (2003) and Ramayah, Tham, Aafaqi & (2003) found that
but while the intention is towards the game, the attitude in this perceived ease of use has a significant impact on intention to use
study is towards the product brand which is embedded in the internet banking, which corroborates the findings by Ramayah,
gamified marketing process (see Fig. 1). Ma’ruf, Jantan, and Osman (2002), Adams, Nelson, and Todd
Some studies have found a significant effect of perceived use- (1992) and Davis et al. (1989). Huang, Linn and Chuang (2007)
fulness on intentions and attitudes (e.g. Davis et al., 1989; argue that perceived ease of use is one of two fundamental fac-
Pikkarainen, Pikkarainen, Karjaluoto, & Pahnila, 2004; Venkatesh, tors for predicting user acceptance. Despite this widespread
2000). However, Shroff, Deneen, and Ng’s (2011) found that agreement on the impact of ease of use of technology on attitudes/
perceived usefulness had no influence on consumers' behavioral behaviours, Benbasat and Barki (2007) and Li (2014) suggest that
intention to use an e-portfolio system. Another study (Li, 2014) ease of use is not relevant in a gamification context. We challenge
argues that perceived usefulness is misleading and superfluous in a this view and argue that an increasing number of companies are
gamification context. However, the present study examines gami- using gamification as a technological platform to influence their
fication in a marketing context. We maintain that gamification is a consumers' attitudes and behaviors. These games vary in their level
useful mechanism that brand managers can implement to enhance of accessibility, simplicity, and degree of ease of comprehension
consumers' brand attitude. The association between the game and and interaction. Therefore, we maintain that consumers will be
the brand is likely to create a useful branding mechanism. We argue more likely to engage with games which are more accessible, easier
that consumers who perceive the game as being useful in the to comprehend and interact with. In this study, we argue that
recognition/familiarity of the brand are more likely to engage in the perceived ease of use of games influences consumers' intention to
engage and should be examined. Therefore we propose the
following:
H3. Perceived ease of use will have a positive effect on customers'
intention to engage in gamification.
As stated above, people's attitude can be influenced by relevant
experiences, emotions and reflections from a certain process. In the
gamification process, perceived ease of use may influence people's
attitude in a similar way to perceived usefulness. Perceived ease of
use represents the degree to which adopting a new technology or
system is free of effort (Davis et al., 1989). If the new technology or
system is simpler to use, people will feel more satisfied and be more
likely to adopt it, and thus create a positive impression of that new
system or technology. Furthermore, when compared with people
who are in a negative state of mind, people who are in a positive
state of mind are proven to have a more positive brand attitude and
a greater intention to try the advertised products (Owolabi & Olu-
Fig. 1. Research model.
 Y. Yang et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469 463

wabi, 2009). From this perspective, a higher degree of perceived from other people. In marketing, a number of sociocultural forces
ease of use is likely to cause a more favourable brand attitude. A such as parents, peers, school, shopping skills and mass media, can
study of smartphone brands in Malaysia found that the relationship be major influences during the process of customers' socialisation
between customer satisfaction and brand attitude is positive and (Gunter & Furnham, 1998). Kamaruddin and Mokhlis (2003)
significant (Ghorban, 2012). Satisfaction was stated to be an index maintain the importance of social influence on brand attitudes
of a system use (website) (Tu, Fang, & Lin, 2010). Satisfaction may and purchasing decisions of young people. In the gaming process,
shape the attitude towards a system or technology use. It has also people can often compete or cooperate with people and thus
been found that perceived ease of use has a significant influence on perceive social influence. In the context of gamified marketing,
customer satisfaction. It is thus reasonable to suggest that perceived social influence has the potential to influence people's
perceived ease of use is related to brand attitude. Therefore, we attitude towards the new system and further influence people's
hypothesize that: brand attitude. Therefore, we hypothesize that:
H4. Perceived ease of use will have a positive effect on customers' H6. Perceived social influence will have a positive effect on cus-
brand attitude. tomers' brand attitude.
Social influence can have a significant impact on behaviors of We posit that the attitude or behavioral intention of a customer
users in the ICT context (Hsu & Lu, 2007; Straub, Keil, & Brenner, towards a technology, system or service may result not only from
1997; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). It is argued that behavioral in- functional usefulness, the effort made for usage or perceived social
tentions could be determined by subjective norm (Fishbein & influence, but also from perceived enjoyment. If users do not enjoy
Ajzen, 1975), which is often defined as a person's perception that engaging in the gamified marketing process, they are unlikely to get
most people who are important to him think he should or should involved in it again. Perceived enjoyment may explain people's
not perform the behavior in question (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). intentions or attitudes (Childers, Carr, Peck, & Carson, 2001;
Oliver, Marwell, and Teixeira (1985) proposed the concept of Yannakakis & Hallam, 2007). Moreover, it has been found that
“critical mass” to examine subjective norm for social influence one important motive for playing games is to seek pleasure; players
research. This refers to the idea that some threshold of participants who perceive enjoyment in games (gamification) are more likely to
or actions have to be crossed before a social movement explodes be motivated to play more (Huang & Cappel, 2005; Kim, Park, Kim,
into being. That concept can explain the effect of social influence in Moon, & Chun, 2002). Thus, we argue that the user will be more
a collective environment and the acceptance of a groupware motivated to do or repeat an enjoyable activity, compared to a
application. It is assumed that people can perform a specific similar activity which is not enjoyable.
behavior if they believe that one or more of the important referents Prior research also suggests that enjoyment can indirectly
think they should. Support is also provided by the IDT suggesting impact behavioral intention through other variables. For example,
that user adoption decisions are influenced by a social system Venkatesh (2000) found that enjoyment significantly impacts
beyond an individual's decision, and by Kelman's (1958) study on behavioral intention to use information technology through
identification (i.e., when an individual accepts influence because perceived ease of use. Lee, Cheung, and Chen (2005) also found that
he/she wants to establish or maintain a satisfying self-defining enjoyment not only directly impacts behavioral intention, but also
relationship to another person or group) and internalisation (i.e., indirectly influences it through attitude. Moreover, scholars have
when an individual accepts influence because it is congruent with argued that hedonic feelings play a role in consumption decisions
her value system). (Hartman, Shim, Barber, & O’brien, 2006). Some studies also sup-
Research into the effect of social influence on behavioral in- port the claims that perceived enjoyment has no direct influence on
tentions have produced mixed results. For instance, Mathieson intention to use (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003; Yi &
(1991) found no significant effect of subjective norm on intention, Hwang, 2003). The authors aim to add to this debate and hypoth-
whereas Taylor and Todd (1995) found a significant effect. So the esize the following:
extent to which social influence can influence consumers' intention
H7. Perceived enjoyment will have a positive effect on customers'
of engagement remains an important issue to be further explored.
intention to engage in gamification.
The increased use of social media has brought about the rise of
online groups or communities with shared norms, values and in- Enjoyment is an important source of value for gamers, and thus
terests (Laroche, Habibi, Richard, & Sankaranarayanan, 2012). they are more willing to persist in a behavior with enjoyment as-
Those virtual groups or communities formed for sharing informa- pects (Deci et al., 1999). However, the impact of enjoyment on
tion may strengthen and intensify the “critical mass” concept of brand attitude has not been examined yet in the context of gami-
Kelman (1958) in the social media environment. Given that most of fication to the best knowledge of the authors. Research in electronic
the gamification processes nowadays are based on social media, it is commerce have so far explored the role of enjoyment in instant
likely that perceived social influence has an effect on customers' messaging (Li, Chau, & Lou, 2005) and online shopping (Koufaris,
intention. The following hypothesis is therefore proposed: 2002). Ducoffe (1996) found a significant positive relationship be-
tween entertainment and advertising value in traditional media
H5. Perceived social influence will have a positive effect on cus-
and in web advertising. A study by Taylor, Lewin, and Strutton
tomers' intention to engage in gamification.
(2011) proposed that SNS users' perceptions from entertaining
Social influence is often considered an essential factor in advertisements would positively influence their attitudes towards
bringing about attitude change, and it is also an important moti- advertising appearing on these SNSs. This was also supported by
vation for game players. Attitude change can be seen as a pervasive Gao and Koufaris (2006) and Brackett and Carr (2001), who argue
influence on judgements from the social environment. People often that perceived entertainment has been identified as one of the
reinterpret messages online with the ideology of important social determinant influences on consumers' attitudes towards adver-
groups and close people around. In Asch's (1952) study, the be- tising in electronic commerce. In a study investigating students'
haviors and beliefs guiding an individual are either an endorsement acceptance of an internet-based learning medium, Lee et al. (2005)
of his (her) group, and therefore a bond of social community, or an found that enjoyment not only directly impacts behavioral inten-
expression of conflict with it. Attitudes can be formed by reference tion, but also indirectly influences it through attitude.
464 Y. Yang et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469

Norris and Colman (1993), Gullen (1993) and Lloyd and Clancy followed standard interpretive practice. We started the analysis by
(1991) proposed that enjoyment or entertainment properties of identifying open codes followed by axial codes that helped us
an advertisement may affect people's attitude towards that elaborate some of the key themes (Corbin and Strauss, 2008). From
advertisement. Compared with other activities such as online this exploratory analysis, it was clear that perceived enjoyment was
shopping and information system uses, gamification processes (like recognised as a key motivation of engaging with brand games. The
games) will be more experience oriented. Thus the participants' results of the qualitative study combined with existing literature
attitude is more likely to be motivated by intrinsic motivations than were used to advance the conceptual development and hypotheses.
by playing online games. Perceived enjoyment from a new mar- In addition, the results of the qualitative study helped refine the
keting system is closely related to the attitude towards that system, measurement scales of the quantitative stage.
and people's attitude towards that system is also possibly related to
their attitude towards the brand embedded in that system. We 3.3. Sample and data collection
therefore hypothesize that:
University students in the UK and China have been chosen as the
H8. Perceived enjoyment will have a positive effect on customers'
main sampling participants.
brand attitude.
College students are often considered a bellwether of internet
Past studies have indicated that there is a link between attitude use, but the internet is not the only technology they have incor-
and behavioral intention, although the nature of the link is not porated into everyday life. Thanks to a plethora of technologies
always clear (Spears & Singh, 2004). Generally, researchers have (video game consoles, computers, handheld devices, and the
focused on the influence of attitude on behavioral intention, and internet), a range of entertainment options is at their disposal e a
not the other way round. Sukpanich and Chen (1999) found that range that is much wider than was available to their predecessors.
intention was one of the three constructs to affect web advertising Furthermore, today's college students are using technologies like
attitudes, the other two being awareness and preference. Similarly, mobile phones, MP3 players and other devices to entertain them-
Kotler (2004) showed the close relationship between behavioral selves wherever they may be. Hence, college students are a suitable
intention and attitude in his definition of an attitude, which is “a target for this study.
person's enduring favourable or unfavourable evaluations, A sample of students was drawn from one British university and
emotional feelings and action inclination toward some idea or one Chinese University through email invitation from December
object”. The strong emotional ties that gamification creates be- 2014 to March 2015. During that period, about 1500 students with a
tween the customers and the brand during marketing activities valid e-mail address were invited to participate in a gamification
have also been recognised (Norris & Colman, 1993). Therefore we activity which included playing a game (Oreo: Twist, Lick, Dunk)
posit that in a gamified marketing context, the intention to engage and completing a survey relating to the gamification marketing
with the game is likely to drive more favourable attitude towards activity of Oreo company.
the gamified brand. Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed: Oreo: Twist, Lick, Dunk is the official game of the popular
chocolate cookie brand. As suggested in the title, the game makes
H9. Customers' intention to engage in gamification will have a pos-
you twist, lick and dunk virtual Oreo cookies. First, swipe through
itive influence on their attitude towards the brand.
the cookies to “twist” them. Second, swipe through them again to
“lick” them and combine them into one big cookie. And then, drag
the big cookie into the glass of milk to “dunk” it. Finally, the players
3. Methods
can see the score and ranking on the leader board. Players can
download and play the ordinary version for free, and it is available
3.1. Research context
for iOS and Android devices, which made it the best performing
branded game ever launched, ranking number one overall in 12
We tested the hypotheses in the context of a gamified brand.
countries and top 10 overall in 36 countries. This game is popular
This study adopted a largely quantitative approach, informed by
and easy to pick up. Also, it enables players to unlock the Oreo
exploratory qualitative research. A review of the literature identi-
cookie varieties featured in the game.
fied numerous scales that had been developed, tested and validated
to measure the constructs that form the focal points for this
3.4. Research procedure
research e perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived
social influence, perceived enjoyment, intention of engagement
The research mimicked a gamification marketing activity and
and brand attitude. While it is documented that a phenomeno-
was made as easy as possible to conduct for the researcher. During
logical approach could have revealed deeper insights linking these
the research part, the participants were in pairs. Both of the sub-
phenomena, the problem of necessarily small sample sizes would
jects in each pair first watched a guide video about how to play the
have limited the generalisability of such an approach. The authors
game Oreo: Twist, Lick, Dunk. Then, all the participants down-
believe that our approach has validity because scales to measure
loaded the game from the app store to the mobile devices. They had
the focal constructs have been previously validated. This study
5 min to learn and practice playing the game. The participants then
makes a contribution to knowledge by identifying new linkages
played the game and got a score in the local and/or worldwide
between the aforementioned constructs and testing hypotheses
ranking leader board. After comparing their scores in pairs, the
specifically in the context of a gamified brand.
winner of each pair got a free pack of Oreo cookie. After playing the
game and getting the result, the participants filled up the ques-
3.2. Exploratory qualitative research tionnaire. The time for each research took about 20e30 min.
During data collection period, 323 responses were collected (a
Given the novelty of investigating gamification in the marketing response rate of 21.5%). Among all the collected data, 320 were fully
context, an initial exploratory qualitative study using two separate completed responses and 3 were incomplete with 1 answer
focus groups was undertaken. Using a purposive sampling method, missing respectively. The missing data have been calculated by
the focus groups' discussions on the motivations and effects of SPSS regress substitution. At last, all the collected data (323) were
playing games were analysed using NVIVO software. The analysis included in the analysis. All the participants are chosen from
 Y. Yang et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469 465

Table 1 4. Results
Demographic profile of respondents.

Demographic Profile Frequency Percentage % The hypothesized effects were tested using the two-step
Gender Male 105 32.5
approach of structural equation modelling (SEM) using AMOS
Female 218 67.5 (21.0). In a first step, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was
Total 323 100 employed to examine the reliability and validity of the scales
Education Bachelor and Under 183 56.6 employed in this study (Gerbing & Hamilton, 1996), followed in the
Master 103 31.9
2nd step by evaluation of the structural model.
PhD 37 11.5
Total 323 100 The measurement model was assessed by a range of commonly
Faculty Engineering 52 16.1 used indicators. The overall fit of the final model was good by
Science 150 46.4 conventional standards Chi-Square is 459.2 with 287 degrees of
Humanities and Arts 114 35.3
freedom (p < 0.000), Chi-Square/df ¼ 1.6, comparative fit index
Other 7 2.2
Total 323 100
(CFI) ¼ 0.96, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) ¼ 0.95, and root mean square
error approximation (RMSEA) ¼ 0.043. Convergent and discrimi-
nant validity was assessed for the final multi-item constructs. All
factor loading estimates measuring the same constructs for the
university students, so 300 out of 323 were ranging from 19 to 39
final CFA model are highly significant (p  0.001) showing that all
years old, 14 were under 19 years old and 9 were above 39 years old.
indicators effectively measure their corresponding construct and
Since the data were collected from Britain and China, the partici-
support convergent validity.
pants were mainly from Europe (132) and Asia (185). The partici-
Furthermore, the standardized loadings are all above 0.5 with
pants were chosen at random when invited, so there were several
the majority being above 0.7. The reliability of the constructs was
international students have been included in the research (Amer-
assessed using the measure of construct reliability (CR), which is
ica: 1, Arica: 5). The other demographic profile are shown in Table 1.
computed from the squared sum of factor loadings and the sum of
error variance terms (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham,
3.5. Measurement development
2006). All composite reliabilities exceeded 0.7 demonstrating
adequate reliability. Discriminant validity was examined by
Previously developed and validated measurement scales were
comparing the square root of the variance extracted measures with
adapted to the context of gamification. All constructs used 5-point
the inter-construct correlations associated with that factor. All
Likert-type scales anchored at “Strongly disagree” (1) to “Strongly
square root variance-extracted estimates are greater than the cor-
Agree” (5).
responding inter-construct correlation estimates, thus confirming
Perceived usefulness was measured with four items adapted
discriminant validity. Table 2 shows the mean, standard deviations,
from Hsu and Lu (2004), e.g. ‘It effectively made me think about the
reliability estimates, average variance extracted and the correlation
brand’, ‘I found it is useful in the branding of brand X’. Perceived
coefficients for the latent constructs of the study.
ease of use was measure with five items also adapted from Hsu and
Lu (2004), e.g. ‘It was easy for me to learn how to play that game
and compete with another person’, ‘My interaction with playing the 4.1. Hypothesized effects
game and the competition was clear and understandable’.
Perceived social influence was measured with six items adapted The structural model also showed acceptable fit (Chi-
from Hsu and Lu (2004), e.g. ‘If my friends like to join the game Square ¼ 469.00, Chi-Square/df ¼ 1.66, df ¼ 283, CFI ¼ 0.95,
competition, I will do it as well.’, ‘If people I know think it is fun to TLI ¼ 0.95, RMSEA ¼ 0.045). The model explains 41.2% of variation
win the game competition and get the prize, I will do it.’ Perceived in intention of engagement and 60.7% in brand attitude.
enjoyment was measured with 5 items based on Wu and Liu The results show that perceived usefulness had a positive sig-
(2007). nificant influence on both customers' intention to engage in
Intention of engagement was conceptualised as the degree to gamification and their brand attitude (b ¼ 0.148, p < 0.000 and
which a person has formulated conscious plans to perform or not b ¼ 0.102, p < 0.000), hence supporting H1 and H2. H3 and H4 were
perform some specified future behavior relating to the game. The not confirmed as perceived ease of use was not found to be a pre-
intention of engagement was measured with three items based on dictor to intention of engagement or brand attitude. While no
Park (2009) and Ahn, Ryu, and Han (2007), e.g. ‘I intend to join this support was found to the proposed effect of perceived social in-
activity again’ and ‘I intend to play that game frequently in the fluence on intention of engagement H5, higher levels of perceived
future’. social influence were associated with more positive brand attitude
Brand attitude was captured with nine items from Yalcin and (b ¼ 0.159, p < 0.005), thus confirming H6. Perceived enjoyment
Demir (2009) and Park (2009), e.g. ‘It makes me feel more had a positive significant effect on both intention of engagement
personally connected to the Oreo brand’ and ‘It makes me have the (b ¼ 0.571, p < 0.000) and brand attitude (b ¼ 0.100, p < 0.000),
intention to use other Oreo services or products’. demonstrating support for H7 and H8. Intention of engagement led

Table 2
Means, standard deviations, composite reliabilities, average variance extracted and correlations among latent constructs.

Construct No Mean SD CR AVE 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Perceived usefulness 3 3.23 1.00 0.76 0.62 0.79

2. Perceived ease of use 3 3.34 1.06 0.74 0.59 0.43 0.77
3. Perceived social influence 5 3.38 1.06 0.88 0.83 0.26 0.16 0.91
4. Perceived enjoyment 4 3.44 1.02 0.80 0.67 0.62 0.30 0.41 0.82
5. Intention of engagement 3 3.64 1.25 0.86 0.60 0.48 0.17 0.23 0.64 0.77
6. Brand attitude 8 3.54 1.04 0.87 0.76 0.47 0.18 0.33 0.55 0.69 0.87

Note: SD¼Standard Deviation, CR ¼ Composite reliability, Values in the diagonal represent the square root average variance extracted.
466 Y. Yang et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469

Table 3
Structural model estimates.

Hypo- theses Hypothesized paths Std. path coeff. t-value p-value Result

H1 PU/ IOE 0.148 1.608 0.000 Support

H2 PU /BA 0.102 1.296 0.000 Support
H3 PEU/ IOE 0.059 0.874 0.382 No Support
H4 PEU /BA 0.051 0.862 0.195 No Support
H5 PSI/ IOE 0.030 0.477 0.633 No Support
H6 PSI/BA 0.159 2.889 0.004 Support
H7 PE/IOE 0.571 5.617 0.000 Support
H8 PE/BA 0.100 1.090 0.000 Support
H9 IOE/BA 0.624 6.918 0.000 Support

to more positive brand attitude (b ¼ 0.624, p < 0.000), confirming Perceived enjoyment was found to be the strongest predictor of
H9. Table 3 provides an overview of the structural path parameter intention to engage in the gamification process which is not sur-
estimates. prising given the gamification context. This is consistent with
Huang and Cappel (2005) and Kim et al. (2002) who argue that fun
or entertainment is the most important motivation for game
4.2. Common method variance
players, and most people aim to seek pleasure through playing
games. In addition, this study found perceived enjoyment to
Harman's single test factor has been used to check for potential
significantly influence brand attitude in the gamification process
common method bias (Chang, Van Witteloostuijn, & Eden, 2010).
for marketing purposes. This is consistent with Wise, Bolls, Kim,
The constructs were loaded into the exploratory factor analysis. The
Venkataraman, and Meyer (2008) who studied advergames and
test result shows that there is no single factor explaining a
found that brand attitude was significantly affected by game
disproportionately large portion of variance. Thus, no “general”
enjoyment.
factor is apparent in the data. The correlation matrix is also
While behavioral intention was maintained to be determined by
examined. The matrix revealed the absence of highly correlated
attitude in past research, our study results found positive effect of
variables and therefore common method bias is unlikely to be a
the intention of engagement on brand attitude in the context of
concern with this data (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff,
gamification marketing.
2003).

5. Discussion 5.1. Summary and implications

While perceived usefulness was found to positively influence This study contributes to the marketing literature by providing
people's intention of engagement in the gamified branding process, an extension to the TAM model in the context of gamification used
perceived ease of use is not significantly relation to the intention of by marketers. In line with past research, the results confirmed that
engagement. Although this result failed to support H3, it was not TAM is a valid theory not only in the context of information system
totally unexpected because most prior TAM research has found that adoption, but also in the evaluation of a marketing system. In
perceived usefulness has a greater influence on the intention of addition, based on the extended model, some positive effects of
engagement when compared to perceived ease of use (e.g. Davis gamification have been found for marketing purposes in this
et al., 1989; Savitskie, Royne, Persinger, Grunhagen, & Witte, research. In particular, the intention to engage with a gamified
2007; Smith, 2008). Similarly, this study's findings suggest that brand is likely to lead to positive attitudes towards that brand. In
perceived usefulness and not ease of use positively influences addition, the study contributes to the TAM literature by shedding
brand attitudes which is consistent with other studies (Soroa- the light on the importance of enjoyment in predicting the inten-
Koury and Yang, 2010; Hosseini, Alakbarli, Ghabili, Shoja, & tion of engagement. Marketers or game designers should pay more
Hakim, 2011). It can be inferred that although perceived ease of attention to the elements that can bring about enjoyable perception
use has the potential to influence people's attitude or behavior or experience when playing a game. For example, as in game
towards a new system or technology in the beginning, it may not design, the enjoyable elements of the gamification process can be
influence their attitude or behavior for a long time (engagement). It competition with other participants, interesting interactivity or the
is also possible that because of the advances in information tech- reward system.
nology, perceived ease of use (i.e. the degree to which a person The results of this study provide evidence about the effects of
believes that using a particular system will be free of effort) is not a gamification in practice as a foundation for further application of
concern for most people, especially for young people (the target gamification in different areas. Also, it may serve as a guide for
participants of this research are university students). gamification planners or designers regarding what factors are
Consistent with Mathieson (1991), perceived social influence important for participants in influencing their behaviors and atti-
was not found to positively influence people's intention of tudes, and it makes a contribution to academic research on the
engagement in the gamified marketing process. This finding adds extensions of the original technology acceptance model and testify
to the debate in the literature characterised by conflicting results as to the application of TAM in different areas. Finally, examining the
to the impact of social influence on behavioral intentions. This relationship between intention of engagement with the gamifica-
study has found that perceived social influence is closely related to tion marketing process and the attitude towards the particular
brand attitude in the context of gamified marketing. This is in line brand in that process may potentially enable marketers to increase
with Hamari and Koivisto (2013) who pointed out that social as- participants' intention when they carry out marketing activities
pects play an important role in gamification such as game playing, and also theoretically fill the knowledge gap about the relationship
and found that social factors such as social influence contribute to between intention of engagement and brand attitude.
attitudes and use intentions towards gamification services. Gamification is a comparatively new term, and there are many
 Y. Yang et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469 467

directions that gamification use can be further studied. The estab- Brand attitude
lished model in this research might be used in future as a basic
model that can be extended. Future research may focus on the This activity makes me feel more emotionally bonded with Oreo
element of design of games and what design elements may make a brand now.
game more enjoyable and/or more useful in the gamification pro- This activity evoked positive feelings about Oreo brand.
cess. This will have considerable managerial implications for I shall be more inclined to buy Oreo brand from now on.
companies that wish to achieve marketing benefits from gamifi- This activity makes me to derive pleasure from choosing Oreo.
cation. Some external factors could be included in the model. For This activity makes me delighted to choose Oreo.
example, technology elements may influence the prediction of This activity makes me have intention to use other Oreo's ser-
people's intention of engagement and brand attitude based on vice or products.
existing perceptions, especially for the gamification use with I like the experience of that activity about playing Oreo's game
internet. Also, researchers can further explore potential moderating and win the prize of the competition.
effects of previous experiences (positive/negative) or social value I may recommend Oreo to other people.
orientation (proself/prosocial) on the relationships in this study. In
addition, the applications of gamification to different areas apart References
from marketing area can also be studied in more depth. Overall, the
practical use of gamification for many different purposes and in Acar, A. (2007). Testing the effects of incidental advertising exposure in online
different ways in future should be encouraged, especially in mar- gaming environments. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 8, 45e56.
Adams, D. A., Nelson, R. R., & Todd, P. A. (1992). Perceived usefulness, ease of use,
keting area, given the impact gamification can have on consumers' and usage of information technology: A replication. MIS Quarterly, 16(2),
attitudes and behaviors. 227e247.
Adis, Azaze-Azizi Abdul, & Jun, Kim Hyung (2013). Antecedents of brand recall and
brand attitude towards purchase intention in advergames.
Appendix. Measurement items Ahn, T., Ryu, S., & Han, I. (2007). The impact of Web quality and playfulness on user
acceptance of online retailing. Information & Management, 44, 263e275.
Anderson, C. A., & Dill, K. E. (2000). Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings,
Perceived usefulness and behavior in the laboratory and in life. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 78(4), 772e790.
The game effectively made me think about Oreo. Asch, S. E. (1952). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of
judgment. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men. Pittsburgh, PA:
The game increased my familiarity with Oreo. Carnegie Press.
I found the game useful in the branding of Oreo. Benbasat, I., & Barki, H. (2007). Quo vadis TAM? Journal of the Association for In-
formation Systems, 8(4), 7.
Biehal, G., Stephens, D., & Curlo, E. (1992). Attitude toward the Ad and brand choice.
Perceived ease of use Journal of Advertising, 11(3), 19e36.
Brackett, L., & Carr, B. N. (2001). Cyberspace advertising vs. other media: Consumer
vs. mature student attitudes. Journal of Advertising Research, 41(5), 23e32.
It was easy for me to learn how to play that game and compete Bunchball, Inc. (2010). Gamification 101: An introduction to the use of game dynamics
with another person. to influence behavior. White Paper.
It was flexible for me to play that game and compete with other Burk, B. (2013). The gamification of business. Available from: http://www.forbes.
com/sites/gartnergroup/2013/01/21/the-gamification-of-business/.
people. Chang, S. J., Van Witteloostuijn, A., & Eden, L. (2010). From the editors: Common
It was easy to access the game and get another person to method variance in international business research. Journal of International
compete. Business Studies, 41(2), 178e184.
Childers, T. L., Carr, C. L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian mo-
tivations for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77, 511e536.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). The basics of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Los
Perceived social influence
Angeles, CA: Sage.
Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System character-
If my friends think it is fun to win the game competition and get istics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-
the prize, I will do it. Machine Studies., 38(3), 475e487.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R., & Warshaw, P. (1989). User acceptance of computer tech-
If my classmates think it is fun to win the game competition and nology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8),
get the prize, I will do it. 982e1003.
If my classmates like to join the game competition, I will do it as Deci, E. L., Koestelr, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A nieta-anualytic review of experiments
examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological
well. Bulletin, 125, 627e668.
If people I know think it is fun to win the game competition and Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
get the prize, I will do it. behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Denny, J. (2014). Gamification: Intrinsic motivation for lasting engagement. eLearning
If people I know like to join the game competition, I will do it as Industry. available at: https://elearningindustry.com/gamification-intrinsic-
well. motivation-lasting-engagement.
Deterding, S. (2011). Gamification: Designing for motivation. Interactions, 7, 14e17.
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements
Perceived enjoyment to gamefulness: Defining “Gamification”. In Proceedings from MindTrek '11.
Tampere, September 28e30. Finland: ACM.
Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarette, J., de-Marcos, L., Fe rnandez-Sanz, L., Page
s, C., &
The game was interesting. MartínezHerr aiz, J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implica-
The game made me feel enjoyable. tions and outcomes. Computers and Education, 63(1), 380e392.
The game was a good way to spend my leisure time. Ducoffe, R. H. (1996). How consumers assess the value of advertising. Journal of
Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 17, 1e18.
The game involves me in an enjoyable process. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and Behavior: An intro-
duction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley.
Fletcher, J. D., & Tobias, S. (2006). Expanding opportunities through on-demand
Intention of engagement learning. In T. L. Good (Ed.), 21st century education: A reference handbook.
New York: Sage.
I intend to join this activity again. Gao, Y., & Koufaris, M. (2006). Perceptual antecedents of user attitude in electronic
commerce. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 37(2&3), 42e50.
I intend to play that game frequently in the future. Gartner Research. (2011). Gartner says by 2015, more than 50 percent of organizations
I intend to continue playing that game because it is fun. that manage innovation processes will gamify those processes. Available at: www.
468 Y. Yang et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469

gartner.com/newsroom/id/1629214. Lin, C., Shih, H., & Sher, P. J. (2007). Integrating Technology Readiness into Tech-
Gartner Research. (2012). Gamification 2020: What is the future of gamification?. nology Acceptance: The TRAM Model. Psychology Marketing, 24(7), 641e657.
Available at: https://www.gartner.com/doc/2226015/gamificationefuture- Lloyd, D. W., & Clancy, K. J. (1991). CPMs versus CPMIs: Implications for media
gamification. planning. Journal of Advertising Research, 31(4), 34e44.
Gerbing, D. W., & Hamilton, J. G. (1996). Viability of exploratory factor analysis as a Lule, I., Omwansa, T., & Waema, T. (2012). Application of technology acceptance
precursor to con®rmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 3, model (TAM) in MBanking adoption in Kenya. International Journal of Computing
62e72. and ICT Research, 31e43.
Ghorban, Zahra Seyed (2012). Brand attitude, its antecedents and consequences, MacKenzie, S., Lutz, R., & Belch, G. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a
investigation into smartphone brands in Malaysia. Journal of Business and mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. Journal
Management, 2(3), 31e35. of Marketing Research, 23(2), 130e143.
Glover, I. (2013). Play as you learn: Gamification as a technique for motivating Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology
learners. In Proceedings of world conference on educational multimedia, hyper- acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems
media and telecommunications 2013 (pp. 1999e2008). Chesapeake, VA: Associ- Research, 2(3), 173e191.
ation for the Advancement of Computing in Education. McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is Broken: Why games make us better and how they can
Grigorovici, D., & Constantin, C. (2004). Experiencing interactive advertising beyond change the world. New York: Penguin Books.
rich media: Impacts of ad type and presence on brand effectiveness in 3D Meloni, W., & Gruener, W. M. R. (2012). Gamification in 2012. Available at: http://
gaming immersive virtual environments. Journal of Interactive Advertising, goo.gl/75Ph5.
5(Fall), 22e36. Ndubisi, N. O., & Jantan, M. (2003). Evaluating IS usage in Malaysia small and
Gullen, P. (1993). Measuring the quality of television viewing and its link with medium sized companies using technology acceptance model. Logistics Infor-
advertising effectiveness. In Paper presented at the marketing week/carat UK mation Management, 16(6), 440e500.
value of quality television seminar, London. Nelson, M. R. (2002). Recall of brand placements in computer/video games. Journal
Gunter, B., & Furnham, A. (1998). Children as consumers: A psychological analysis of of Advertising Research, 42(2), 80e92.
the young People's market. London, UK: Routledge. Nicholson, S. (2012). A user-centered theoretical framework for meaningful gami-
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data fication. Gamesþ Learningþ Society, 8, 1.
analysis (6th ed.). N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall. Norris, C. E., & Colman, A. M. (1993). Context effects on recall and recognition of
Hamari, J., & Koivisto, J. (2013). Social motivations to use gamification: An empirical magazine advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 21(3), 37e46.
study of gamifying exercise. In In proceedings of the 21st European conference on Oliver, P., Marwell, G., & Teixeira, R. (1985). A theory of the critical mass. I.
information systems, June 5e8, Utrecht, Netherlands. Owolabi, K. O., & Olu-wabi, F. E. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and crises of
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification Work? A literature development in Africa. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 10(4),
review of empirical studies on gamification. In Proceedings of system sciences 218e230.
(HICSS), 47th Hawaii international conference (pp. 3025e3034). January 6-9, O'Neil, H. F., Wainess, R., & Baker, E. L. (2005). Classification of learning outcomes:
Hawaii. Evidence from the computer games literature. The Curriculum Journal, 16(4),
Hartman, J. B., Shim, S., Barber, B., & O’brien, M. (2006). Adolescents' utilitarian and 455e474.
hedonic web-consumption behavior: Hierarchical influence of personal values Park, S. Y. (2009). An analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model in under-
and innovativeness. Psychology Marketing, 23, 813e839. standing university students' behavioral intention to use e-learning. Educational
Herrewijn, L., & Poels, K. (2013). Putting brands into Play: How game difficulty and Technology Society, 12(3), 150e162.
player experiences influence the effectiveness of in-game advertising. Interna- Park, H. J., & Bae, J. H. (2014). Study and research of gamification design. Interna-
tional Journal of Advertising, 32, 17e44. tional Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications, 8(8), 19e28.
Hosseini, S. F., Alakbarli, F., Ghabili, K., Shoja, M. M., & Hakim, E. J. (2011). Persian Pikkarainen, T., Pikkarainen, K., Karjaluoto, H., & Pahnila, S. (2004). Consumer
Physician and Jurist, 284, 647e650. acceptance of online banking: An extension of the technology acceptance
Hsu, C., & Lu, H. (2004). Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with model. Internet Research, 14(3), 224e235.
social influences and flow experience. Information & Management, 41, 853e868. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common
Hsu, C., & Lu, H. (2007). Consumer behavior in online game community: A moti- method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and
vational factor perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1642e1659. recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879e903.
Huang, Z., & Cappel, J. J. (2005). Assessment of a web-based learning game in an Ramayah, & Jantan. (2003). Intention to Purchase through the World Wide Web
information systems course. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 45(4), (WWW): The Malaysian experience. In The third international conference on
42e50. electronic commerce engineering, Hangzhou, China.
Huang, J. H., Lin, Y. R., & Chuang, S. T. (2007). Elucidating user behavior of mobile Ramayah, T., Lam, S. C., & Sarkawi, F. (2003a). Attitude and intention to use web-
learning. The Electronic Library, 25(5), 585e598. based supply chain management (SCM) among SME's. In Asia Pacific seminar
Huotari, K., & Hamari, J. (2011). “Gamification” from the perspective of service mar- on E- customer relationship management, Shah Alam, Selangor, 8e9th July,
keting, CHI 2011, May 7e12. Malaysia.
Kamaruddin, A. R., & Mokhlis, S. (2003). Consumer socialization, social structural Ramayah, T., Ma'ruf, J. J., Jantan, M., & Osman, M. (2002). Technology acceptance
factors and decision making styles, a case study of adolescents in Malaysia. model: Is it applicable to users and non users of internet banking. In The pro-
International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27(2), 145e156. ceedings of the international Seminar, Indonesia-Malaysia, the role of harmoni-
Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification and internalization: Three pro- zation of Economics and business discipline in global competitiveness, Banda Aceh,
cesses of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 51e60. Indonesia.
Kim, K. H., Park, J. Y., Kim, D. Y., Moon, H. I., & Chun, H. C. (2002). E-Lifestyle and Ramayah, T. D., Tham, K. T., & Aafaqi, B. (2003b). Perceived web security and
motives to use online games. Irish Marketing Review, 15(2), 71e77. WebBased online transaction intent. Multimedia, Cyberscape Journal, 1, 131e141.
Koo, D. M. (2009). The moderating role of locus of control on the links between Reiss, S. (2000). Who am I? The 16 basic desires that motivate our actions and define
experiential motives and intention to play online games. Computers in Human our personality. New York: Penguin Publishing.
Behavior, 25, 466e474. Rodrigues, L. F., Costa, C. J., & Oliveira, A. (2013). The adoption of gamification in e-
Kotler, P. (2004). Marketing management (7th ed.). India: Pearson Education. banking. In ISDOC’13, July 11-12 (pp. 47e55).
Koufaris, M. (2002). Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). , New York: The Free Press.
on-line consumer behavior. Information System Research, 13(2), 205e223. Rughinis, R. (2013). Talkative objects in need of interpretation, re-thinking digital
Lafrenie re, M. K., Verner-Filion, J., & Vallerand, R. J. (2012). Development and vali- badges in education. In CHI’13 extended abstracts on human factors in computing
dation of the gaming motivation scale (GAMS). Personality and Individual Dif- systems (pp. 2099e2108).
ferences, 53, 827e831. Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of play game design fundamentals. United
Laroche, M., Habibi, M. R., Richard, M. O., & Sankaranarayanan, R. (2012). The effects States of America: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
of social media based brand communities on brand community markers, value Sallam, M. A., & Algammash, F. A. (2016). The effect of attitude toward advertise-
creation practices, brand trust and brand loyalty. Computers in Human Behavior, ment on attitude toward brand and purchase intention. International Journal of
28(5), 1755e1767. Economics, Commerce and Management, 4(2), 509e520.
Lee, M. K. O., Cheung, C. M. K., & Chen, Z. (2005). Acceptance of Internet-based Savitskie, K., Royne, M., Persinger, S., Grunhagen, M., & Witte, C. (2007). Norwegian
learning medium: The role of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Information internet shopping Sites: An application & extension of the technology accep-
& Management, 42, 1095e1104. tance model. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 10(4), 54.
Lee, M., & Faber, R. J. (2007). Effects of product placement in on-line games on brand Shepperd, J. A. (2001). Social loafing and expectancy-value theory. In S. G. Harkins
memory. A perspective of the limited-capacity model of attention. Journal of (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on the effects of evaluation on performance (pp. 1e24).
Advertising, 36, 75e90. New York: Kluwer.
Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information tech- Sheppard, Blair H., Hartwick, Jon, & Warshaw, Paul R. (1988). The theory of reasoned
nology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifica-
Management, 40(3), 191e204. tions and future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 325e343.
Li, C. (2014). Evaluation of a theoretical model for gamification in workplace is context. Shroff, R. H., Deneen, C. C., & Ng, E. M. W. (2011). Analysis of the technology
Doctoral dissertation. University of British Columbia. acceptance model in examining students' behavioural intention to use an
Li, D., Chau, P. Y. K., & Lou, H. (2005). Understanding individual adoption of instant eportfolio system. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(4),
Messaging: An empirical investigation. Journal of the Association for Information 600e618.
Systems, 6(4), 102e129. Smith, T. J. (2008). Senior citizens and e-commerce websites: The role of perceived
 Y. Yang et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 459e469 469

usefulness, perceived ease of use, and Web site usability. Informing Science: The shop online. Journal of Computers, 5, 1527e1533.
International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 11, 59e83. Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of Perceived ease-of-use: Integrating control,
Soroa-Koury, S., & Yang, K. C. C. (2010). Factors affecting consumer's responses to intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. In-
mobile advertising from a social norm theoretical perspective. Telematics and formation Systems Research, 11, 342e365.
Informatics, 27, 103e113. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology accep-
Spears, N., & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase tance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2),
intentions. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 26(2), 53e66. 186e204.
Straub, D. W., Keil, M., & Brenner, W. (1997). Testing the technology acceptance Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of
model across cultures: A three country study. Information & Management, 33, information Technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425e478.
1e11. Wise, K., Bolls, P., Kim, H., Venkataraman, A., & Meyer, R. (2008). Enjoyment of
Sukpanich, N., & Chen, L. (1999). Antecedents of desirable consumer behaviors in advergames and brand attitudes: The impact of thematic relevance. Journal of
electronic commerce. In Proceedings of the 5th Americas conference on infor- Interactive Advertising, 9(1), 14e25.
mation systems (pp. 550e552). Wu, J., & Liu, D. (2007). The effects of trust and enjoyment on intention to play
Tahashi, D. (2008). Funware's threat to the traditional video game Industry, Venture online games. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 8(2), 128e140.
beat. available at: http://goo.gl/O9lSq. Xu, X. J. (2010). The effect of advertising Persuasion (Vol. 25, pp. 79e83). Beijing
Taylor, D. G., Lewin, J. E., & Strutton, D. (2011). Friends, fans, and Followers: Do ads Technology and Business University (Social Sciences).
work on social Networks? How gender and age shape receptivity. Journal of Yalcin, M., & Demir, I. E. (2009). Using associations to create positive brand attitude
Advertising Research, 51(1), 258e275. for generation Y consumers: Application in fashion retailing. The Journal of
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 14(2), 261e276.
of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(1), 44e176. Yannakakis, G. N., & Hallam, J. (2007). Towards optimizing entertainment in com-
Teo, T. S. H., Lim, V. K. G., & Lai, R. Y. C. (1999). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in puter games. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 21, 933e971.
Internet usage. Omega International Journal of Management Science, 27(1), Yi, M. Y., & Hwang, Y. (2003). Predicting the use of web-based information systems:
25e37. Self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology accep-
Tsai, C., & Chang, C. (2007). The effect of physical attractiveness of models on tance model. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 59(4), 431e449.
advertising effectiveness for male and female adolescents. Journal of Adoles- Zichermann, G., & Linder, J. (2010). Game-based Marketing: Inspire customer loyalty
cence, 42, 827e836. through rewards, challenges and contests. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Tu, C. C., Fang, K., & Lin, C. Y. (2010). Predicting consumer repurchase intentions to