Dopamine Jackpot! by Sapolsky

Sapolsky explaining why we respond so strongly to to ‘what if’ and ‘maybe’.
Part of the motivation power in gaming comes from the effect of ‘maybe’ on the dopamine system. Give chance a chance.

Posted in Mediated | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Bartle’s Player Groups by Extra Creditz

Excellent explanation – not just on the taxonomy of player groups and its’ two dimensions but also on how and why the categorization came to be.

Posted in Mediated | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Metacognition: Discussing a definition

‘Thinking about thinking’ had been cited by Flavell before the eighties as a “promising new area of investigation” coining the term metacognition. “Metacognition refers to one’s knowledge concerning one’s own cognitive processes and products or anything related to them. […] Metacognition refers, among other things, to the active monitoring and consequent regulation and orchestration of these processes in relation to the cognitive objects on which they bear, usually in the serve of some concrete goal or objective”. (Flavell, 1976, p. 232)

Still fuzziness continued in the fields of psychology and education around terms such as ‘strategic knowledge’. Great discrepancy existed in the definition of strategic knowledge, most apparent in the research area of problem solving, even though a debate on this issue had been in the literature for over a decade at that time.

“To some, strategies are general processes that operate across domains (e.g.,Gillingham, Garner, Guthrie, & Sawyer, 1988; Roth, 1985), whereas to others they are compilations or extensions of domain-specific knowledge  (e.g.,Chi, 1985; Rabinowitz & Chi, 1987). Furthermore, while some researchers investigate a singular strategy, such as mapping (Resnick,1982), others investigate complex, interrelated groups of strategies such as summarizing, predicting, and verifying (e.g.,Palincsar & Brown, 1984; Schoenfeld, 1985).” (Alexander & Judy, 1988, p. 381.)

After having discussed the concepts of strategic knowledge and metacognition for another two decades in the fields of cognitive research and learning theories, a need was clear for a higher level connection of concepts:

“Traditional developmental research in memory and reasoning, as well as current investigations in such disparate areas as theory of mind, epistemological understanding, knowledge acquisition, and problem solving, share the need to invoke a meta-level of cognition in explaining their respective phenomena.” (Kuhn, 2000, p. 178).

At that time there were several models and definitions of metacognition (which had replaced strategic knowledge as the umbrella term). These models and definitions are discussed, summarized and distilled in 2002 by Pintrich:

“Metacognitive knowledge includes knowledge of general strategies that might be used for different tasks, knowledge of the conditions under which these strategies might be used, knowledge of the extent to which the strategies are effective, and knowledge of self (Flavell, 1979; Pintrich et al., 2000; Schneider & Pressley, 1997).” (Pintrich, 2002).

Posted in Perfectly Flawed | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Workshop Spelenderwijs 6 oktober

6 oktober 2015, 10:00 – 16:30 uur, Amsterdam
Interesse in gamification? Staat u op het punt om spel serieus te gaan gebruiken? Tijdens deze workshop krijgt u een inleiding in de wereld van doelmatig spelen. U gaat naar huis met nieuwe kennis en inzichten en de juiste vragen om verder te kunnen.

De Psychologie van Game Based Learning en Gamification
Steeds vaker in educatie, HRM en productontwikkeling maakt men gebruik van spel of spelelementen. Door middel van game-based-learning, serious games, applied games, gameful design of gamification willen we allemaal gebruik maken van onze neiging to spelen.

Werkbare wetenschap
Tijdens deze intensieve dag krijgt u een beter begrip van van wat serious gaming en gamification is en wanneer het wel/niet werkt. Deze workshop biedt u een fundament in de wetenschappelijk kennis van de psychologische processen achter en onder spelstructuren.

U neemt uw eigen – abstracte of zeer specifieke – vraagstuk mee naar de workshop om mee aan de slag te gaan. Aan de hand van uw eigen vraagstuk doorlopen we gelijktijdig psychologische theorie, resultaten uit onderzoek en de mogelijkheden voor toepassing. Samen bespreken wij verschillende voorbeelden en onderzoeken we de toepassing voor uw eigen vraagstuk en de mogelijkheden voor andere deelnemers. Als deelnemer bent u tijdens de dag gestructureerd en open aan het brainstormen. U denkt mee, stelt vragen en wordt bevraagd.

De kracht van spelen in je vingers
U verkent de relevante achtergronden uit de sociale wetenschappen, krijgt kennis uit toegepaste psychologie samengevat en verrijkt uzelf met inzichten uit gaming-onderzoek.

We behandelen onder andere
– spelen, spel en spelelementen
– de leerkracht van spel
– extrinsiek vs. intrinsieke motivatie
– Self Determination Theory
– psychologisch welzijn
– Flow
– spelerstypen
– Fogg Behaviour Model
– narritiviteit
– verschillende vormen van feedback
– Points, Badges & Leaderboards.

Deelnemers en kosten
Deze workshop is gemaakt voor een volle dag voor maximaal 12 deelnemers. Kosten € 260,- per persoon (excl. btw). Inclusief catering, readers, dagverslag & follow-up. Mail naar priscillaharing[at] om u aan te melden & voor verdere vragen.

”De vraag hoe maak ik het leuk/hoe bouw ik spel-elementen in coaching en training komt regelmatig boven en daar pas ik delen van de theorie uit de workshop bij toe. Het is voor mij vooral een kader en een anker.”
Paul de Vries, StudiumGenerale – Hogeschool Utrecht.

“De workshop heeft mij inzicht gegeven in de markt en achtergronden van gamification. Het model van hoe dat te benaderen was heel inzichtelijk en handzaam.”
Henriëtte van Strijland, marketeer.

Posted in Mediated | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Upside of Stress – book review

Absolutely accessible. This book should be able to make sense and remain enjoyable throughout for everyone interested in the subject and capable of reading English (I would hereby like to make an open offer to do the Dutch translation when needed). There are reflections and exercises and the end of each chapter, making the book more suited to read in bits and pieces, rather than one sitting. For some of these reflections take time to do or to settle.

There are plenty of real-world examples from the New Science of Stress course madam McGonigal teaches at Stanford. She also refers to personal anecdotes and mentions her own pains and fears. By the time you finish the book, you feel like you’ve gotten to know her a little bit as a curious, enthusiastic, warm-hearted teacher who is at times as insecure, stressed out and gets as much in her own way as the rest of us. In between all these easily readable and relatable stories of humans and stress, there is more than enough scientific backing. The book provides clear explanations on how measurements show effects and shares results found, shedding a different light on our common idea of Stress. The body of research ranges from philosophy and sociology to experimental psychology and biology, all to test the hypothesis of the title; that there is an upside to being stressed.

To me the new distinction of Mind-set-research and the hormone-testing-experiments were most interesting. I was gratified to find the Brooks experiment mentioned, as this work is the inspiration for my Game Prompt experiment (paper forthcoming) and it feels so nice to have this book reflect the same enthusiasm I felt when reading the Brooks’ paper. The Upside of Stress has changed my perspective of feeling stressed – which was already along these lines – I feel this book has taken me further down the path of discovery I was on. I now have more points of interpretation to choose from. I can be more articulate and more evidence-based. For me, it fits right in with my own ‘theory of research’ and strengthens me that I am not alone as a researcher, that the effects are out there and a change is going to come. Exciting, isn’t it?

TL;DR: There is an Upside to Stress, this book has the science to prove it and will give you a useful different perspective of stress along the way.

Find the book here on Amazon

Posted in Book Reviews | Leave a comment

Barriers to health appeals

This is my summary/translation of the article Abwehrreaktionen auf Gesundheitsappelle: Forschungsstand und Praxisempfehlungen by Hastall, 2012.

Against threatening or disturbing messages we have defensive processes, in order not to get thrown into a (unhealthy) state of frenzy every time we encounter one. These defensive processes are understood as motivated reactions, responses to health-appeals that take up resources when three criteria are met (Hastall, 2012).

  1. The response follows directly after contact with the message
  2. The response is based on defensive measures; it is meant to reflect an anticipated threat (e.g. threats to feelings of self-worth or emotional well-being)
  3. The response is aimed directly or indirectly at avoiding the message or attacking the content of the message

We can distinguish four different groups of defensive responses that might inhibit effective health marketing/communication:

  1. Avoiding or minimising contact with threatening messages
  2. General psychological ego-defence mechanisms
  3. Attacking the content of the message or the messenger
  4. Increased health-damaging behaviour

Modern man has developed advanced avoidance strategies for online marketing messages of any kind to such a degree that we completely miss the advertisements on a website (a concept known as banner-blindness) and we install ad-blocking software, spam filters and the like to assist us in avoiding unsolicited content. Modern psychoanalysis and clinical psychology defines defence mechanismsas unconscious processes meant to protect an individual from fear and recognition of internal or external burdens and threats. A defence mechanism does this by regulating the response of the individual to emotional conflict and external burdens (Wittchen/Hoyer, 2011). Over 40 such processes have been discerned and are commonly and continually applied by individuals in their daily lives (Cramer, 2008). The mechanisms of denial, repression and rationalisation seem especially important in the health domain (Hastall, 2012).  For example; illusory superiority bias describes the constant overestimation of our positive aspects and the subsequent underestimation of our negative aspects. Combining this bias with unrealistic optimism and false consensus bias leaves many well intended health messages unattended to, because they are deemed ‘not relevant’ to us.

Table: Health marketing defence mechanisms (Hastall, 2012)

Avoiding or minimising contact with threatening messages
Selective message avoidance Complete avoidance of messages or turning away the attention after brief/short and unconscious contact
Banner blindness Selective advertisement avoidance specific to websites. While visually scanning the site, the anticipated  advertisements are visually faded out
Technical defence Using technical solutions to avoid contact with unwanted messages, such as AdBlock or a spam filter
Legal defence Prohibiting advertisements or joining a revocation list e.g. Robinson-list
General psychological ego-defence mechanisms
Denial Not considering or denial of aspects in reality that threaten ones’ existence, such as health risks
Repression Displacing threatening aspects of reality in ones’ subconscious
Rationalisation Inventing seemingly reasonable explanations to justify threatening thoughts, feelings or behaviours
Illusory superiority effect Overestimating ones’ positive qualities in comparison to others, while simultaneously underestimating ones’ negative qualities
Unrealistic optimism Believing that one will be affected less by negative occurrences and more by positive occurrences than other people
False consensus effect Overestimating the proportion of people that share ones’ viewpoint on a certain topic
Attacking the content of the message or the messenger
Selective interpretation Reinterpreting the content of the message in such a way that it harmonises with ones’ views and beliefs
Counter arguments Generating arguments that counter the propositions of a message and the recommendations made e.g. by looking for information stating the opposite
Source devaluation Devaluating the source of a message e.g. by insinuations of incompetence or unreasonable intentions
Aggression Verbal or physical  attacks on the messenger, the message or the medium carrying the message e.g. tearing down health related placards
Advantageous social comparison Comparing oneself to person who are worse off or are behaving worse than you in order to feel better about oneself and to diminish the necessity of a behaviour or attitude change
Social validation Looking for persons with similar attitudes and behaviours and emphasizing the high number of corresponding people
Heightened attractiveness of critical aspects Health damaging behaviours are seen as more attractive after contact with the message than before contact with the message
Increased health-damaging behaviour
Boomerang effect Message provokes the opposite of the intended goal e.g. smoking more after contact with a anti-smoking message
Taking psycho-active substances Taking alcohol, nicotine, drugs or medication after contact with the message in order to pacify oneself or shift thoughts

Should a possibly threatening message get through the first line of defence mechanisms and manage to get itself consciously considered, attack strategies might come into play. Findings that confirm this course of thought and action are aggregated from research into cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957), psychological reactance (Brehm, 1966; Dillard & Shen, 2005) and resistance (Jacks & Cameron, 2003).

Strategies to lessen the resistance

There are two neurological systems working in parallel: BIS and BAS (e.g. Carver et al. 2000; Gray, 1982). The Behavioural Inhibition System; looking for potential threats and possible dealing with them through various defence mechanisms – and the Behavioural Activation System; looking for cues for potential positive experiences. BIS concerns itself with (our protection from) negative emotions. Any message that intends to trigger certain health behaviours would do well to address both systems, simultaneously trying to minimize BIS while maximizing BAS (Knowles & Linn, 2004) Minimizing the threat– All health related sciences tend to take the perspective of the ‘Natural model’ of health vs. disease and mainly focus their efforts on the physical. However, a health related message can be perceived as threatening on more levels than just as it relates to our physical manifestation. All the possible levels of threat must be discerned if they are to be minimized.

Table: Threats by health marketing (Hastall, 2012)
Target of threat Anticipated health relevant conditions
Reading messages on health risks Anxiety of health risks Execution of the recommended protective behaviour
Body Physical discomfort when reading the message Pain, reduced capabilities, death Physical strain; side effects
Cognition Worry about the likelihood of the disease Worry about the likelihood of healing Worry about the effectiveness of the protective behaviour
Emotion Fear or dread at reading the message Sorrow about those concerned; fear Feelings of shame or uncertainty
Self-worth “Manipulation” by marketing messages Dependent on outside help; passive layman Self-perception as vulnerable or overanxious
Social status Non-compatible role expectations Loneliness; Blaming others as accomplices Being ridiculed or rejected by others
Resources Time or expenses looking for more information Time or expenses for necessary treatment Time or expenses for protective behaviour


Brehm, J. W. (1966): A Theory of Psychological Reactance, New York: Academic Press. Carver, C. S., Sutton, S. K., & Scheier, M. F. (2000). Action, emotion, and personality: Emerging conceptual integration. Personality and social psychology bulletin26(6), 741-751.
Cramer, P. (2008): Seven Pillars of Defense Mechanism Theory, in: Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 5, S. 1963-1981
Dillard, J. P./Shen, L. (2005): On the Nature of Reactance and Its Role in Persuasive Health Communication, in: Communication Monographs, 72, 2, S. 144-168.
Festinger, L. (1957): A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Gray, J. A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hastall, M. R. (2012). Abwehrreaktionen auf Gesundheits-appelle: Forschungsstand und Praxisempfehlungen. In S. Hoffmann, U. Schwarz & R. Mai (Eds.), Angewandtes Gesundheitsmarketing (pp. 281-296): Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Jacks, J. Z.
Cameron, K. A. (2003): Strategies for Resisting Persuasion, in: Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 25, 2, S. 145-161 Knowles, E. S.
Linn, J. A. (2004): Approach-Avoidance Model of Persuasion: Alpha and Omega Strategies for Change, in: Knowles, E. S./Linn, J. A. (Hrsg.): Resistance and Persuasion, Mahwah: Psychology Press, S. 117-148.
Wittchen, H.-U./Hoyer, J. (2011): Klinische Psychologie & Psychotherapie, Berlin: Springer.

Posted in Mediated, Perfectly Flawed | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment