I'll admit up front, I'm chasing the dev.to 16-week streak posting badge and am uncertain whether I'll have an article ready this week. This psychological pull is strong enough, that I feel compelled to follow it. This post potentially fills in a blank spot in my schedule.
It feels like everything is being gamified and nobody is paying attention to whether there is value behind it. Recently I started using an online todo list, and it gives me points for completing todo items. I had to turn off multiple notices to get it to be quiet. Now I have dev.to badges.
The biggest problem with chasing internet points is that it erodes intrinsic motivation. This has come up a lot in video game discussions. I find games to be intrinsically rewarding -- I feel happy when I complete a hard level of the game. I don't feel happy because I've received a trophy. I've turn all trophy notices off when I can.
So, what effect do the badges on dev.to, and other platforms have. I think they're an interesting way to encourage new people to write, but I feel a bit of pressure by them. As a regular author am I expected to have a lot of badges? Does it impact my legitimacy on this platform?
Consider that I actually feel pressure now to hit that 16-week badge. The 8-week badge was kind of like, ah, "cool", that's nice. But 16-weeks is a hefty badge to obtain. I don't think I'll feel rewarded. I think only that I'd feel defeated if I don't achieve it now. But what if there's a 32-week back after it?!
What do you think about gamification? What are your own personal experiences?
Top comments (50)
We try to walk the line in terms of the badges being a fun thing that make contributions to the community feel more rewarding without making it as upfront and 1:1.
Within the badges, we don't want it to feel like grinding, but it definitely seems like you're feeling that way with the streak badge and we'll take that into account. We introduced the streaks for folks who wanted the extra push for mild self-accountability which is why we launched it along with New Years.
We are against displaying follow counts because it seems like that creates some unhealthy comparison and black-hat gamification in a lot of ways. I definitely feel like I'm grinding for followers on other platforms at times. Hopefully the badges are a bit more like bonuses on top of behavior you'd otherwise enjoy doing.
What about the idea of "pausing" your streak for periods so it relieves the pressure? This could be a complicated feature so it wouldn't go in right away, but we're all for keeping this light and healthy.
I didn't realize there were streak badges until I got the 8-week one -- somehow I missed the notice for the 4-week one. Obviously they aren't what motivate me to write, but I understand it could motivate others.
It's hard to say where the balance is between a reward, and punishment. I would certainly think a 32-week badge clearly crosses that line though -- since it requires a significant commitment to achieve.
The thing about streaks is that they reset if you fail, making it daunting to achieve again. Compare this to some of the most difficult trophies on PlayStation -- they don't reset, you can always pick up again.
So perhaps pausing might make sense, but then it wouldn't encourage people to write weekly. An option would be to consider the average article count, but then again, not weekly.
Another thing to consider is that badges end up becoming elite as the user-base grows. Those Top7 and Top5 badges I have are increasingly difficult to obtain.
Maybe if it instead was "post 3 weeks in a row x amount of times"? And have 4 weeks count as 2, 5 weeks as 3 etc.
That way you would only lose two weeks of progress if you take a break while in a streak.
Could maybe also allow two consecutive week breaks before it breaks the combo. This would allow people to post only once every one, two, or three weeks as they please, but still give incentive to post every week since it makes the combo increase faster.
I'm all for the badges as they've given me the push to get creative and write often. However I realize this shouldn't be the driving factor as one may be tempted to write just for the sake of writing and not provide value in the content one shares.
So maybe award the streak badges based on engagement or maybe likes(idk any other threshold that may be relevant 😂).
This is my feeling exactly when it comes to internet points. It's a fun boost to something I already enjoy.
For example I run and I use the Smashrun platform. It offers badges that give you something to aim for and would maybe get you to do something you wouldn't normally do (like earning the Birthday Badge by running on your birthday). But the point isn't to run for the badges.
Some less-than-organized thoughts:
The way I see it the main premise of gamification is customer retention. We generally have a tendency of getting bored of things and moving on quite fast. Especially since there's always something new on the horizon.
Gamification/points system gives us the inner feeling of accomplishment and the desire for wanting more.
From all the apps and websites I use on a regular basis have some sort of system designed to keep us hooked. I can't think of a popular platform without it. Without it I don't think we'd have great retention rates.
It's a system designed to appeal to people's addictive tendencies and insecurities. It's one of the areas of tech where I think we need to step back and have a deep discussion about ethical principles...we've made so many advancements in tech (and that pace isn't going to slow down anytime soon), that we didn't have time to reflect on if all these things are a net positive for the world (or maybe some people did and chose to make money anyways).
Is that not an admission that the content itself is not interesting enough to retain users?
It's also a self-fulfilling prophecy. As we get trained to follow the bait, sites not offering those incentives become less interesting.
I think I need a Firefox plugin that blocks internet points. :)
I notice a lot of people talking about your point of gamification with regard to a means of retaining users but I wanted to address a different point; "...am I expected to have a lot of badges? Does it affect my legitimacy on this platform?"
Personally, I have to say that I didn't even know about Dev.to badges until about two minutes ago... but I don't think that when you look at another user's profile, you actually think about the (number of) badges that they have.
I mean, in my experience others will only actually notice a large number of badges or points, etc when you have a remarkably large amount of them - so essentially; do you think points or badges normally have a value to people looking at your profile?
This is a big part of the pressure to get badges, is the impression they leave, or I think they leave on others.
What are the expectations we have of serious authors? If I see some people with no badges, and then another with a lot, it triggers from internal concern of legitimacy.
Is a user with more badges a "better" member of the community? Is a member without badges just passing by, or disinterested?
This definitely happens with follower counts on other platforms. To the point of creating catch-22's, you don't get followers unless you have followers.
In theory one could run a test. Take a top contributor to dev.to and toggle their badge display on/off for each viewer of their profile and measure the follow rate. If badges have no influence, the follow rate should be the same.
This a good point, however, doesn't that remove the value of the actual work? Whether a user has a lot of badges or not, wouldn't well-written posts and engaging authors naturally attract readers and commentors? Are you not proving that by this post alone? You admit yourself you were tempted to write only one line item to prove the post was guided by a badge; yet, being a quality author you couldn't make yourself do that. As a result of that, look at all the engagement and interaction on this post. Not because of any badge, but because you had geniune thoughts and insights into an important topic.
Though it might have some affect on follow rate (sidenote: is that the only measurement of success? What about post reactions/comments/etc?), I still think people in general value quality over quantity. I think at this platform especially it seems that way. I've been here since April, so I can't really back this up with a lot of experience.
The answer is unfortunately no. Refer to my article on the internet lottery Were the internet not so punishing, then perhaps the badges might not feel as much like grinding. But for a lot of people the 16-week badge could very well mean 16 articles with zero feedback -- even if the quality is good. :(
On dev.to I've not done the one liner responses, but on other platforms I have. Snark and cynicism is often as rewarded, if not more, than quality content. This is why gamification must be treated carefully, to understand what is really being encouraged.
I'm just providing more thinking points. I'm not really disagreeing with you.
I appreciate that. However, I took a brief peek at that linked article. Doesn't seem like there are actually any sources listed?
You make a good point - whilst I would assume the value of badges exponentially decreases with the increase in number, having no badges at all could have a significant effect.
Though another thing that's interesting to consider would be if having a small number of badges is better or worse than having no badges at all.
In any case, I do like the idea of running a test of some kind and I would certainly be interested in the outcome.
This is tricky.
You are absolutely right that it plays on the psychological urge to get things done, to tick another box and move up a level. I sorta love it ... but sort of hate it.
In the context of dev.to I have a sneaky suspicion that it may encourage sup par posts that get lost because they are 'only ok' and get written because of oh-no-I-need-to-get-a-post-up-so-I-get-the-badge. But at the same time, it's the motivation to keep writing from New Year to now that helps people stay on that platform.
Yes, about that quality... I was fighting my sardonic tendencies with this post. I was very tempted to leave it as a single line post. Alas, my inner "but but but" voice, won, I attempted to provide something of value.
I dislike gamification in general, and try to avoid any service that pushes it too hard.
Once, I put in a question on a forum for my ISP and before the week was out I had received 11 emails, most of which were about me "unlocking new badges!". Including one for visiting my account preferences page, where I'd gone to try to turn off the notifications (and failed).
I understand what these organisations are trying to do, but they've just become noise.
If I made a one-word response that consisted solely of
#irony, would I be falling into the gamification-trap?Your story is kinda brutal, though. Sounds like something Cox, Comcast or Verizon would do. :p
It was Virgin Media :)
One possible good use of badges/cheevos/etc is to be a guide. If you're starting as a blank slate and wondering what do I do here?, having a set of neatly defined goals can give that void some structure.
That being said, the achievements on a platform often reflect the goals of the platform. If you get a badge for having a certain number of followers or logging on a certain number of days in a row, that shows what the platform is trying to guide you to do. It's reflective in many ways of the site's culture if, say, you get a gold star for having a certain number of followers vs getting a gold star for posting the best comment of the week.
As someone who spends an unhealthy amount of time researching game design and gamification, my feelings on gamification are... conflicted. What it really boils down to, is that gamification is a tool. It can be used for good (incentivizing people to stick to their goals) or evil (addicting people to "games" that are nothing but Skinner boxes).
In regards to Dev.to's badges system... I honestly didn't know it existed until I read this post. I definitely feel like they have a valid purpose, but the concerns over them is understandable. If they were listed next to your name on every post, I think there would be a legitimate concern over your number of badges indicating a sense of validity. But with them only being visible to people who visit your profile page, I think that problem is mostly avoided.
Does the site notify you of badges you can chase, or do you only learn about them via visiting other people's profiles? I don't really agree with the former, since it can cause a sense of obligation that's mentioned in the OP. The latter would mean that you're only really interacting with the badges if you want to. Maybe the first badge you earn should be notified to you, and that notification would include an opt-in to be notified about further badges you earn and can earn?
I was informed of the 16-week badge when I got the 8-week one. It was worded to convince me to reach the 16-week streak. It was not voluntary.
I agree where the badges are shown make a difference. I think about Twitter, where if you hover over a name it shows you how many followers they have. People do appear to use that of validity of the opinion.
I think rewards should be designed with a clear purpose, and then followup should be done to see if it's meeting that purpose.
If it gave you the option to opt-in before informing you about the 16-week badge (assuming you agreed to opt-in to badge notifications), would you have felt better about it?
I'm really not fond of sites publicly displaying how many people follow you or putting your badges anywhere outside of your profile page. They're both just forms of peacocking that don't actually provide anything positive to the community. If anything, it encourages toxic forms of competition.
I've seen some that allow you to choose a single badge to display alongside your username on posts, I'm relatively okay with that setup. I wouldn't advocate for it though.
That's an interesting point. I think a great solution could be to make streak badges private only! If the point is to encourage writing, just personally seeing this would do so. I have habit apps on my phone that run on similar concepts. I use them because it does actually work. But the world doesn't need to see that info in order for them to encourage action from me.
Some public badges could be community-based type badges. Like the SheCodes one. Or maybe a badge for someone who helped someone else. Or badges for Mentors because that's a really great thing to do.
Things that encourage positive actions towards each other. :)
Just shared your post in the Buffer Slack community I'm in! We're talking about the new testing Instagram is doing on making likes on posts private. You have great timing. It's funny that now I'm in a few conversations about this.
But if likes are private how will I know what makes me happy in life? 😏
I'm uncertain if hiding them changes the gamification, since an author will still see how many likes they get.
However, it likely impacts The Internet Lottery
Haha, I actually am perfectly fine with Instagram how it is. I enjoy the likes. I get out of it exactly what I put into it, and all those things are positive. I think they should have tested it out on April 1st for 24 hours. That would have been really interesting to see, lol.
Yea, you also posted that article on my other comment. I'm not I really if I agree with it, however.
Sorry for spamming you with the same link. You don't need to agree, in fact, go ahead and disagree, and disagree loudly!
...and be sure to link to the original so I can collect more internet points. I'm close to levelling up I think! :)
No worries, I understand. I'm sure you get +50 EXP points for every time you link it.
For many people, games are fun. It's a way to increase engagement for those who are competitive and like the drive. Competition is not for everyone. That's why I think choice is important. I like the option to participate when I want to, but wouldn't want it to be a requirement.
For example, on here I can write articles and participate in discussions. I have no interest or bandwidth to guarantee an article a week so I don't worry about those badges. However, at certain times when I want to set a goal I love being able to "opt-in" to competitions for accountability. It helps motivate me to keep going.
I tried out (and made it on the team) for basketball in high school and couldn't take the pressure of performing in the games. I was much more confident on a computer keyboard than on a basketball court and I would get so nervous I'd forget plays. It didn't work for me, so I stopped playing. I don't think that means high school should cancel basketball, or that I should take it away as an option from people who thrive doing it, I just had to exercise "I'll do me, you do you."
I see games the same way. Making them available is great as long as they aren't a requirement. Let me opt-in to games here, but don't make it a fundamental part of my experience.
I think perhaps that's what caught me off guard here. I didn't expect to be participating in the badge race. I got a random reward for 8 weeks, which was nice I guess, but it then told me about the 16 week badge. It feels like I was being pressured.
So yes, I think this type of thing should be opt-in, but what is the opt-in mechanism. Is it simply being a creator, or an explicit toggle.
I mean, I don't think I was heavily affected, yet enough to get me to write this #discuss entry. I don't know whether that is good or bad -- it seems like the discussion is good, but my motivation to create it, perhaps not.