Agon: an Acceptance Requirements Framework based on...

Agon: an Acceptance Requirements Framework based on Gamification

Organizational Information Systems 2016-2017

17 May 2017, Trento - Italy

Luca Piras

University of Trento, Trento - Italy

luca.piras@unitn.it

OIS 2016-2017 Agon: an Acceptance Requirements Framework Based on Gamification – luca.piras@unitn.it 2

Recap & Plan

▪ Main topics: Gamification and Acceptance

Requirements

▪ (2 hours) 15th May: Gamification

▪ (3 hours) 17th May: Acceptance Requirements

through Gamification Solutions

▪ (3 hours) 29th May: Tutorial as an experiment

▪ (2 hours) 15th May: Gamification

▪ (3 hours) 17th May: Acceptance

Requirements through Gamification

Solutions

▪ (3 hours) 29th May: Tutorial as an

experiment

Questions

Experience Questionnaire

▪ How to analysis and design a system maximizing

the probability that the user will accept and use it

▪ Acceptance:

o Acceptance Requirements Analysis -> Human Behavior,

Psychology, cognitive, Organizational Behavior factors and

strategies -> Acceptance Factors and Acceptance

Strategies

▪ Gamification:

o Gamification Analysis and Design: gamification concepts,

guidelines, best practices

What do we learn in this part of the course?

▪ (2 hours) 15th May -> Gamification:

o how to gamify a system

o gamification design: concepts, strategies and best

practices

▪ (3 hours) 17th May -> Acceptance Requirements:

o actually, there is even more than gamification ->

different solutions

o Acceptance Factors

o Acceptance Strategies

o Systematic Acceptance Requirements Analysis

▪ (3 hours) 29th May -> Tutorial on Agon: an

Acceptance Requirements Framework

o Acceptance Requirements Elicitation and Analysis

o Operationalization by using Gamification

▪ Tutorial details:

o Case study -> simple system to gamify

o Acceptance Model

o Gamification Model

o Visio 2016

Visio 2016 Instructions

▪ Go here: https://icts.unitn.it/microsoft-imagine; in the bottom of the page there is the link to

Microsoft Imagine where you can download Visio 2016

▪ You (as UniTn student) are affiliated with Microsoft and you can download Microsoft software

for free

▪ Try to login in the Microsoft Imagine website with your UniTn account. It could not work the

first time because, probably, your account needs to be activated by UniTn technicians in

relation to the Microsoft Imagine website.

▪ If you cannot login, ask the UniTn technicians to provide you with a Microsoft Imagine

account or enable your UniTn account. You can do this by opening a ticket in the OTRS

widget in MyUniTn (if the widget is not available, search it and add it in your dashboard).

▪ ATTENTION: UniTn technicians could answer you also with a delay of 1 week, therefore, do

this in advance in order to have Visio 2016 ready for the experiment of 29th May.

▪ When you are able to login in Microsoft Imagine download Visio 2016

▪ You will receive also a license key

▪ Install Visio 2016 and run it -> Enter in the software your license key -> DONE

▪ (Some/Most) (Crucial) system functionalities are to be accepted and used by

users -> accomplishment of system`s goals depends on users

▪ Strategical factors:

o User’s motivation

o Software Acceptance

▪ (Traditional) solutions:

o to improve usability

o to introduce more flexibility in the system, add more features

▪ Innovative solutions (fun, surprise, achievement, socialization):

o Serious Games

o Game Metaphors

o Gamification

Why OIS and [Acceptance + Gamification] ?

▪ Books:

o G. Zichermann and C. Cunningham,

Gamification by Design: Implementing

Game Mechanics in Web and Mobile

Apps. "O’Reilly", 2011.

o J. Schell, The Art of Game Design: A

book of lenses. CRC Press, 2014.

▪ References:

o Publications

o Links

Lecture Materials

▪ First part (theoretical):

o Agon: an Acceptance Requirements Framework

o The Systematic Acceptance Requirements Analysis

▪ Second part (practical):

o Demo on using Agon

o The Systematic Acceptance Requirements Analysis in

action

o The Doodle-Like Meeting Scheduler

This lecture

The Problem

Acceptance Requirements Framework: Agon

The Models

Systematic Acceptance Requirements Analysis

Conclusions

Outline

The Problem

The Models

Conclusions

Outline

The Problem

Process A

• Machine

Process B

• Human

Process C

• Machine

The problem

Process D

• Machine

Process D

• Human

Process E

• Group

Process F

• Machine

Goal 1

Goal 2

▪ Success Factors:

o Acceptance

o Motivation

▪ Methodologies for analyzing and designing software systems

have to consider those new factors

▪ Software Engineering process:

o Expensive

o Long

o Many heterogeneous experts

o Risks (success not completely predictable and guaranteed before the

delivery)

▪ Success factors for Software Systems (above all, the ones depending on a

high involvement of the user -> task accomplishment ):

o Usage

o Participation

The Problem

Maximization

Doodle-like Meeting Scheduler Exemplar

Main Elements

▪ Success factors for Social Software Systems:

o Usage

o Participation

▪ Lacks in the Software Engineering Process (Acceptance Requirements):

o User Characterization

o Psychological factors

o Incentive Mechanisms

The Problem and the Solution

Acceptance

Requirements

Framework

Maximization

▪ Literature:

o Technology Acceptance [9]—[13]

o Domain-Specific Technology

Acceptance [1]—[4], [22]

▪ Distinction Points:

o Software (the user contribution is fundamental)

o Reference models

o Psychology Factors -> Gamification

o User Context Model and CDRs

o Acceptance Model

o Gamification, Serious Games, Game

Metaphors, Tangible Incentives, …

The Problem

The Models

Conclusions

Outline

▪ Agon (in Greek Αγων) means “game” or “competition”, as in Olympic Games

(Ολυμπιακοι Αγωνες)

Agon: An acceptance requirements framework

The framework offers a metamodel

of acceptance requirements,

gamification solutions and the links

in-between

▪ Acceptance model – considers

psychological factors and how to

address them

▪ Tactical model – links

acceptance problems to

gamification solutions

▪ Gamification model – describes

gamification solutions along

multiple dimensions, e.g., user

profiles, gaming concepts, best

practices/guidelines

▪ Framework characteristics:

o generic

o flexible

▪ Multiple solutions:

o Gamification

o Serious Games

o Tangible Incentives

▪ Current focus:

Gamification

The Problem

The Models

Conclusions

Outline

The Models

▪ https://pirasluca.wordpress.com/home/acceptance/

▪ Goal Modeling techniques (NFR Framework) [L. Chung, B. Nixon, E. Yu, and

J. Mylopoulos ‘12]

▪ Acceptance model – encompasses several models from the literature:

o Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT),

o the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM2),

o the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA),

o the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB),

o the Combined TAM and TPB (C-TAM-TPB),

o etc.

▪ Gamification model:

o point systems (i.e., experience, redeemable, skill, karma, reputation and

training points), badges, leader–boards, levels, paths, gamified training (i.e.,

suggestions, tricks, tours, tutorials, training paths), gamified market (i.e.,

rewards and market policies of redeeming, making gifts, purchasing), game

roles, powers, unlockable powers, etc.

o best practices/guidelines

Metamodels

▪ https://pirasluca.wordpress.com/home/acceptance/

▪ Tactical model:

captures alternative tactics for fulfilling acceptance requirements by using

gamification requirements; provides our framework with enough flexibility

to add alternative solution models (serious games model, tangible

incentives model, …)

▪ Context model - User Context Model and Context Dependant Rules:

critical user dimensions, adopted from the literature [6], [9], [17], [18], that

in the real life make difference in the way of people reacting to acceptance

and gamification techniques

Metamodels and the context model

Metamodels and the context model (2)

https://pirasluca.wordpress.com/home/acceptance/

▪ Statistics: 270 goals, 376 relationships (refinements,

operationalizations, positive/negative contributions, …)

An example

Instance

User Context Model

▪ Extension of the [Orsi and Tanca ‘11] notation and framework

User Context Model

User Context Model and Context Dependent Rules

▪ The kind of game offered greatly depends on the intended user group, e.g.,

young, technology-savvy users prefer very different games than elder

technology-adverse ones …

▪ We model context using an extension of the [Orsi and Tanca ‘11] framework.

In that framework, contexts are defined along several dimensions.

▪ Our extension consists of allowing dependency rules between different

context points

Example from the

acceptance model

Example from the

gamification model

The Problem

The Models

Conclusions

Outline

Case study: using Agon, an Acceptance

Requirements Framework

System

Psychological Strategies

Incentive Mechanisms

Gamification

User/Player Model

User Characterization

Gamified

System

▪ Base system requirements modeling

▪ Acceptance requirements elicitation and analysis

▪ Context characterization

▪ Context–based analysis of acceptance requirements

▪ Acceptance requirements refinement and selection of high-level

incentive mechanism requirements

▪ Context–based operationalization via incentive mechanism

(gamification) requirements

▪ Domain-dependent instantiation of incentive mechanism

(gamification) requirements

The Systematic Acceptance Requirements Analysis

Gamified Solution

Base system requirements modeling

Initial Requirements Model (1)

Initial Requirements Model (2)

Acceptance requirements elicitation and

analysis

Acceptance Requirements

▪ We represent them as quality requirements [FengLinLi14].

▪ meaning that N% of intended users (Participants) shall use the set of

functions (Functions)

▪ To define acceptance requirements it is needed to identify, among all the

functions of the software, the ones that:

o cannot be fulfilled automatically just by IT procedures;

o need human contributions;

o the human has to be to stimulated, engaged to carry out the activity.

▪ Such a requirement can be operationalized by a gamification mechanism

to be selected by taking into account the intended users, the user context

and other parameters.

Acceptance Requirements for the case study

Context Characterization

Context–based analysis of acceptance

requirements

Context–Based Reasoning over Acceptance

▪ Examples:

Acceptance requirements refinement and

selection of high-level incentive mechanism

requirements

Requirements Selection

Context–based operationalization via

incentive mechanism (gamification)

requirements

Context–Based Reasoning over Gamification

▪ Examples:

Domain-dependent instantiation of incentive

mechanism (gamification) requirements

Gamified Operationalization

▪ Examples:

The Gamified Solution

The gamified meeting scheduler in a nutshell

▪ Acceptance Requirement:

▪ Main solution elements:

▪ Tour:

▪ Improve Perceived Ease of Use -> Improve System Perception by IT -> Provide

▪ Propose Tour Before Compiling

▪ Set Skip The Tour

▪ Badges

▪ First Compiling Badge

▪ Second Compiling Badge

▪ …

▪ Leader-board (First Doodle compilers LB)

▪ Redeemable points (Win 100 RP points)

▪ Gamified market (Real rewards; Redeemable policies)

▪ …

The Problem

The Models

Conclusions

Outline

Conclusions

▪ On-going:

o Integration

o evaluation (PACAS European Project, Vision European

project, students, case studies from heterogeneous fields)

▪ Future work:

o Conclude the integration

o Development of a tool

o additional dimensions/characterizations

o alternative operationalizations for acceptance

requirements

o adaptive gamification solutions

On-going and Future work

▪ Publications:

▪ L. Piras, P. Giorgini, and J. Mylopoulos, “Acceptance

Requirements and their Gamification Solutions”, 24th IEEE

International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE),

IEEE, Beijing, 2016.

▪ L. Piras, E. Paja, R. Cuel, D. Ponte, P. Giorgini and J.

Mylopoulos, “Gamification Solutions for Software

Acceptance: A Comparative Study of Requirements

Engineering and Organizational Behavior Techniques”, in 11th

IEEE International Conference on Research Challenges in

Information Science (RCIS), IEEE, Brighton (UK), 2017.

▪ …

Publications

Master Theses

▪ Software Engineering, Formal Methods and Security Group

▪ Professors and Researchers: Paolo Giorgini, John Mylopoulos, Elda Paja, Mattia

Salnitri, Luca Piras, Marco Robol

▪ European Projects: PACAS (http://www.pacasproject.eu/), VISION

(http://www.visioneuproject.eu/), etc.

▪ Collaborations:

o Universities (Utrecht, Eindhoven, Brighton, etc.)

o Research Centers (FBK, Stiftelsen SINTEF Norwegian Research Centre, etc.)

o Companies (ATOS Spain SA, Deep Blue Srl, etc.)

▪ Master Theses:

o Software Engineering

o Requirements Engineering

Our Research Group, activities and Master Theses

Gamification

Acceptance

Requirements

Security

Privacy

Business

Processes

▪ 4 students

▪ Theses on Gamification of:

o A Decision-Making platform for Air Traffic Management (ATM) (PACAS

European Project http://www.pacasproject.eu/)

o Privacy Platform (VISION European Project http://www.visioneuproject.eu/)

o Mobility Platform

o Children Independent Mobility (CIM) Platform

▪ Other theses:

o other gamification case studies (reducing waste of energy, water consumption,

recycling, etc.)

o AGON-Tool Improvement (complete the cycle: Analysis, Design ->

Development)

o Modeling other operationalizations for acceptance requirements (Serious

Games, Game Methaphors, Tangible Incentives, Mechanism Design, Nudges,

Marketing, Advertisements, etc.)

o Modeling new gamification concepts, patterns, best practices

Master ThesesGamification

Acceptance

Requirements

Tutorial and second part of the lecture

▪ (3 hours) 29th May: Tutorial as an experiment

▪ Requirements for the tutorial:

o Bring your laptop with Visio ready-to-use

o Visio 2016 -> best solution

o Visio 2013 -> Google Drive -> mails

o Linux Users? -> Visio installed in a Virtual Machine

▪ Second part of the lecture:

o Demo on using Agon

o The Systematic Acceptance Requirements Analysis

o The Doodle-Like Meeting Scheduler

Tutorial and second part of the lecture

1. J. Beer and L. Takayama, “Mobile Remote Presence Systems for Older Adults: Acceptance,

Benefits, and Concerns,” in Proc. of the 6th international conference on Human-robot

interaction. ACM, 2011.

2. K. Arning, B. Trevisan, M. Ziefle, and E. Jakobs, “Eliciting User Requirements and Acceptance

for Customizing Mobile Device System Architecture,” in Design, User Experience, and

Usability. Design Philosophy, Methods, and Tools. Springer, 2013, pp. 439–448.

3. F. Davis and V. Venkatesh, “Toward Preprototype User Acceptance Testing of New Information

Systems: Implications for Software Project Management,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering

Management, 2004.

4. R. Poston and A. Calvert, “Vision 2020: The Future of Software Quality Management and

Impacts on Global User Acceptance,” in HCI in Business. Springer, 2015, pp. 748–760.

5. M. Kaptein, P. Markopoulos, B. De Ruyter, and E. Aarts, “Personalizing Persuasive

Technologies: Explicit and Implicit Personalization Using Persuasion Profiles,” Intern. Journal

of Human-Computer Studies, 2015.

6. G. Zichermann and C. Cunningham, Gamification by Design: Implementing Game Mechanics

in Web and Mobile Apps. "O’Reilly", 2011.

7. J. Schell, The Art of Game Design: A book of lenses. CRC Press, 2014.

8. L. Piras, G. Valetto, A. Marconi, and M. Pistore, “Virtual Coaches for Mission-Based Gamified

Smart Communities,” in CHI-PLAY 2015 Workshop, Personalization in Serious and Persuasive

Games and Gamified Interactions. ACM, 2015.

References (1)

9. V. Venkatesh, M. Morris, G. Davis, and F. Davis, “User Acceptance of Information Technology:

Toward a Unified View,” MIS quarterly, 2003.

10. V. Venkatesh and F. Davis, “A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model:

Four Longitudinal Field Studies,” Management science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186–204, 2000.

11. B. Sheppard, J. Hartwick, and P. Warshaw, “The Theory of Reasoned Action: A Meta-Analysis

of Past Research with Recommendations for Modifications and Future Research,” Journal of

Cons. Research, 1988.

12. I. Ajzen, “The Theory of Planned Behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision

Processes, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 179–211, 1991.

13. S. Taylor and P. Todd, “Assessing IT Usage: The Role of Prior Experience,” MIS quarterly, pp.

561–570, 1995.

14. J. Mylopoulos, L. Chung, and B. Nixon, “Representing and Using Nonfunctional Requirements:

A Process-Oriented Approach,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 18, no. 6, pp.

483–497, 1992.

15. L. Chung, B. Nixon, E. Yu, and J. Mylopoulos, Non-Functional Requirements in Software

Engineering. Springer, 2012, vol. 5.

16. J. Hamari, “Do Badges Increase User Activity? A Field Experiment on the Effects of

Gamification,” Computers in Human Behavior, 2015.

17. J. Koivisto and J. Hamari, “Demographic Differences in Perceived Benefits from Gamification,”

Computers in Human Behavior, 2014.

References (2)

18. R. Bartle, “Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players Who Suit MUDs,” Journal of MUD

Research, 1996.

19. G. Orsi and L. Tanca, “Context Modelling and Context-Aware Querying,” in Datalog Reloaded.

Springer, 2011, pp. 225–244.

20. L. Piras, P. Giorgini, and J. Mylopoulos. Full models of this work. [Online]. Available:

21. R. Kazhamiakin, A. Marconi, M. Perillo, M. Pistore, G. Valetto, L. Piras, F. Avesani, and N.

Perri, “Using Gamification to Incentivize Sustainable Urban Mobility,” in 1st Intern. Smart Cities

Conf. (ISC2). IEEE, 2015.

22. A. Sutcliffe, P. Rayson, C. Bull, and P. Sawyer, “Discovering Affect-Laden Requirements to

Achieve System Acceptance,” in 22nd International Requirements Engineering Conference

(RE). IEEE, 2014.

References (3)

Agon: an Acceptance Requirements Framework based on...

Documents

70645 · 2020. 6. 17. · 42 48 46 47 agon Flip 45 agon o agon agon e est agon agón agon agón agon ada agon agón 4 45 46 47 48 4

Agon broj 22

«AGON» (ISSN 2384-9045), n. 4, gennaio-marzo 2015 Maria ...portale.unime.it/agon/files/2015/03/0405.pdf · «AGON» (ISSN 2384-9045), n. 4, gennaio-marzo 2015 !! 58 Una voce stratificata

PHOTOGRAPHIQUES RENCONTRES #03 AGON-COUTAINVILLE

Agon broj 09

Ar Agon Altfont

Agon Price List Wef 1-11-2013

Agon Broj 20

RATIONAL ACCEPTANCE* - Joel Velascojoelvelasco.net/teaching/3865/kaplan 81 - rational acceptance.pdf · One need only to look at the history of the last few decades for ... Suppose

AGON 2011/4 nro 32.pdf

Agon: an Acceptance Requirements Framework based on ... · SE-Seminars Agon: an Acceptance Requirements Framework Based on Gamification –luca.piras@unitn.it 3 What is this seminar

ZAGADKI I AGON MĘDRCÓW W KRÓLU EDYPIE SOFOKLESA · ZAGADKI I AGON MĘDRCÓW W KRÓLU EDYPIE SOFOKLESA ABSTRACT. Cieślak Małgorzata, Zagadki i agon mędrców w „Królu Edypie”

AGON, sample

Agon: Revisionalism and Critical Personality - Harold Bloom

GB 150.4 Fabrication, inspection and testing, and acceptance.pdf

Diapo agon oedipe roi

AGON N:o 16.3.2011 ORDLIGA 10. VSK. 1/2011 ORTHERN …agon.fi/pdf/AGON-29-2011-1.pdf · 2014-11-06 · agon 29 16.3.2011 1 extra philosophiam nulla salus agon pohjoinen filosofiyhdistys

Agon pp video music_10_3_13

AGON CASOPIS 06 2010

AGON - broj 10