Analysis of a Cultural Heritage Game with a Purpose with an Educational Incentive

Irene Celino, Andrea Fiano and Riccardo Fino

CEFRIEL – Milano, Italy

paper: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38791-8_28

Introduction and motivationCultural Heritage (CH) Game with a Purpose (GWAP)

Gameplay: quiz to guess a CH asset from four different images

Purpose: ranking images of CH assets

Collateral effect: learning about CH

Evaluation of the CH GWAP:

Effectiveness to achieve its ranking purpose

Ability to engage and retain players

Potential effect of the educational/cultural incentive

Indomilando gameplayImages of CH architectures in the city of Milano

Churches, villas, buildings, schools, towers, …

1 name/title and 4 photos (of 4 different assets)

Link to official asset record

Map to explore CH assets the user played with

http://bit.ly/indomilando

Intuitively, a photo is recognizable if it is correctly guessed more frequently

Conservative measure: lower bound of Wilson score interval

But some categories are more recognizable than others (e.g. buildings are difficult)

correction: standardization by asset type

Final photo rank score:

Indomilando purpose

Computing photo ranking

p: observed fraction of successes (=photo guessed)z2

α/2: (1 - α/2) quantile of the standard normal distributionn: total number of trials (=photo played)

Indomilando purpose

Computing CH asset rankingIntuitively, an asset rank score corresponds to the average of its photos’ rank scores

But each asset has a different no. of photos (1-40)

correction for number of photos

But each set of photos can be heterogeneous (mix of good and bad photos)

correction for photo inhomogeneity

Final asset rank score:

Indomilando purpose

Evaluating ability to rankComparison with no. of visits of assets’ Wikipedia pages (when existing)

But no. of Wikipedia visits is more a sign of “popularity” than “recognisability”

Comparison with ground truth

Best photo of top-10 Wikipedia assets

Manual ranking by 12 users

Rank aggregation weighted by declared familiarity with Milano CH

Good ability to rank and much more time-effectiveEach manual ranker: avg. of 1 min 27 sec to rank 10 assets

Indomilando: 72 players with avg. of 7.5 min to rank ~1400 photos and ~650 assets

Indomilando gaming flavor

Evaluating players engagementALP (Average Life Play): 7.5 min

Left-skewed distribution (long tail)

Median < 3 min

Two user groups (+ “outliers”)

Subjective analysis of engagement through user questionnaire

Players like it

Indomilando cultural flavor

Evaluating educational incentive (1/2)Possibility to explore CH official records between game rounds (map exploration)

Two rounds consecutive if < 15 min

Distribution of “exploration” time

Possibility to learn over time to recognize CH assets

No. of correctly guessed photos as a function of the played game rounds

Indomilando cultural flavor

Evaluating educational incentive (2/2)Subjective analysis of cultural incentive through user questionnaire

What motivated you to play? Did you learn anything new about Milano?

guessing it right

leaderboard

learning something new

Conclusions Indomilando is effective to achieve its ranking purpose

Resulting rank highly correlated to a ground truth

Outcome achieved in a very limited time

Indomilando shows a good engagement potential

Most players find the game fun

User group spending a significantly long time in playing

Indomilando has a learning/educational effect

Players are motivated to acquire new knowledge

Interplay of ranking purpose and educational incentive to be further investigated

Indomilando promoted by Lombardy

http://l15.regione.lombardia.it/

Analysis of a Cultural Heritage Game with a Purpose with an Educational Incentive

Irene Celino, Andrea Fiano and Riccardo Fino

Thank you!

Additional material can be found at http://swa.cefriel.it/urbangames/indomilando/icwe2016.html

http://bit.ly/indomilando