Making Learning Fun, A Taxonomy of Intrinsic Motivations for Learning

Here I continue discussion of readings for Instructional Simulations & Games, IDT 545, http://www.idt.und.edu/index.html

Making Learning Fun, A Taxonomy of Intrinsic Motivations for Learning
Malone and Lepper
In Aptitude Learning and Instruction Ed. Snow

The authors seek to set up instructional environments that are intrinsically motivating. They look to computer games and their motivating features.

They quote "The will to learn is an intrinsic motive, one that finds both its source and its reward in its own exercise. The will to learn becomes a 'problem' only under specialized circumstances like those of a school, where a curriculum is set, students confined and a path fixed" (Bruner)

This is possibly not quite the same as the Crawford position that play IS learning (The Art of Computer Game Design http://www.vancouver.wsu.edu/fac/peabody/game-book/Coverpage.html)

They propose these classes of motivation:

challenge
fantasy
curiosity
control
co-operation
competition
recognition

In a study of game preferences of 65 elementary elementary school students (Malone 1981), they found the following correlation with preference:

Goal 0.65**
computer keeps score 0.56**
Audio effects 0.51**
Randomness involved in game 0.48**
Speed of answers counts 0.36*
Visual effects 0.34
Competition 0.31
Variability difficulty level 0.17
Cooperation 0.02
Fantasy 0.06
Graphic game 0.38*
Math game -0.2
Word game -0.38

It is noted that those correlations marked with ** have 98% confidence (p<0.02) and
those marked with * have 95% confidence(p<0.05). If (p<0.05), one can not state with any confidence that there is any correlation, any observed correlation is statistically insignificant because of the sample size.

Malone and Lepper are often quoted on the importance of endogenous fantasy. It is noteworthy that in this study, fantasy had no effect on player preference whatever.

Also, this study finds no correlation with cooperation. Cooperation is often quoted by higher level players of World of Warcraft as a strong motivator. WoW is highly successful with more than 6 million paid subscribers http://www.mmogchart.com/ It should be noted that at the time of the study, 1981, computer games were quite unsophisticated by today's standards.

Habgood conducted an experiment to see if children would create a learning game with endogenous or exogenous fantasy, they created games without fantasy. This indicates that fantasy may not play an inportant role in motivation.
http://www.zombiedivision.co.uk/

Also, there was little evidence of fantasy in games made in a computer club, http://tonyforster.blogspot.com/2006/07/other-worlds-and-game-creation.html

Malone & Lepper go on to say "fantasy ... is clearly important in many kinds of intrinsically motivating activities, such as computer games, television, reading, and dramatic play (cf Singer 1973)" (Singer 1973 The child's World of make-believe
http://www.amazon.com/Childs-World-Make-Believe-Experimental/dp/0126466602)

I have not read Singer's book but I doubt Singer was commenting on computer games, computer games barely, if at all, existed then http://www.pong-story.com/inventor.htm

Many computer games have a back story, often told in the opening cinematics, but I doubt it plays a major factor in most gamers' enjoyment.

Did Malone & Lepper ignore their own data? It looks a bit as if they allowed their own assumptions to override their experimental data.