Industrial and Organizational Psychology
Describing the current state of gamification, Chamorro-Premuzic, Winsborough, Sherman, and Hogan () provide a troubling contradiction: They offer examples of a broad spectrum of gamification interventions, but they then summarize the entirety of gamification as “the digital equivalent of situational judgment tests.” This mischaracterization grossly oversimplifies a rapidly growing area of research and practice both within and outside of industrial–organizational (I-O) psychology. We agree that situational judgment tests (SJTs) can be considered a type of gamified assessment, and gamification provides a toolkit to make SJTs even more gameful. However, the term gamification refers to a much broader and potentially more impactful set of tools than just SJTs, which are incremental, versatile, and especially valuable to practitioners in an era moving toward business-to-consumer (B2C) assessment models. In this commentary, we contend that gamification is commonly misunderstood and misapplied by I-O psychologists, and our goals are to remedy such misconceptions and to provide a research agenda designed to improve both the science and the practice surrounding gamification of human resource processes.
Original Publication Citation
Armstrong, M. B., Ferrell, J. Z., Collmus, A. B., & Landers, R. N. (2016). Correcting misconceptions about gamification of assessment: More than SJTs and badges. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(3), 671-677. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2016.69
Armstrong, Michael B.; Ferrell, Jared Z.; Collmus, Andrew B.; and Landers, Richard N., "Correcting Misconceptions About Gamification of Assessment: More Than SJTs and Badges" (2016). Psychology Faculty Publications. 132.