↓ Skip to main content

ENED-GEM: A Conceptual Framework Model for Psychological Enjoyment Factors and Learning Mechanisms in Educational Games about the Environment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
ENED-GEM: A Conceptual Framework Model for Psychological Enjoyment Factors and Learning Mechanisms in Educational Games about the Environment
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01085
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristoffer S Fjællingsdal, Christian A Klöckner

Abstract

Based on a thorough review of psychological literature, this article seeks to develop a model of game enjoyment and environmental learning (ENvironmental EDucational Game Enjoyment Model, ENED-GEM) and delineate psychological processes that might facilitate learning and inspire behavioral change from educational games about the environment. A critically acclaimed digital educational game about environmental issues (Fate of the World by Red Redemption/Soothsayer Games) was used as a case study. Two hundred forty-nine reviews of the game from the popular gaming and reviewing platform known as Steam were analyzed by means of a thematic content analysis in order to identify key player enjoyment factors believed to be relevant to the process of learning from games, as well as to gain an understanding of positive and negative impressions about the game's general content. The end results of the thematic analysis were measured up to the suggested ENED-GEM framework. Initial results generally support the main elements of the ENED-GEM, and future research into the importance of these individual core factors is outlined.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Researcher 6 7%
Professor 4 5%
Other 21 24%
Unknown 24 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 10 11%
Psychology 9 10%
Computer Science 8 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 6%
Arts and Humanities 5 6%
Other 23 26%
Unknown 28 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,004,890
of 22,982,639 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#2,047
of 30,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,402
of 315,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#58
of 612 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,982,639 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,496 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 612 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.