Captology Notebook

In simplified form, the logic of "interaction-to-action" claims goes something like this:

1. People engaged in a simulation game have experiences and adopt strategic responses they may have never considered without the game.
2. Certain responses get rewarded with points or other rewards (e.g., promotion to the next level; special powers or resources and ultimately winning the game).
3. Players repeat / practice / explore "winning" responses in an attempt to do even better.
4. Responses that are reinforced – or even just experienced – will be easier to think of and execute the next time the player encounters a similar situation – in the game or otherwise.

Dr. Straub wraps up with these questions:

Consider these questions as you start creating "serious games" for your reality.

* What decisions or actions does your site or application try to help people execute?
* Can/do you use or embed interactive, self-directed feedback to help users understand the impact of making various decisions?
* Are the interactive task flows appropriate, available, and obvious at key decision points?
* Are they "walk-up easy" to interact with and use?
* Do the interactives invite you to fiddle with them? Or are they just scary?
* Can users explore alternate strategies effectively?
* Can users translate the feedback to "what-next" action?
* Are the interactives engaging and persuasive... from the customer's perspective?

--BJ Fogg