Paula Bräuer

The recent developments in the scientific system have been characterized by an increasing openness, with open access (OA) publishing emerging as a central principle. OA represents an alternative model for publishing research articles, diverging from the traditional subscription-based model. While positive developments have been observed, obstacles for OA remain, including elevated publication costs and the imperative to publish at the highest level in the scholarly community with a significant impact. To overcome these obstacles, it may be beneficial to consider using non-monetary incentives, such as gamification, to promote OA publishing. To address this challenge, an experimental study employing a conjoint analysis has been conducted to investigate the impact of various gamification options on researchers' publishing behavior. The study utilized a sample of N = 356 subjects. The results demonstrate that the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is a dominant criterion for determining where to publish. However, gamification, particularly in the form of badges associated with an article, can also significantly influence journal selection and support OA. Additionally, qualitative data was collected to identify other factors influencing the choice of a journal for OA from the perspective of the participating researchers in the experiment.

Gamification can increase motivation in learning, and intelligent virtual assistants (IVAs) can support foreign language learning at home. However, there is a lack of design concepts to motivate learners to practice with their IVA. This study combines both concepts and analyzes if audio-gamification can increase engagement to address this research gap. To this end, a one-year long-term field experiment with 230 subjects using a German language learning skill for Amazon Alexa was conducted. A between-subjects design determined differences in learning behavior and learning outcomes between a control group and two gamified groups (achievements and leaderboard). The findings reveal a positive effect on the number of translated vocabulary and learning success. However, only in the group with a leaderboard was a statistically significant effect on the number of translated vocabulary found. These findings imply that audio-gamification can be a helpful tool for increasing motivation to use IVAs for foreign language learning.

Current gamification research usually examines several game design elements at the same time, which makes it difficult to distinguish how and to what extent individual game design elements increase motivation. We address this research question by individually examining four game design elements (progress bar, narrative, feedback, and badges) in an online experiment. In addition, combinations of game design elements were tested to gain insight about additive effects on motivation. The study included 505 subjects who answered a maximum of 190 different multiple-choice questions. The subjects were told to answer questions only as long as they enjoyed answering them. The results provide statistically significant motivational gains for all individual game design elements. Interestingly, not all game design elements benefit from a combination in the same way. The results of our study indicate that an increase in motivation through gamification is already possible if only an individual game design element is added.

The political and social debate on nuclear energy in Germany has been characterized for many decades by a high potential for conflict and dissatisfaction. In particular, the controversies surrounding the Gorleben salt dome achieved international attention and altered the relationship between the population and political decision makers at the local up to international levels. With the Site Selection Act from 2013 (StandAG, first revision 2017) a new approach was selected in order to find a participative, inclusive and transparent search process for the best possible site of a repository for highly radioactive waste in Germany. In connection with this a self-learning process was proclaimed, based on a white (unprejudiced) map, which aimed to give the general public an active role; however, even the first interim report of the Federal Company for Radioactive Waste Disposal (BGE) and the publication of the multicolored map, in which geologically suitable areas were extensively shown, revealed a massive potential for conflict. Many citizens and activists, who had already protested against the Gorleben salt dome, in this early phase of the process criticized the lack of transparency and opportunities to voice an opinion on possible site regions. In order to counter these criticisms, the possibilities for a web geographic information system (WebGIS) application (interactive map) as an online platform were analyzed (Walkobinger and Tauch, 2018; Brown and Kyttä, 2018). The aim was to virtualy present available geodata (Chwalisz, 2021), which enabled people to contribute to spatial information (geological, superficial) and therefore to achieve an interaction and participation option with respect to the possible site regions. For this, available geodata relevant for the site search process, such as subareas (BGE, 2020), nuclear power stations (active/inactive, research stations etc.), storage facilities (repository, central, intermediate storage etc.), historically relevant sites (sites of protest, uranium-enrichment and preparation plants etc.) and basic data on orientation were used. Based on this, two possibilities for participative interaction were analyzed: (1) the inclusion of spatially located notes that contain own experiences or local knowledge (e.g. reports, concerns, suggestions, own expert opinions) and (2) the initiation of a platform for a spatially located discussion. Against the background of transdisciplinary research, the aim was to evaluate the participative value of this application in an iterative process, in which the research process is supported by an accompanying group from civil society. For this panel we want to present our results from the transdisciplinary research process. In addition to testing the suitability of such a participation mode, we want to analyze where problems arise and which information is necessary or can lead to conflicts (Griffin, 2020). Finally, we want to gain information on how such participation modes influence the quality of the dialogue and how they contribute to an overall perception of a legally acceptable process (Rzeszewski and Kotus, 2019).