4.5 Review

The Development and Validation of the Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale (GUESS)

期刊

HUMAN FACTORS
卷 58, 期 8, 页码 1217-1247

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0018720816669646

关键词

games; psychometrics; scaling; interface evaluation; usability; acceptance measurement and research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and psychometrically validate a new instrument that comprehensively measures video game satisfaction based on key factors. Background: Playtesting is often conducted in the video game industry to help game developers build better games by providing insight into the players' attitudes and preferences. However, quality feedback is difficult to obtain from playtesting sessions without a quality gaming assessment tool. There is a need for a psychometrically validated and comprehensive gaming scale that is appropriate for playtesting and game evaluation purposes. Method: The process of developing and validating this new scale followed current best practices of scale development and validation. As a result, a mixed-method design that consisted of item pool generation, expert review, questionnaire pilot study, exploratory factor analysis (N = 629), and confirmatory factor analysis (N = 729) was implemented. Results: A new instrument measuring video game satisfaction, called the Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale (GUESS), with nine subscales emerged. The GUESS was demonstrated to have content validity, internal consistency, and convergent and discriminant validity. Conclusion: The GUESS was developed and validated based on the assessments of over 450 unique video game titles across many popular genres. Thus, it can be applied across many types of video games in the industry both as a way to assess what aspects of a game contribute to user satisfaction and as a tool to aid in debriefing users on their gaming experience. Application: The GUESS can be administered to evaluate user satisfaction of different types of video games by a variety of users.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据