3 ms·

Gamification is overt and transparent psychological manipulation. I had friends in Sociology etc. who had to conform to elaborate ethics compliance guidelines b

by sn41 8y ago

Gamification is overt and transparent psychological manipulation. I had friends in Sociology etc. who had to conform to elaborate ethics compliance guidelines before launching surveys etc. Why is gamification not similarly controlled?

zippy5 8y ago
If we were able to enact ethics compliance regulation, I'm pretty sure gamification would be pretty far down our list of things to regulate.
clairity 8y ago
as social animals, we manipulate each other constantly. all it takes is a word, a grunt, a glance, a micro-aggression, even an unwitnessed action. are you suggesting we regulate all human behavior?
- intro-b 8y ago
  I'm sure you understand that there's a difference between normal, personal human interactions, as you've just described, and a complex technological system designed and implemented for use in a business setting?
  - clairity 8y ago
    yes, but the original question made a broad statement about regulating human manipulation. my rebuttal was to ask where we draw the line. note that historically we've allowed all kinds of manipulations (like basically lying in advertisements, caveat emptor), in an abundance of caution to avoid infringing our 1st amendment rights (in the US).
Nasrudith 8y ago
Sociology had their high profile scandals already for one with the Stanford Prison Experiment among with others that people were concerned about being treated like lab rats. Look at everything not controlled with manipulation already even in the relatively restriction friendly commercial advertising space. If we go down that rabbit hole we'll have to mandate package colors and store layouts. No more milk in the back of the grocery store or using attractive people to sell products. Even putting aside practicality altogether many people would probably choose manipulation that left them feeling more fulfilled over unhappy bland truth that their job is tedious repeated trips and waiting that is wearing out their car since they know they need something to help make ends meet. It is accepted that good management is to make your workers motivated - not even the most radical of labor would complain that their boss is making work too engaging. One could argue the status quo is messed up but it is accepted. It might even have good outcomes and be ethically consistent to establish a strong precedent against manipulation but it would be completely outside the overton window and look like trying to swat flies with backhoes even if it was completely right.

by sn41 8y ago

zippy5 8y ago

If we were able to enact ethics compliance regulation, I'm pretty sure gamification would be pretty far down our list of things to regulate.

clairity 8y ago

as social animals, we manipulate each other constantly. all it takes is a word, a grunt, a glance, a micro-aggression, even an unwitnessed action. are you suggesting we regulate all human behavior?

intro-b 8y ago
I'm sure you understand that there's a difference between normal, personal human interactions, as you've just described, and a complex technological system designed and implemented for use in a business setting?
- clairity 8y ago
  yes, but the original question made a broad statement about regulating human manipulation. my rebuttal was to ask where we draw the line. note that historically we've allowed all kinds of manipulations (like basically lying in advertisements, caveat emptor), in an abundance of caution to avoid infringing our 1st amendment rights (in the US).

Nasrudith 8y ago

Sociology had their high profile scandals already for one with the Stanford Prison Experiment among with others that people were concerned about being treated like lab rats. Look at everything not controlled with manipulation already even in the relatively restriction friendly commercial advertising space. If we go down that rabbit hole we'll have to mandate package colors and store layouts. No more milk in the back of the grocery store or using attractive people to sell products. Even putting aside practicality altogether many people would probably choose manipulation that left them feeling more fulfilled over unhappy bland truth that their job is tedious repeated trips and waiting that is wearing out their car since they know they need something to help make ends meet. It is accepted that good management is to make your workers motivated - not even the most radical of labor would complain that their boss is making work too engaging. One could argue the status quo is messed up but it is accepted. It might even have good outcomes and be ethically consistent to establish a strong precedent against manipulation but it would be completely outside the overton window and look like trying to swat flies with backhoes even if it was completely right.