Activismo y narrativas gamificadasestudio comparativo de entornos ciberdemocráticos de empoderamiento ciudadano

  1. Pérez-Escolar, Marta 1
  2. Navazo Ostúa, Pablo 1
  1. 1 Universidad Loyola Andalucía
    info

    Universidad Loyola Andalucía

    Sevilla, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0075gfd51

Journal:
CIC: Cuadernos de información y comunicación

ISSN: 1135-7991 1988-4001

Year of publication: 2019

Issue Title: Digitalización de la comunicación, democracia y ciudadanía

Issue: 24

Pages: 31-46

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5209/CIYC.64842 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: CIC: Cuadernos de información y comunicación

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

The main objective of this study is focused on understanding whether gamification narratives can represent a useful tool for citizen empowerment with which to motivate individual participation in cyber-democratic environments. Regarding this purpose, a representative group of two gamification products with an activist undertone have been selected: the interactive documentary “Fort McMoney” and the serous game “A Force More Powerful”. Then, this research has applied a qualitative methodology that combines the Octalysis model (Chou, 2015) and the Ladder of participation paradigm (Arnstein, 1969). The results show that gamification narratives are a tool for citizen empowerment and favour cyber-activist actions. However, these projects can lead into a pseudo-activism for lazy people as well.

Bibliographic References

  • Arnstein, S. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216-224
  • Baudrillard, J. (1983). Simulations. Philosophy Hall Columbia University New York City, New York, U.S.A.
  • Bauman, Z. (1995). Life in Fragments. Essays in Postmodern Morality. Oxford: Blackwell
  • Bauman, Z. (2007). Miedo líquido. La sociedad contemporánea y sus temores. Barcelona: Paidós
  • Bellamy, C. (2000). “Modelling electronic democracy: towards democratic discourses for an information age”. En J. Hoff, I. Horrocks & P. Tops (Eds.). Democratic Governance and New Technology (pp.33-53). Londres: Routledge
  • Berrigan, F. J. (1979). Community communications. The role of community media in development. Paris: Unesco.
  • Bobbio, N. (1986). El futuro de la democracia. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica
  • Carpentier, N. (2012). The concept of participation. If they have access and interact, do they really participate? Fronteiras, 14(2), pp. 164-177.
  • Carpentier, N. (2015). Differentiating between access, interaction and participation. Conjunctions, 2(2), pp.7-28.
  • Castells, M. (2008). La era de la información: Economía, sociedad y cultura. Volumen I: La sociedad red. Madrid: Alianza Editorial
  • Chadwick, A. (2003). Bringing e-democracy back in: Why it matters for future research on e-governance. Social Science Computer Review, 21(4), 443-455
  • Chou, Y. K. (2015). Octalysis: the complete gamification framework. Yu-Kai Chou: Gamification & Behavioral Design. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/2K6fZI2
  • Coleman, S. & Blumler, J. (2009). The Internet and Democratic Citizenship: Theory, Practice and Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  • Dahlgren, P. (2011). Jóvenes y participación política. Los medios en la Red y la cultura cívica. Telos, (89), 12-22
  • Dahlgren, P. (2013). From public to civic intellectuals via online cultures. Participations. Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 10(1), 400-404
  • Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R. & Nacke, L. (2011). From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: “Defining “Gamification””. En A. Lugmayr, H. Franssila, C. Safran, & I. Hammouda (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments (pp. 9-15). Nueva York: ACM.
  • Feenstra, R. A. & Casero-Ripollés, A. (2014). Democracy in the Digital Communication Environment: A Typology Proposal of Political Monitoring Processes. International Journal of Communication, (8), 2448-2468
  • Freire, J. (2013). Gobierno Abierto. Un proyecto en construcción. Telos, (94), 44-47
  • Ganuza, E. (2012). “The Deliberative Challenge”. En I. Ramos Vielba & E. Campos Domínguez (Eds.), Citizenship in 3D: Digital Deliberative Democracy (pp.19-50). Madrid: Fundación Ideas
  • Gaudenzi, S. (2013). The living documentary: From representing reality to co-creating reality in digital interactive documentary [Doctoral thesis]. University of London.
  • Gifreu, A. (2012). “Nuevo modelo de no ficción interactiva móvil. Caracterización del reportaje y el documental interactivo”. En I. García-Medina & R. S. Contreras-Espinosa (Eds.). M-todos. Tendencias y oportunidades de la movilidad digital (pp. 59-66). Bercelona: Universitat de Vic.
  • Hall, M. (1999). Virtual colonization. Journal of Material Culture, 4(1), 39-55.
  • Hamilton, A., Madison, J. & Jay, J. (2012). El federalista. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
  • Hegel, G. W. F. (1968). Filosofía del derecho. Buenos Aires: Editorial Claridad.
  • Huizinga, J. (1949). Homo ludens. A study of the play-element in culture. London: Routledge & Kegan Pau.
  • Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. Nueva York: New York University Press.
  • Jenkins, H. (2007). From Serious Games to Serious Gaming (Part One): Revolution. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/2Vgw4RI
  • Jenkins, H. y Carpentier, N. (2013). Theorizing participatory intensities: A conversation about participation and politics. Convergence: The international journal of research into new media technologies, 19(3), pp. 265-286
  • Juul, J. (2003). “The Game, the player, the world: Looking for a heart of gameness”. En M. Copier & J. Raessens, (Eds.), Proceedings at the Level Up: Digital Games Research Conference, (pp. 30-45). Utrechet, the Netherlands: Utercht University.
  • Kapp, K. M. (2012). The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Case-Based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education. Nueva York: Pfieffer: An Imprint of John Wiley & Sons.
  • Kapp, K. M., Blair, L. & Mesch, R. (2013) The Gamification of Learning and Instruction Fieldbook: Theory into Practice. Nueva York: John Wiley & Sons..
  • Keane, J. (2009). The life and Death of Democracy. Londres: Simon y Schuster.
  • Kiryakova, G., Nadezhda, A. & Yordanova, L. (2014). “Gamification in Education”. Proceedings of 9th International Balkan Education and Science Conference. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/2y9N9mO
  • Kollock, P. & Smith, M. (1995). The sociology of cyberspace: Social Interaction and order in computer communities. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press.
  • Lasswell, H. D. (1948). “The structure and function of communications in society”. En L. Bryson (Ed.), The communication of ideas (pp.37-51). New York: Harper & Row.
  • Leadbetter, C. (1999). Living on thin air: The new economy. London: Viking.
  • Lévy, P. (2004). Inteligencia Colectiva. Por una antropología del ciberespacio. Washington: Organización Panamericana de la Salud.
  • Lim, M. (2002). Cyber-civic space in Indonesia: From panopticon to pandemonium? International Development Planning Review, 24(4), 383-400.
  • Lipovetsky, G. (2006). Los tiempos hipermodernos. Barcelona: Editorial Anagrama.
  • Macdonald, D. (1969). “Masscult y midcult”. En D. Macdonald, E. Shils, C. Greenberg, L.
  • Lownthal, P. F. Lazarsfeld & R. K. Merton (Eds.), La industria de la cultura (pp.67-156).) Madrid: Alberto Corazón.
  • Mallamaci, M. G. (2017). El poder psicopolítico en las sociedades postdisciplinarias del homo digitalis. Revista Latina de Sociología (RELASO), 7(1), 74-94. Apuntes sobre el pensamiento de Byung-Chul Han
  • Mannheim, K. (1964). Ensayos de sociología de la cultura. Madrid: Aguilar.
  • Martí, J. L. (2008). Alguna precisión sobre las nuevas tecnologías y la democracia deliberativa y participativa. Revista de Internet, Derecho y Política, (6), 3-12
  • Morozov, E. (2009, 19 de marzo). The Brave New World of Slacktivism. Foreign Policy. Recuperado de http://goo.gl/EbRPNb
  • Nash, K. (2011). Clicking on the real: telling stories and engaging audiences through interactive documentaries. Recuperado de http://goo.gl/Vht9oc
  • Neumayer, C. & Schoßböck, J. (2011). “Political lurkers? Young people in Austria and their political life worlds online”. En P. Parycek, M. J. Kripp & N. Edelmann (presidencia). CeDEM 2011. Conferencia llevada a cabo en E–Democracy and Open Government (pp. 131-143), Danube University Krems, Austria.
  • O’Brien, H. L. & Toms, E. G. (2008). “What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology”. Journal of the American society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 938-955.
  • Papert, S. (1980). Tormentas de Mentes (Mindstorms), Niños, Computadoras e Ideas poderosas. Cambridge, Massachusetts. U.S.A.
  • Presno Linera, M. A. (2012). ¿Nos representan o no? Anales de la Cátedra Francisco Suárez, (46), 93-109.
  • Rincón, O. (2015, mayo). PoliTICs: Del polinizar al politizar. Travesía, (33), 11-16.
  • Sampedro, V., Sánchez, J. M. & Campos, E. (2014). “Participación ciudadana en las cibercampañas electorales. Debates teóricos y una aproximación tipológica”. En R. Cotarelo & J. A. Olmeda (Eds.), La democracia del siglo XXI. Política, medios de comunicación, internet y redes sociales (pp. 51-80). Madrid: Centro de Estudios Políticos y Constitucionales.
  • Schudson, M. (1998). The Good Citizen: A History of American Public Life. Nueva York: The Free Press.
  • Toffler, A. (1973). El shock del futuro. Barcelona: Plaza & Janes.
  • Werbach, K. & Hunter, D. (2012). For the Win: How Game Thinking Can Revolutionize Your Business. Philadelphia: Wharton Digital Press.
  • Wilson, K. A., Bedwell, W.L., Lazzara, E.H., Salas, E. Burke, C.S. Estock, J.L., Orvis, L. K. & Conkey, C. (2009). Relationships Between Game Attributes and Learning Outcomes: Review and Research Proposals. Simulation & Gaming, 40(2), 217-266
  • Zichermann, G., & Cunningham, C. (2011). Gamification by Design: Implementing Game Mechanics in Web and Mobile Apps. Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media.