Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 28, 2025
Visualization of Intensity Levels to Reduce the Gap Between Self-Reported and Directly Measured Physical Activity
Published on: March 7, 2019
Evaluating the Impact of Adaptive Personalized Goal Setting on Engagement Levels of Government Staff With a Gamified
Raoul Nuijten1, Pieter Van Gorp1, Alireza Khanshan2
1Department of Industrial Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
Background:
Although the health benefits of physical activity are well established, it remains challenging for people to adopt a more active lifestyle. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions can be effective tools to promote physical activity and reduce sedentary behavior. Promising results have been obtained by using gamification techniques as behavior change strategies, especially when they were tailored toward an individual's preferences and goals; yet, it remains unclear how goals could be personalized to effectively promote health behaviors.
Objective:
In this study, we aim to evaluate the impact of personalized goal setting in the context of gamified mHealth interventions. We hypothesize that interventions suggesting health goals that are tailored based on end users' (self-reported) current and desired capabilities will be more engaging than interventions with generic goals.
Methods:
The study was designed as a 2-arm randomized intervention trial. Participants were recruited among staff members of 7 governmental organizations. They participated in an 8-week digital health promotion campaign that was especially designed to promote walks, bike rides, and sports sessions. Using an mHealth app, participants could track their performance on two social leaderboards: a leaderboard displaying the individual scores of participants and a leaderboard displaying the average scores per organizational department. The mHealth app also provided a news feed that showed when other participants had scored points. Points could be collected by performing any of the 6 assigned tasks (eg, walk for at least 2000 m). The level of complexity of 3 of these 6 tasks was updated every 2 weeks by changing either the suggested task intensity or the suggested frequency of the task. The 2 intervention arms-with participants randomly assigned-consisted of a personalized treatment that tailored the complexity parameters based on participants' self-reported capabilities and goals and a control treatment where the complexity parameters were set generically based on national guidelines. Measures were collected from the mHealth app as well as from intake and posttest surveys and analyzed using hierarchical linear models.
Results:
The results indicated that engagement with the program inevitably dropped over time. However, engagement was higher for participants who had set themselves a goal in the intake survey. The impact of personalization was especially observed for frequency parameters because the personalization of sports session frequency did foster higher engagement levels, especially when participants set a goal to improve their capabilities. In addition, the personalization of suggested ride duration had a positive effect on self-perceived biking performance.
Conclusions:
Personalization seems particularly promising for promoting the frequency of physical activity (eg, promoting the number of suggested sports sessions per week), as opposed to the intensity of the physical activity (eg, distance or duration). Replications and variations of our study setup are critical for consolidating and explaining (or refuting) these effects.
Trial Registration:
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05264155; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05264155.
