The gamification of risk: how health apps foster self-confidence and why this is not enough

Abstract

Weight loss apps enable users to quantify many aspects of food consumption, beginning with calories intake. Users of weight loss apps can also participate in online forums that act as digital self-help groups. These apps also include several features related to game playing or gamification such as avatars, points and virtual awards. Gamification has the aim of strengthening motivation to carry out a (boring) task. We downloaded the 20 most popular free weight loss apps in Google Play. We analysed app descriptions provided by developers, comments about the selected apps in online forums and user reviews. We focused on four of these apps, since they had some special functions. We found that users’ risk management was based on a mixed method that combined quantification and gamification, that is, rationality and emotions. Quantification, which includes self-tracking, data analysis and graphic layout, provides the ‘rational’ basis for dietary regimes, while gamification provides the emotional support needed to maintain motivation and continue with the diet. Our analysis provides support for the emotion–risk assemblage theory and the in-between strategy. Our analysis reinforces the importance of emotions in risk management. However, these dieting apps are based on a reductionist approach to obesity and weight loss, as obesity is framed as an individual problem, while weight loss is seen as dependent on individual motivation. Such framing tends to conceal the social determinant of health and the social and political causes of obesity.

Keywords:

• digital health
• risk
• gamification
• weight loss
• self-tracking

Acknowledgements

While this article is the result of several discussions between the authors, Francesca Setiffi wrote the sections ‘The Gamification of Health’, ‘Methodology’ and ‘Findings’ and Antonio Maturo wrote the remainder of the article. The reviewers provided us with invaluable help with their comments and remarks.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.