As gamification literature has matured, the gap between how different domains apply the theory has widened. This has positioned gamification as being more dependent on context, rather than being an independent theory per se. To address this notion, three concepts are identified as being central for how a gamificator, the one responsible for gamifying, gamifies a process. These are mechanics, mental mediators and desired outcomes. Following this logic, a review was conducted using 77 (n) articles across seven disciplines, namely health and wellness, crowdsourcing, sustainability, computer science, software development, business, and tourism. The findings highlighted potentially causal and correlational relationships between several concepts when gamifying a situation, context, service or/and process. This research presents an alternative and uniform perspective on the broad gamification research to better understand how gamification functions and can be employed to impact various outcomes. Furthermore, this research contributes to this rather eclectic domain, presenting a more categorized view in showing domain-specific mechanics and how these can be employed for empirical testing. Lastly, the conceptual model can be modified, employed and adjusted to investigate various effects of gamification on outcomes.

中文翻译：

---

关于游戏化的跨学科视角：力学，心理中介和结果

随着游戏化文学的成熟，不同领域如何应用该理论之间的差距越来越大。这将游戏化定位为更依赖于上下文，而不是独立的理论本身。为了解决这个问题，确定了三个概念，这些概念对于游戏角色（负责游戏化的人）如何使过程游戏化是至关重要的。这些是机制，心理调解者和期望的结果。遵循这种逻辑，我们对涉及健康与保健，众包，可持续性，计算机科学，软件开发，商业和旅游等七个学科的77（n）条文章进行了审查。研究结果突出显示了当游戏化一种情况，上下文，服务或/和过程时，几个概念之间潜在的因果关系。这项研究为广泛的游戏化研究提供了另一种统一的视角，以更好地理解游戏化如何发挥作用并可以用来影响各种结果。此外，这项研究对这个折衷的领域做出了贡献，在展示领域特定的机制以及如何将其用于经验测试方面表现出了更为分类的观点。最后，可以修改，采用和调整概念模型，以研究游戏化对结果的各种影响。