Data for: Gamified environmental multi‐criteria decision analysis: information on objectives and range insensitivity bias

Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is well suited to address complex public policy problems but could benefit from new tools to involve many laypeople. Online information on specialized topics could be more engaging by including game elements. This paper reports an experiment that assessed a gamified interface to (1) inform laypeople about the objectives to consider in wastewater management decisions, (2) assist them in constructing range-based preferences, and (3) provide a positive experience. We measured the effects with (1) a knowledge pre- and posttest, (2) the elicited weights and a range sensitivity index, and (3) an experience questionnaire based on self-determination theory. Answers from 174 participants indicated that participants learnt about the objectives and constructed preferences in both the gamified and control treatments. However, in neither were weights sufficiently adjusted. Our gamification making the ranges salient did not help overcome this bias. Both treatments were experienced as neutral to positive, the gamified being more entertaining. We discuss implications: if gamification of tools for participatory decision-making is to be promoted, it requires further research. Range insensitivity remains an unresolved bias in MCDA.多准则决策分析（Multi-criteria decision analysis, MCDA）十分适用于复杂公共政策问题的解决，但仍可借助新工具进一步吸纳大量非专业民众参与。针对专业主题的线上资讯，若融入游戏化元素，可有效提升其吸引力。本文报道了一项实验，该实验对一款游戏化交互界面进行了评估，其核心目标包括：（1）向非专业民众科普污水处理决策中需考量的各类目标；（2）协助他们构建基于区间的偏好；（3）为使用者提供积极的使用体验。本研究通过三种方式评估该界面的效果：一是知识前后测，二是获取权重值与区间敏感性指数，三是采用基于自我决定理论的体验问卷。174名参与者的反馈显示，无论在游戏化组还是对照组中，参与者均掌握了相关目标知识并构建了自身偏好。但两组均未实现权重的充分调整。本研究通过游戏化手段强化区间显著性，并未帮助克服该认知偏差。两组的使用体验均为中性至偏正向，其中游戏化组的趣味性更强。本文还讨论了相关研究启示：若要推广面向参与式决策的游戏化工具，仍需开展进一步研究。区间敏感性缺失仍是MCDA中尚未解决的认知偏差。