  Repeated measurements of player experience are crucial in games user
research, assessing how different designs evolve over time. However, this
necessitates lightweight measurement instruments that are fit for the purpose.
In this study, we conduct an examination of the test-retest reliability of the
\emph{miniPXI} -- a short variant of the \emph{Player Experience Inventory}
(\emph{PXI}), an established measure for measuring player experience. We
analyzed test-retest reliability by leveraging four games involving 100
participants, comparing it with four established multi-item measures and
single-item indicators such as the Net Promoter Score (\emph{NPS}) and overall
enjoyment. The findings show mixed outcomes; the \emph{miniPXI} demonstrated
varying levels of test-retest reliability. Some constructs showed good to
moderate reliability, while others were less consistent. On the other hand,
multi-item measures exhibited moderate to good test-retest reliability,
demonstrating their effectiveness in measuring player experiences over time.
Additionally, the employed single-item indicators (\emph{NPS} and overall
enjoyment) demonstrated good reliability. The results of our study highlight
the complexity of player experience evaluations over time, utilizing single and
multiple items per construct measures. We conclude that single-item measures
may not be appropriate for long-term investigations of more complex PX
dimensions and provide practical considerations for the applicability of such
measures in repeated measurements.
