Cited by 121Educational Games and GamificationDigital Games and MediaOnline Learning and Analytics

The impact of applying challenge-based gamification program on students’ learning outcomes: Academic achievement, motivation and flow

Open access
Kaya, Omer Sami, Ercag, Erinc·2023·Education and Information Technologies

Abstract

Despite the growing attention towards gamification in learning context, challenge-based gamification application has rarely been subjected to testing in education. In recognition of this void, and grounded on gamification principles, we developed Educhall web-based program. Drawing on self-determination theory, and flow theory the present study aims to explore how the application of this challenge-based gamified program in to learning process of students can increase students' motivation, flow, and academic success through the generated competition and challenge. The study applied a random experimental research design within distance learning context with 30 university students of control group and 30 students of experimental group who used the Educhall application for one academic semester. In line with self-determination theory, it was statistically evidenced that application of challenge-based gamified learning method increased level of academic performance and overall motivation. Of the motivational sub factors, experimental group reported significantly higher confidence level and satisfaction towards the course. Furthermore, grounded on flow theory, the study showed that challenge-based gamified learning increased flow level of learners but not significantly which warrants further data collection and experimental research in future studies. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10639-023-11585-z

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Multiplayer collaborative programming environments may allow adolescents to develop both technical and social skills through role rotation, peer feedback, and progressively challenging projects.

    “Multiplayer collaborative programming environments may allow adolescents to develop both technical and social skills through role rotation, peer feedback, and progressively challenging projects [51].”

    From Health Benefits of Video Games in Adolescents and Young Adults (2026) · cites this paper as [51]

    The Materials and method section describes Educhall as a platform where students challenge peers to solve questions, and Practical implications says this can foster peer support and social interaction (page numbers unavailable). The paper does not describe a collaborative programming environment for adolescents or support technical and social skill development through role rotation, peer feedback, and progressively challenging projects. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Bada SO Olusegun S Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning Journal of Research & Method in Education 2015 5 6 66 70
  2. Balaji S Murugaiyan MS Waterfall vs. V-Model vs. Agile: A comparative study on SDLC International Journal of Information Technology and Business Management 2012 2 1 26 30
  3. Buckley P Doyle E Doyle S Game on! Students’ perceptions of gamified learning Journal of Educational Technology & Society 2017 20 3 1 10
  4. Csikszentmihalyi M Flow and Education NAMTA Journal 1997 22 2 2 35
  5. Elmasri R Navathe SB Elmasri R Navathe S Fundamentals of Database Systems 2000 Springer
  6. George, D. (2011). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple study guide and reference, 17.0 update, 10/e. Pearson Education India.
  7. Nunnally JC Psychometric Theory 1978 2d McGraw-Hill
  8. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Experimental designs using ANOVA (Vol. 724). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Brooks/Cole.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kaya, O. S., & Ercag, E.
Affiliations
Near East University (CY)
Corresponding author
Kaya, Omer Sami
Venue
Education and Information Technologies
Published
2023-01-19
Volume
28
Issue
8
Pages
10053-10078
ISSN
  • 1360-2357 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7608
OpenAlex
W4317425956
Cited by
121
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 10
FWCI
58.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Education and Information Technologies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
Keywords
gamified learning, academic performance, student motivation, flow experience, self-determination theory, flow theory, distance education, university students, course satisfaction, learner confidence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review