Cited by 381Educational Games and GamificationVisual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesDigital Games and Media

A meta-analytic review of the role of instructional support in game-based learning

Wouters, Pieter, van Oostendorp, Herre·2013·Computers & Education

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.018

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wouters, P., & van Oostendorp, H.
Affiliations
Utrecht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Wouters, Pieter
Venue
Computers & Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-01
Volume
60
Issue
1
Pages
412-425
ISSN
0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2093501953
Cited by
381
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
21.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers & Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
Keywords
pedagogical support, game-based learning, video games, skill acquisition, information selection, information integration, publication bias

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