Cited by 280Educational Games and GamificationEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningDigital Games and Media

Digital Game-Based L2 Learning Outcomes for Primary through High-School Students: A Systematic Literature Review

Open access
Acquah, Emmanuel O., Katz, Heidi T.·2020·Computers & Education

Abstract

Abstract The aim of this systematic literature review was to examine the empirical evidence for the effectiveness of digital games on second language learning between 2014 and 2018, with a focus on participants 6–18 years old. The initial search yielded 578 results, from which a total of 26 articles were included in the final content analysis. The analysis of the included studies revealed: (1) the majority of studies were conducted with a mixed methods design; (2) most studies used computers as the gaming platform; (3) the most common game genre was educational games or educational mini games; (5) most games were designed for learning; (4) research was mainly conducted in East Asia and the Middle East; (5) the primary context of study was within a formal learning environment; and (6) the target language was usually English. Further analysis suggests that digital learning games (DLGs) may benefit players' language acquisition, affective/psychological state, contemporary competences, and participatory behavior. An inductive analysis revealed six key game features highlighted within the studies that influenced the outcomes: ease-of-use, challenge (at one's zone of proximal development), rewards and feedback, control or autonomy, goal-orientation, and interactivity. In addition to game features, associations between context and outcomes were also explored: studies conducted within a formal learning environment, with or without teacher facilitation, resulted in mostly positive language acquisition results, meaning DLGs can be implemented successfully within schools. Based on the overall findings, it is clear that DLGs are an effective tool, but future research should explore how they can best be implemented in the classroom setting.

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 · 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103667

Cites

69 of 69 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?

  • Digital game-based vocabulary learning has been found to enhance learner motivation and engagement and to promote higher interaction and autonomy.

    “Educationally, DGBVL has been found to enhance learner motivation and engagement as well as to promote higher interaction and autonomy [29,31,32].”

    From The Effect of Multiplayer Video Games on Incidental and Intentional L2 Vocabulary Learning: The Case of Among Us (2021) · cites this paper as [29]

    The review’s study summaries report increased motivation from online vocabulary games and link enjoyment and autonomy with vocabulary learning (study-summary section; page unavailable). Its Discussion reports willingness to interact and feelings of autonomy for digital L2 games more broadly, not specifically vocabulary games. The claim extends those broader findings—and the evidence on engagement—to digital game-based vocabulary learning as a whole. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    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: 2

  1. Mazaji, 2016, Effects of digital games on vocabulary acquisition of Iranian low proficiency male and female EFL learners, Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 6, 151
  2. Utku, 2018, Teaching EFL vocabulary to young digital natives through Online, International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 5, 115

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Acquah, E. O., & Katz, H. T.
Affiliations
Åbo Akademi University (FI)
Corresponding author
Acquah, Emmanuel O.
Venue
Computers & Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-01
Volume
143
Pages
103667
ISSN
0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2969402346
Cited by
280
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 3
FWCI
4.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computers & Education (publishedVersion)
  • Åbo Akademi University Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
Keywords
video games, second language acquisition, game-based learning, language acquisition, game features, zone of proximal development, learner autonomy, affective learning outcomes, formal learning environments, teacher as facilitator, English as a second language

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