Cited by 202Educational Games and GamificationFlow Experience in Various FieldsDigital Games and Media

Content Creation Challenges and Flow Experience in Educational Games: The IT-Emperor Case

Kiili, K.·2005·The Internet and Higher Education

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.06.001

Cites

2 of 2 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
Kiili, K.
Affiliations
Tampere University of Technology (FI)
Corresponding author
Kiili, K.
Venue
The Internet and Higher Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-07
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
183-198
ISSN
1096-7516 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2020535884
Cited by
202
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
FWCI
7.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Internet and Higher Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Flow Experience in Various Fields
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
Keywords
game-based learning, flow experience, usability, university students, online courses

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