CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 29Educational Games and GamificationAugmented Reality ApplicationsVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts

Extracting Design Guidelines for Augmented Reality Serious Games for Children

Open access
Li, Jingya, Spek, Erik Van Der, Hu, Jun, Feijs, Loe·2022·IEEE Access
DOI 10.1109/access.2022.3184775
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Augmented Reality serious games have become an emerging solution to positively influence the learning experience for children born in the digital age. However, systematic and empirically tested design guidelines for AR serious games remain unexplored. In this study, we investigated the design guidelines by designing and developing four AR serious games with different mechanics inspired by the psychological needs within Self-determination Theory, following with four user studies respectively. In the first study, we explored the AR game concepts by conducting participatory design sessions. In the second study, we investigated how children react to different types of interactions and feedback mechanics in AR serious games with 32 participants. Then, we scrutinized the effect of social interactions in AR serious games on children with 24 participants. Lastly, we designed an AR game with four different versions, tested pathways to immerse children to explore and play in an AR fantasy world with 81 participants. Generally, this research explored the concepts, prototypes, and results of incorporating AR with serious games for children. We realized multiple AR prototypes inspired by SDT and generalized a set of design guidelines, which are intended to help future related designs in AR serious games.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This paper reports four studies designing and testing AR serious games for elementary-school children, using Self-determination Theory to target competence, relatedness, and autonomy. It derives eight design guidelines, favoring screen-touch interaction, 3D feedback, collaboration for relatedness, and moderated task choice/game story.

Key findings

  • In Phase I, the AR game prototype achieved significantly higher ratings on overall experience than the paper version, with no significant difference in in-game learning performance; participants were 20 children in China (10 M, 10 F; M = 8.2 years, SD = 0.62) and 18 in the Netherlands (10 M, 8 F; M = 7.1 years, SD = 0.32).
  • In Phase II with 32 children (16 M, 16 F; mean age 7.72), there was no significant difference between screen-touch and tangible interaction on perceived competence, perceived autonomy, or enjoyment; the 3D progress map was significantly preferable over the 2D progress bar, with significantly more perceived competence, autonomy, and enjoyment.
  • In Phase III with 24 elementary students (mean age 9.04, SD = 1.04; 8 M, 16 F), participants perceived significantly more relatedness in collaboration mode than competition mode; competition mode was faster and more focused, while collaboration mode took more time.
  • In Phase IV with 81 results (42 boys, 37 girls, 2 did not identify; ages 7–10, mean 8.82, SD = 0.83), game story had a main effect on higher perceived competence and relatedness; no task choice produced a significantly higher correctness rate than task choice; game story and task choice had a significant interaction on perceived competence, but no significant effects on perceived autonomy.

Methods

  • Four-phase design-based research translating Self-determination Theory needs—competence, relatedness, and autonomy—into AR serious game prototypes and user studies.
  • Samples: Phase I: 20 children in China and 18 in the Netherlands; Phase II: 32 children in the Netherlands; Phase III: pilot with 4 children plus formal study with 24 elementary students in the Netherlands; Phase IV: 81 children aged 7–10.
  • Measures included Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI), Player Experience of Need Satisfaction (PENS), Inclusion of Community in Self Scale (IoCiS), interviews, observations, a knowledge pre-test, and time spent on exercises, with quantitative comparisons across conditions.

Limitations

  • The paper does not include a dedicated limitations section, and no explicit limitations are stated in the provided text.
  • The text makes evident that the paper “does not focus on the detailed outcomes of each research phase,” and the studies use specific samples in China and the Netherlands with small early-phase samples and varying age ranges.
  • Phase IV found no significant effects of game story or task choice on perceived autonomy, and the game story/task choice interaction on competence was nuanced, which limits broad claims about autonomy-supportive design.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/access.2022.3184775

Cites

92 of 92 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

4 of 38 cited sources checked · 3 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    Children might face more difficulties in interacting with these new methods.

    “Children might face more difficulties in interacting with these new methods [92], [93].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [92] source
    • cites [93] source
  • Premisecitation

    Even positive feedback may impede people's inherent need for autonomy and thus decrease their intrinsic motivation.

    “Even positive feedback may impede people's inherent need for autonomy and thus decrease their intrinsic motivation [77].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
  • Findingown data

    There was a main effect of game story on perceived competence, with higher perceived competence in the version with a game story than without.

    “There appeared to be a main effect of game story on the perceived competence and perceived relatedness, where in the version with a game story the participants perceived higher competence and relatedness than the version with the no game story.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    On average, participants spent more time in the collaboration mode.

    “On average, participants spent more time in the collaboration mode.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    No significant correlation was found between self-rated maths skills and perceived relatedness, gender, and time spent in the game in both modes of the AR game.

    “We found no significant correlation between the self-rated maths skills and the perceived relatedness, gender, and the time spent in the game in both modes of the AR game.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 29
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 22

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    AR serious games have been reported as motivating and engaging for children in their learning experience, stimulating positive learning attitude.

    “AR serious games have been reported as motivating and engaging for children in their learning experience, stimulating positive learning attitude [31], [32].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [31] source

      Section 3.2.1, “Contribution to Learners” (page not provided), reports that AR can increase students’ interest and motivation and foster positive attitudes. Section 3.2.2, “Learning Outcomes” (page not provided), says learners found AR fun and enjoyable. These passages concern AR in STEM education generally; they do not establish the claim specifically for AR serious games or children. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [32] source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The fantasy game environment might lead to lower learning achievements.

    “While the game story may have the potential to enhance motivation, research indicated that the fantasy game environment might lead to lower learning achievements [8].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Children were able to make meaningful real-world analogue actions by controlling the virtual content with the textbook directly, and through that, understand the direct feedback corresponding to their actions.

    “Children were able to make meaningful real-world analogue actions by controlling the virtual content with the textbook directly, and through that, understand the direct feedback corresponding to their actions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Children preferred the screen-touch interaction because it was easy to master and required less effort.

    “Children preferred the screen-touch interaction because that it was easy to master and required less effort.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Children finished the learning tasks faster and were concentrated more in the competition mode than in collaboration mode.

    “Although the collaboration could lead to more active communications and discussions, the results of the study also showed that children finished the learning tasks faster and were concentrated more in the competition mode.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Game story and task choice resulted in neither significant main effects nor significant interaction effects on perceived autonomy.

    “In our study, game story and task choice resulted in neither significant main effects nor significant interaction effects on perceived autonomy.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Children enjoyed exploring and practicing the controls of the tangible interface and laughed when they made mistakes.

    “Instead, we observed that children enjoyed exploring and practicing the controls of the tangible interface and laughed when they made mistakes such as making the animal walk in circles or out of the paper.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    In the no task choice version, participants had to finish one exercise to unlock the next exercise, following a clear path to complete the task.

    “From the observation of the study, we noticed that in the version with no task choice, participants had to finish one exercise to unlock the next exercise, following a clear path to complete the task.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Under competition mode, participants felt separated and more competitive, doing their own exercises with concentration and did not communicate with each other in the real world.

    “Participants felt separated and more competitive in the game, doing their own exercises with concentration and did not communicate with each other in the real world.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Under the competition game, children were more focused and immersed in the game world.

    “Under the competition game, children were more focused and immersed in the game world.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Under collaboration mode, children perceived the teamwork and the presence of each other during the game play and communicated more in the real world.

    “The interview results also showed that children perceived the teamwork and the presence of each other during the game play and communicated more in the real world.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Under collaboration mode, children felt close to their partners because they were helping each other during the game, and they could understand what they were talking about as a team.

    “Children also felt close to their partners because they were helping each other during the game, and they could understand what they were talking about as a team.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Screen-touch interaction was perceived as more effective and easier to understand than tangible interaction.

    “Our results indicated no significant difference between the screen-touch and the tangible interactions, while the screentouch interaction was perceived as more effective and easier to understand.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    As observed in our base game and the autonomy-inspired game, children would turn to others for help during the game and vice versa.

    “As observed in our base game and the autonomy-inspired game, children would turn to others for help during the game and vice versa.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    When receiving feedback through the progress map, children significantly perceived more competence and autonomy, and reported significantly stronger feelings of enjoyment.

    “When receiving feedback through the progress map, children significantly perceived more competence and autonomy, and they reported significantly stronger feelings of enjoyment.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Under collaboration mode, children tended to extend the boundaries of the game to the real world and to incorporate the other player more.

    “Under the collaboration mode, instead of being immersed in the game world, children tended to extend the boundaries of the game to the real world and to incorporate the other player more.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Under competition mode, children tended to concentrate on themselves and tried to be faster to finish the exercises but barely talked to the other player.

    “We noticed that children tended to concentrate on themselves and tried to be faster to finish the exercises but barely talked to the other player.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Under competition mode, children did not pay much attention to each other and had the feeling that they did not see each other.

    “The results of the perceived relatedness also showed that under competition mode, although children were presented with the same physical environment, they did not pay much attention to each other and had the feeling that they did not see each other.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Under collaboration mode, children discussed together, sharing what they were looking at and made decisions on one answer together.

    “Children would discuss together with each other under the collaboration game, sharing what they were looking at and made decisions on one answer together.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Our relatedness-inspired study enabled competition and collaboration interactions among children.

    “Our relatedness-inspired study also enabled competition and collaboration interactions among children.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This kind of feedback could also avoid the situation where children perceive the feedback as controlling and/or see the activity as a task they have to perform rather than a game they want to play.

    “This kind of feedback could also avoid the situation where children perceive the feedback as controlling and/or see the activity as a task they have to perform rather than a game they want to play.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The latest AR technologies have the potential to create a more interactive play environment but are expensive and dependent on the desktop PC network connection.

    “The latest AR technologies have the potential to create a more interactive play environment but are expensive and dependent on the desktop PC network connection [91].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [91] source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The China study used a within-subject design where each group experienced the AR game and the paper exercise in different orders.

    “We used a within-subject design for the study, where each group experienced the AR game and the paper exercise in different orders.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    Children were asked to rate their relationship with the other player using the Inclusion of Community in Self Scale (IoCiS).

    “Children were asked to rate their relationship with the other player in the group by using the Inclusion of Community in Self Scale (IoCiS) [83].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [83] source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Intrinsic motivation leads to enhanced creativity and improved learning outcomes.

    “Intrinsic motivation is defined as ''doing something because it is inherently interesting or enjoyable'' [51] (pp.55), leading to enhanced creativity and improved learning outcomes [51]- [53].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [51] source
    • cites [52] source
    • cites [53] source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    [87] found no positive effect of the game story on learning performance.

    “[87] found no positive effect of the game story on learning performance.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [87] source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    A game story is one of the motivational tools to add sense to the learning task, giving the learning activity a specific form to be linked to the context.

    “A game story is one of the motivational tools to add sense to the learning task, giving the learning activity a specific form to be linked to the context [43].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [43] source

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The tangible interaction has the potential to motivate children as they found it interesting and fun even though it required more effort.

    “This suggests that the tangible interaction has the potential to motivate children as they found it interesting and fun even though it required more effort.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The setting of filling up a natural pasture with animals or building a city could be felt as more self-determined than following the game rules to completion.

    “The setting of filling up a natural pasture with animals or building a city could be felt as more self-determined than following the game rules to completion.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Participants completed a questionnaire using items from Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI).

    “After the paper and the AR game, participants were asked to complete a questionnaire using items from Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI) [62].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [62] source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: version 1 with a game story and task choice, version 2 with a game story and no task choice, version 3 with no game story and task choice, and version 4 with no game story and no task choice.

    “Then they were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions: version 1) with a game story and task choice, version 2) with a game story and no task choice, version 3) no game story with task choice, and version 4) no game story and no task choice.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Positive effects of AR technology on children's learning were identified in the development of skills and knowledge, enhancement of learning experiences, and improvement of collaborative learning.

    “Positive effects of AR technology on children's learning were also identified in the development of skills and knowledge, enhancement of learning experiences, and improvement of collaborative learning [33].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33] source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Autonomy should not be equated with the mere presence of choice.

    “However, SDT research also highlights that autonomy should not be equated with the mere presence of choice [48].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [48] source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Too much choice may lead to cognitive overload during the experience, which is one of the most frequently reported AR design challenges.

    “In parallel, too much choice may lead to cognitive overload during the experience, which is one of the most frequently reported AR design challenges [48], [85], [86].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [48] source
    • cites [85] source
    • cites [86] Perry, AR gone wild: Two approaches to using augmented reality learning games in Zoos

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Phase II, children were assigned to different condition groups randomly and each child was exposed to two different types of interactions and answered the SDT-based questionnaire, IMI and PENS, after each interaction in a counter-balanced manner.

    “We assigned children to different condition groups randomly and each child was exposed to two different types of interactions and answered the SDT-based questionnaire, IMI and Player Experience of Need Satisfaction (PENS) [46], [76], after each interaction in a counter-balanced manner.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [46] source
    • cites [76] Rigby, 2007, The player experience of need satisfaction (PENS) model

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In the China study, participants were randomly assigned into two equal groups.

    “In China, 20 participants (10 Males and 10 Females; M = 8.2 years, SD = 0.62 years) were randomly assigned into two equal groups.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In the context of AR serious games, previous research suggested driving the player interaction and learning through gamified stories or narratives, which could provide the structure and rationale for the AR experience and impact the quality of the experience profoundly.

    “In the context of AR serious games, previous research also suggested driving the player interaction and learning through gamified stories or narratives [84], which could provide the structure and rationale for the AR experience and impact the quality of the experience profoundly [85], [86].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [84] source
    • cites [85] source
    • cites [86] Perry, AR gone wild: Two approaches to using augmented reality learning games in Zoos

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    In Phase III, participants were grouped in dyads and were presented with the two modes of the game in a counterbalanced order.

    “Participants were grouped in dyads and were presented with the two modes of the game in a counterbalanced order.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Netherlands study, 18 participants were randomly divided into two groups.

    “In the Netherlands, 18 participants (10 Males and 8 Females; M = 7.1 years, SD = 0.32 years) took part in the user study.18 participants were randomly divided into two groups.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    SDT includes three basic psychological needs-competence, relatedness, and autonomy-which are positively associated with intrinsic motivation and independently predict a higher enjoyment level.

    “SDT includes three basic psychological needs, including the need for competence, the need for relatedness, and the need for autonomy, which are proven to be positively associated with intrinsic motivation and independently predict a higher enjoyment level [46], [47], [51], [52], [54], [55].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [46] source
    • cites [47] source
    • cites [51] source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    [43] and [95] proposed to minimize the interaction with the game tools and the physical effort.

    “[43] and [95] proposed to minimize the interaction with the game tools and the physical effort, while we suggested designers apply tangible interaction as an alternative solution and encourage children to interact with the physical objects such as textbooks, maps, and other physical objects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [43] source
    • cites [95] source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Previous work suggested considering to either force, forbid or allow/neglect competition or teamwork.

    “When designing for social interactions, previous work suggested considering to either force, forbid or allow/neglect competition or teamwork [43].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [43] source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Seeing the visual content might already stimulate the feeling of autonomy, whereas a game story helps stimulate the feeling of competence in terms of accomplishing a challenge and being connected with the game.

    “Seeing the visual content might already stimulate the feeling of autonomy, whereas a game story helps stimulate the feeling of competence in terms of accomplishing a challenge and being connected with the game.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The game elements of competition could improve motivation significantly.

    “The game elements of competition could improve motivation significantly [94].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [94] source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    In the study of [94], the use of feedback mechanics, such as points and rewards, motivated players strongly in AR serious games.

    “For example, in the study of [94], the use of feedback mechanics, such as points and rewards, motivated players strongly in AR serious games, while we suggested AR designers replace this kind of feedback with 3D feedback.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [94] source
45 of 45

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The design guidelines derived from the four studies are applicable to future AR serious games for children beyond the specific games and contexts studied.

    “generalized a set of design guidelines, which are intended to help future related designs in AR serious games.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    AR environments might already overload children with a large amount of information and complex tasks.

    “The degree of choice should be moderated to avoid imposing an extra load on children since AR environments might already overload children with a large amount of information and complex tasks.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In the context of an educational game, the efficiency of learning is equally important besides the motivating experience.

    “In the context of an educational game, the efficiency of learning is equally important besides the motivating experience.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Elements such as leaderboards and scores were the most commonly used features for competition in existing AR serious games, and they are not specific for AR settings.

    “Elements such as leaderboards and scores were the most commonly used features for competition in existing AR serious games, which, however, are not specific for AR settings.”
4 of 4

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • The IoCiS citation points to a different work

    Minor

    The paper cites reference [83] for the Inclusion of Community in Self Scale, but reference 83 is about gamification. The bibliography lists the scale under reference 84.

  • Cited page 55 falls outside reference 51

    Minor

    The definition is attributed to page 55 of reference [51], but the bibliography gives that work a page range of 38-46. Page 55 falls within the listed range of reference 52, not reference 51.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 94 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Chiang, 2014, An augmented reality-based mobile learning system to improve students’ learning achievements and motivations in natural science inquiry activities, J. Educ. Technol. Soc., 17, 352
  2. Deci, 2002, Self-determination research: Reflections and future directions, 431
  3. Groh, Gamification: State of the art definition and utilization, 39

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Li, J., Spek, E. V. D., Hu, J., & Feijs, L.
Affiliations
  • Beijing Jiaotong University (CN)
  • Industrial Design (ID), Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
  • Eindhoven University of Technology (NL)
ORCID
Venue
IEEE Access
Publisher
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Published
2022
Volume
10
Pages
66660-66671
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1109/access.2022.3184775
OpenAlex
W4285061076
Cited by
29
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3
FWCI
9.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Augmented Reality Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Keywords
augmented reality, serious games, children, design guidelines, self-determination theory, game mechanics, social interaction, immersion, participatory design, game-based learning

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-11-02.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-11-02.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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