CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 95Educational Games and GamificationEducational Technology and E-LearningTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies

Kahoot! Game‐based digital learning platform: A comprehensive meta‐analysis

Open access
Özdemir, Osman·2025·Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
DOI 10.1111/jcal.13084
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Background In recent years, the widespread use of technology in classrooms has encouraged the transition from traditional lecture methods to digital‐based learning environments. Technological game‐based learning platforms, such as Kahoot!, which are used to encourage students' active participation and interaction in learning environments, are used significantly by teachers and students in educational environments worldwide. Objectives This article aims to examine the effects of Kahoot, a digital learning platform, on education through meta‐analysis. This meta‐analysis provides a holistic understanding of the potential impact of Kahoot on education by synthesizing the results of various experimental studies. This study evaluates the influence of Kahoot on key educational variables, such as academic achievement, retention, motivation, anxiety and attitude, which are essential for enhancing teaching methods and optimizing learning environments. Methods The study conducted a meta‐analysis following the guidelines outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis (PRISMA). A total of 43 studies that met the specified criteria were included in the sample, providing a comprehensive overview of the impact of Kahoot across different contexts. The sample was n = 1706 for the experimental group and n = 1647 for the control group. Results and Conclusion The findings from the meta‐analysis indicate that Kahoot has a significant moderate positive effect on academic achievement, with an average effect size of 0.772 (95%CI: 0.540–1.004). The analysis also shows a very large positive effect on retention, with an average effect size of 1.492, suggesting that students using Kahoot tend to have significantly higher retention compared with those who do not. For motivation, Kahoot demonstrates a large positive effect, with an average effect size of 0.960, indicating that students using Kahoot tend to be more motivated. The impact on anxiety is less clear, with a small negative effect size of −0.338, suggesting a moderate reduction in anxiety levels among students using Kahoot. Lastly, Kahoot appears to have a medium positive effect on students' attitudes towards learning, with an average effect size of 0.678. Takeaways These results underscore the potential of Kahoot as an effective educational tool. The results of this study provide valuable guiding information for educators and policy makers by helping to optimize teaching methods and learning environments through the effective use of digital tools, such as Kahoot. The findings suggest that Kahoot can increase academic achievement, retention, motivation and attitudes and potentially reduce anxiety, making it a promising digital tool for modern educational practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jcal.13084

Cites

121 of 121 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?

  • These tools may support low-stakes retrieval practice and long-term memory retention.

    “These tools may support low-stakes retrieval practice and long-term memory retention [55].”

    From Health Benefits of Video Games in Adolescents and Young Adults (2026) · cites this paper as [55]

Self-check

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

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

Cited works that were retracted

Works this paper cites that were later retracted, from the retraction notices publishers deposit. Major when the notice came out before this paper was published.

  • Cites a retracted work: 10.7759/cureus.36796

    Info

    The cited work was retracted on 2026-01-02 (notice 10.7759/cureus.r214), not before this paper was published (2024-10-22).

    Cited work 10.7759/cureus.36796 · retracted 2026-01-02 · notice 10.7759/cureus.r214 · this paper published 2024-10-22

1 of 1

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. Aras G. N.(2020).Soru‐cevap ve Kahoot yöntemi ile yapılan pekiştirmenin hemşirelik öğrencilerinin başarı ve motivasyon düzeylerine etkisinin karşılaştırılması(Publication No. 636122) [Master's Dissertation Ataturk University]. YOK Thesis Center.https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
  2. Ares A. M., 2018, 4th international conference on higher education advances (HEAD'18), 1215
  3. Batıbay E. F.(2019).Web 2.0 uygulamalarının Türkçe dersinde motivasyona ve başarıya etkisi: Kahoot örneği karşılaştırılması[Master's Dissertation Hacettepe University]. YÖK Açık Bilim.https://acikbilim.yok.gov.tr/handle/20.500.12812/433579
  4. Bozkurt Türk H.(2019).The effect of Kahoot! as a student response system on the attitudes and success of university students in learning English vocabulary(Publication No. 603588) [Master's Dissertation Duzce University]. YOK Thesis Center.https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
  5. Emecen S.(2019).A case study in ninth grade students at a state school; differences between kahoot! and traditional activities in terms of vocabulary retention[Master's Dissertation Ufuk University]. YÖK Açık Bilim.https://acikbilim.yok.gov.tr/handle/20.500.12812/105719
  6. Higgins J. P. T., 2021, Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0
  7. İncekar O.(2023).The effect of success and motivation on english vocabulary learning with Kahoot! and student opinions(Publication No. 809489) [Master's Dissertation Ankara University]. YOK Thesis Center.https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
  8. Kasap T.(2023).The effects of using Kahoot! as a digital tool on enhancing English vocabulary of secondary school students' learning English as a foreign language(Publication No. 823417) [Master's Dissertation Bursa Uludağ University]. YOK Thesis Center.https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
  9. Kurtoğlu U.(2021).Vocabulary teaching through Web 2.0 tools: A comparison of Kahoot! and Quizlet(Publication No. 705495) [Master's Dissertation Trakya University]. YOK Thesis Center.https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
  10. Mirpour S.(2022).The effect of employing the online Kahoot game‐based learning platform on primary Turkish EFL learners' grammar learning improvement(Publication No. 756193) [Master's Dissertation Bahcesehir University]. YOK Thesis Center.https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
  11. Özdemir O.(2022).The effects of Kahoot learning on English vocabulary learning and retention [Conference presentation abstract].2nd International Conference on Educational Technology and Online Learning—ICETOL 2022 Ören Burhaniye Turkey.https://www.icetol.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/icetol2022_abstract_proceedings.pdf
  12. Quiroz M. F., 2021, Improving English vocabulary learning through Kahoot!: A quasi‐experimental high school experience, The Journal of Teaching English with Technology, 21, 3
  13. Reynolds E. D., 2020, Kahoot!: EFL instructors' implementation experiences and impacts on students' vocabulary knowledge, Computer‐Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 21, 70
  14. 10.56801/10.56801/v8.i.452 · DOI
  15. 10.18009/jcer.9224882 · DOI
  16. Tan A. W. L., 2020, Comparing the effectiveness of direct vocabulary ınstruction and ıncidental vocabulary learning in ımproving the academic vocabulary of Malaysian tertiary students, Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 28, 263
  17. Tan Ai Lin D., 2018, Kahoot! It: Gamification in higher education, Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 26, 565
  18. Türkan A.(2019).Oyunlaştırma yönteminin ortaokul öğrencilerinin akademik başarı motivasyon ve tutumlarına etkisi(Publication No. 585667) [Master's Dissertation Ataturk University]. YOK Thesis Center.https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
  19. Ünal H. N.(2018).Comparison between Kahoot! and a traditional exercise in terms of vocabulary retention in EFL learners(Publication No. 528655) [Master's Dissertation Gazi University]. YOK Thesis Center.https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Özdemir, O.
Affiliations
Selçuk University (TR)
Corresponding author
Özdemir, Osman
ORCID
Özdemir, Osman
Venue
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-10-22
Volume
41
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 0266-4909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2729
DOI
10.1111/jcal.13084
OpenAlex
W4403625794
Semantic Scholar
edea620f7466f86f84bf075975fa40d18432869c
Cited by
41
References
115
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 1
FWCI
32.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and E-Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Technology-Enhanced Education Studies
Keywords
Kahoot, game-based learning, digital learning platforms, academic performance, knowledge retention, student motivation, test anxiety, learning attitude, educational technology, gamified learning, student engagement, classroom technology

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