Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 363

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An Empirical Test of the Theory of Gamified Learning: The Effect of Leaderboards on Time-on-Task and Academic Performance

Landers, Richard N., Landers, Amy K.·2014·Simulation & Gaming
DOI 10.1177/1046878114563662
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: The theory of gamified learning provides a theoretical framework to test the impact of gamification efforts upon learner behaviors and attitudes, as well as the effect of these behavioral and attitudinal changes on learning. It does so by providing mediating and moderating processes linking specific game elements to learning outcomes. Aim: This article links specific game elements common to leaderboards (conflict/challenge, rules/goals, and assessment) with a focal learner behavior, time-on-task, by exploring educational research on competition and psychological research on goal-setting theory. Method: The mediating process of the theory of gamified learning is tested experimentally by assigning learners completing an online wiki-based project to a gamified version with a leaderboard or to a control version without a leaderboard. Leaderboard achievement was not tied to course grades. Results: Random assignment to leaderboards supported a causal effect. Students with leaderboards interacted with their project 29.61 more times, on average, than those in a control condition. Bootstrapping was used to support the mediation of the effect of gamification on academic achievement by this amount of time. Conclusion: The mediating process of the theory of gamified instruction is supported. Leaderboards can be used to improve course performance under certain circumstances.

Overview

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 · 10.1177/1046878114563662

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.020 · DOI
  2. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00093.x · DOI
  3. 10.1007/978-3-319-10208-5_28 · DOI
  4. Cheong C., 2013, Proceedings of Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems
  5. Cohen J., 1988, Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
  6. Deterding S., 2011, Proceedings of the CHI 2011 Gamification Workshop
  7. 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020 · DOI
  8. Doran G. T., 1981, Management Review, 70, 35
  9. Farzan R., 2008, Symposium on Persuasive Technology
  10. Goldstein I. L., 1993, Training in organizations: Needs assessment, development, and evaluation
  11. 10.1037/0021-9010.74.4.657 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Kuncel N. R., 2001, Handbook of industrial, work & organizational psychology, 2, 278
  13. Landers R. N., Simulation & Gaming: An Interdisciplinary Journal
  14. 10.1007/978-3-319-10208-5_9 · DOI
  15. Landers R. N., Callan R. C. (2012). Training evaluation in virtual worlds: Development of a model. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research, 5(3). Retrieved from https://journals.tdl.org/jvwr/index.php/jvwr/article/view/6335 · DOI
  16. Landers R. N., Computers in Human Behavior
  17. Locke E. A., 1990, A theory of goal setting & task performance
  18. 10.3102/00346543047001087 · DOI
  19. Pychyl T. A., 2000, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 239
  20. 10.3102/00346543050002315 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1080/02796015.2007.12087958 · DOI
  22. 10.1177/1046878198291002 · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Landers, R. N., & Landers, A. K.
Venue
Simulation & Gaming
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2014-12
Volume
45
Issue
6
Pages
769-785
ISSN
  • 1046-8781 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-826X
DOI
10.1177/1046878114563662
OpenAlex
W2160363390
Cited by
363
References
6
FWCI
33.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.