The DOI matches its Crossref record; 84 of the 88 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 29 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review
Open accessAbstract
Gamification of education is a developing approach for increasing learners’ motivation and engagement by incorporating game design elements in educational environments. With the growing popularity of gamification and yet mixed success of its application in educational contexts, the current review is aiming to shed a more realistic light on the research in this field by focusing on empirical evidence rather than on potentialities, beliefs or preferences. Accordingly, it critically examines the advancement in gamifying education. The discussion is structured around the used gamification mechanisms, the gamified subjects, the type of gamified learning activities, and the study goals, with an emphasis on the reliability and validity of the reported outcomes. To improve our understanding and offer a more realistic picture of the progress of gamification in education, consistent with the presented evidence, we examine both the outcomes reported in the papers and how they have been obtained. While the gamification in education is still a growing phenomenon, the review reveals that (i) insufficient evidence exists to support the long-term benefits of gamification in educational contexts; (ii) the practice of gamifying learning has outpaced researchers’ understanding of its mechanisms and methods; (iii) the knowledge of how to gamify an activity in accordance with the specifics of the educational context is still limited. The review highlights the need for systematically designed studies and rigorously tested approaches confirming the educational benefits of gamification, if gamified learning is to become a recognized instructional approach.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This critical review of educational gamification (June 2014–December 2015) finds that empirical evidence is fragmented and mostly inconclusive, with insufficient high-quality evidence for long-term benefits. It concludes that the practice of gamifying learning has outpaced researchers’ understanding of its mechanisms and context-specific design.
Key findings
- From 41 ABC empirical studies, only 15 had conclusive evidence: 12 positive and 3 negative; the text reports 25 inconclusive outcomes, while Table 9 lists 26 (50%).
- Most gamification studies targeted university level (44 papers) versus K-12 (7 papers); CS/IT was the most gamified subject (20 papers, 39%), followed by Others (11, 21%), Multimedia/Communication (6, 12%), Math (5, 10%), Medicine/Biology/Psychology (5, 10%), and Languages (4, 8%).
- The most common game-element combination was points, badges, and leaderboards (PBL) in 14 papers (27%); badges only in 9 (18%), leaderboards only in 3 (6%), points only in 1 (2%), and other combinations in 24 (47%).
- The review concludes: (i) insufficient evidence exists to support the long-term benefits of gamification in educational contexts; (ii) the practice of gamifying learning has outpaced researchers’ understanding of its mechanisms and methods; (iii) knowledge of how to gamify an activity according to the specifics of the educational context is still limited.
Methods
- Critical literature review; searched Google Scholar, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Explore, and ScienceDirect using (gamification OR gamify OR gameful) AND (education OR learning OR training) AND (since 2014), yielding 4,998 results.
- Included peer-reviewed empirical papers reporting findings and theoretical papers; excluded full-fledged games and purely descriptive papers; restricted to June 30, 2014–December 31, 2015; final set was 63 papers (51 empirical, 11 theoretical).
- Extracted data on game elements, educational level, academic subject, learning activity, study sample, study duration, data collection, and outcome; assessed validity via sample size, number of groups, study length, data collection, variable control, statistical procedures, and support for conclusions, classifying ABC studies as positive, negative, or inconclusive.
Limitations
- The paper states that its judgment of inconclusiveness can be viewed as rather subjective, and Table 12 lists reasons for each inconclusive classification.
- The review is restricted to papers appearing in the searched databases between June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2015; only 51 empirical studies met the criteria.
- The paper notes that representing high-dimensional data in table format is challenging, implying a tradeoff between completeness and clarity (stated); many reviewed studies had small samples, short durations, no comparison groups, descriptive statistics, or confounding variables (stated as reasons for inconclusiveness).
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
68 No basis given · 35 Own interpretation · 24 Own result · 14 No full text of the sources · 12 Sources not found · 4 Own method · 2 Partly supported · 2 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although gamifying the use of such simulations can help overcome the problems with insufficient motivation and engagement, there is a lack of studies evaluating the effects of gamified simulation-based learning.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our review shows that the empirical studies on understanding what kind of game elements under what circumstances can drive desired behavior are not quite systematic.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A sizable part of the papers (16) studied gamification of courses as a whole, which implies gamifying a range of learning activities.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the knowledge of how to gamify an activity in accordance with the specifics of the educational context is still limited.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · p. 3 · hedged
“we found the level of understanding of how to promote engagement and learning by incorporating game design elements to be questionable.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · p. 3 · hedged
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The reviewed collection of empirical studies on gamifying education is very diverse with respect to the focus of the studies and the reported outcomes.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the review reveals that (i) insufficient evidence exists to support the long-term benefits of gamification in educational contexts;”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The majority of gamification studies feature a subset of the following game elements: points, badges, levels, leaderboards and progress bars.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In sharp contrast, gamification experiments targeting activities related to disciplines from humanity and social sciences are extremely limited, with only one example (Holman et al., 2015) touching this subject.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Holman et al., 2015 source
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
In the paper
“The reviewed papers expand the scope of the empirical research on educational gamification, as compared to (Dicheva et al. 2015).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dicheva et al. 2015
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We noticed that in addition to the heterogeneous nature of the empirical research, the stated goals of the studies were not always in line with the reported outcomes.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 73
- It may state two separate claims as one. 46
- The quote only partly states this claim. 10
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For example, (Hakulinen et al., 2015) present convincing evidence that points, badges and leaderboard incorporated in online Java exercises increases the use of an open learning environment.”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Hakulinen et al., 2015 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report that students offered badges spent significantly more time in TRAKLA2 and had more exercise sessions than controls, supporting increased use of the online learning environment. But the study tested badges, not a combined points–badges–leaderboard intervention: exercise points applied to both groups, and Future Work says the social aspect was missing. Materials and Procedure describes algorithm-simulation exercises, not specifically online Java exercises. (LLM, conf=0.90)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For example, two papers (Hakulinen et al., 2015) and (Landers & Landers, 2015) report positive outcomes for using single game elements, but one is for badges and the other one for leaderboards.”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Hakulinen et al., 2015 source
The Conclusions report that this study added achievement badges to a university course’s online learning environment and found statistically significant effects on some aspects of student behavior, along with generally positive attitudes. That supports the badge-related positive outcome attributed to Hakulinen et al.; the leaderboard paper is a separate citation. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not matchedcites Landers & Landers, 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The collection of papers covers a wide range of academic subjects (32) organized in six categories (see Table 2).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For comparison, the total number of papers included in the previous review covering the period January 2010 -June 2014 was 34.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The end result was a list of 11 theoretical papers appearing in the searched databases between June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2015.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A surprising fact is that the vast majority of the empirical works (25 studies) report inconclusive outcomes, which means that there is no basis for confidence in the reported results.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the reviewed collection, 11 papers report studies of the effect of a single game element, 8 papers study gamified systems using 2 game elements, 16 papers study gamified systems with 3 game elements, while the remaining 16 papers report results of gamifying systems by incorporating more than three elements (see Table 4).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Considering the educational level, the bulk of gamification studies in the survey period were conducted at university level (44 papers), with less attention to K-12 education (7 papers).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In those 15 papers, the findings related to the benefits of gamification are mixed: 12 studies present evidence for positive effects of gamification in educational settings, while 3 present evidence for negative effects.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the majority of empirical works still examine the impact of the gamification on students ' engagement, performance, participation or retention, they are widening and deepening the focus of their studies.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the connection between motivation and gamification design is demonstrated by a number of the reviewed studies, they do not add persuasive evidence confirming the effect of gamification as a motivational tool.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The result was a list of 51 empirical research papers.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus the final number of selected papers (empirical and theoretical) amounted to 63 in total.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Another part of the papers addresses activities with indirect effect on learning, such as engaging students in more regular interactions with the learning environment (11).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although this presumes a higher concentration of studies on gamified online learning our findings indicate the opposite.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It covers studies on different configurations of game elements, used to gamify different activities and resulting in different outcomes, without any identifiable pattern of distribution.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, we note that the gamification terminology is still unsettled and various variations of the introduced above terms exist.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This search yielded a total of 4998 results depicted in Table 1.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In parallel, a significant part of the empirical research was nonetheless reporting success stories and possibly contributing to the ' inflated expectations ' .”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The papers listed in the platform-centric category do not cover all gamified platforms proposed in the reviewed papers.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Studies on how distinct categories of learners are affected by gamification, what to measure as an outcome, and how to add a gamified layer to a core activity are also emerging.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While in our first review the question shared between most of the papers was ' Is gamification effective? ' , now it appears in a more extended version, in combination with the questions ' for what? ' or ' to whom? ' .”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The examination of the selected papers indicated that the empirical studies tended to use surveys and quasi-experimental designs, while the randomized controlled trials were less common.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Table 12 Inconclusive studies with reasons for this categorization”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result, the educational benefits of gamification in terms of increasing student motivation or linking this motivation to learning outcomes are still not well understood.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While the majority of the reviewed studies do analyze specific educational effects of gamification (on learning, attainment, participation), their focus is often aside from motivation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, research remains inconclusive on these assumptions.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The reported outcome often concludes that the gamification produced the pursued learning gains and that the users appreciated the added gamification features.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, the majority of the studies target college students.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A number of gamification approaches, driven by specific objectives, have been applied to support learning and related activities in a variety of educational contexts.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There are several assumptions underlying the usefulness of gamification in educational context, such as gamification is motivating, gamification is engaging, gamification can improve attendance and participation.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We maintain the view that gamification is not just a technology but also a methodology which some organizations adopt as way to increase motivation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Studies involving different demographic groups however are beneficial, as we cannot necessarily generalize the results of a study conducted with one demographic group to another demographic group.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We also included the used game elements, mechanics and dynamics since they are inherently related to the success of a gamification application.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The review was restricted to papers appearing in the searched databases between June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2015.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
- Rests on an assumption: The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
In the paper
“For example, (Pedro et al., 2015b) reported that the game mechanics implemented in a virtual learning environment did not have any effect on motivation and performance of the female students.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Pedro et al., 2015b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Online learning normally requires stronger motivation, which makes it a somewhat more promising field for applying gamification.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Motivation as a psychological process that gives behavior purpose and direction is contextual.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Although most of the reviewed 34 papers have been reporting promising results, the review concluded that more substantial empirical research is needed to determine whether both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation of the learners can be actually influenced by gamification.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Dicheva et al. 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Not matched
In the paper
“More specifically, (Ryan et al., 2006) argue that the intrinsic appeal of games is due to their ability to satisfy the basic psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ryan et al., 2006 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Not only are individuals motivated in multiple ways, but also their motivation varies according to the situation or context of the task.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The results show that a gamified laboratory simulation can increase both learning outcomes and motivation levels when compared with traditional teaching.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bonde et al. (2014) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this aspect, gamification is not a purely marketing trend but a behavioral/affective design trend that can be applied to different areas, including education.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While gamification strives at its core to increase motivation, yet motivation is not a unitary phenomenon - different people may have different types and amounts of motivation, which can be shaped by the activity they are undertaking (Gooch et al., 2016).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Gooch et al., 2016 source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The results of the study found that women in the female-dominated leaderboard condition demonstrated stronger academic identification than those in the control and maledominated leaderboard conditions.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Christy & Fox, 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whilst 12 studies report encouraging outcomes, they cover a range of specific combinations of game elements, specific activities and outcomes and thus do not support practical generalization.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition to appropriate measures, the verification of the validity of reported results requires availability of relevant statistical information about the studies.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“which points out that an emerging technology first climbs the ' peak of inflated expectations ' followed by a subsequent strong fall down into the ' trough of disillusionment ' , before reaching the ' slop of enlightenment ' , which marks the stage where its benefits and limitations are understood and demonstrated.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gartner, 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Improving our understanding of motivational aspects of gamification will enable us to predict its effect on the related concepts.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Motivation is associated with a number of learning related concepts such as engagement, effort, goals, focus of attention, self-efficacy, confidence, achievement, interest, etc.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This suggests a user-centered approach in the design of gamified systems, characterized by a focus on the needs and desires of learners.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased communication, participation, punctuality”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Without a theoretical framework backing the design of the studies and the interpretation of their results, it is problematic to select an appropriate gamification structure or to differentiate which of the employed game mechanisms and principles were essential for arriving at successful outcomes.”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased motivation and learning”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In several cases our judgment simply conveys the paper ' s conclusion where the authors themselves acknowledge that the results of the study should be interpreted with caution.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased intention to use the PLE”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study reveals an interesting psychological perspective of gamification in educational environments: merely making an activity seem like a game impacts learners ' engagement.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Most emerging technologies and the accompanying research go through an initial period of hype as described by the Gartner ' s Hype Cycle, before evolving for a second period of measured popularity, in which it attains maturity and meets the expectations (Naik, 2015).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Naik, 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The theory of gamified learning proposed by (Landers et al., 2015) provides two specific causal pathways by which gamification can affect learning and a framework for testing these pathways.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Landers et al., 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mixed acceptance of game elements”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Increased knowledge retention, reduce attrition”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites (Nevin et al., 2014)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Positive effect on student collaboration”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“reduced undesirable behaviors in VLE”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Improved retention period, and learning performance”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Increased playfulness and engagement in learning”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites (Perry, 2015)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The availability of successful gamified platforms will help widen the scope of gamified educational activities and create a ground for broadening experimental studies towards developing evidence based practices.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Motivated continuous learning for module”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relation between badge interaction and engagement”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In the first one, this behavior moderates the relationship between instructional quality and learning. In the second, this behavior mediates the relationship between game elements and learning.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Landers et al., 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Improved learning performance”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Possible reasons for this are from one side the hype to publish on gamification and from another, the addressing of an overly broad research question based on limited supportive evidence.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the process of integrating game design principles within varying educational experiences appears challenging and there are currently no practical guidelines for how to do so in a coherent and efficient manner.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased engagement, foster learning”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For gamification to be effective, it must successfully alter an intermediary learner behavior or learner attitude.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Landers et al., 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Improved participation and quality of online discussion”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased usage of the open learning environment”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“an emerging shared message particularly relevant to instructional designers recognizes that what one learner values, another may not, what one learner believes is achievable, another may not.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased intrinsic motivation”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“Leaderboards create stereotype threat”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites (Christy & Fox, 2014)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, reported positive effects of gamification based on a two-week study could be attributed to the ' novelty effect ' of the used tool or approach rather than to the added gamification features.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased competence need (negative) and performance (positive)”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The observed emphasis on points, badges, and leaderboards is too narrow to address the relevant motivational factors.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While it seems apparent that gamification has the potential to create enhanced learning environments, there is still insufficient evidence that it (1) produces reliable, valid and long-lasting educational outcomes, or (2) does so better than traditional educational models.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We note that our judgment in studying inconclusiveness can be viewed as rather subjective.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our decision on the validity of the gamification studies was guided by the following factors: the sample size, the number of study groups, the length of the study, how the data was collected, how the variables were controlled, how and by what statistical procedures the data was analyzed, how well the conclusions are supported by the data, and does the study give enough information to convince the”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The rise and fall of expectations for applying gamification in educational contexts is nothing out of the ordinary.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Improved time on task”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“Correlation between XPs, badges and learning - positive”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites (Paiva et al., 2015)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased disposition to the experience flow”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“Does not improve learning”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Long & Aleven, 2014 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relation between learner gamification typology and learner interactive”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The outcomes indicate that engagement and enjoyment increased significantly due to the psychological effects of framing the task as a game. Furthermore, no actual increased interest or enjoyment was measured by adding actual game mechanics to the task, when it was already framed as a game.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lieberoth (2015) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Improved motivation”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“The results show that although there is support for the importance of competition against peers (contrary to the current prevailing understanding), the challenge of overcoming the game ' s obstacles and mastering them is what matters the most to players, regardless of the type of the game.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tomaselli et al., 2015
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fostered learning activities”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relation between gaming personality and game dynamics”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper relies on this without support.
The selected databases and search terms capture the relevant empirical literature on educational gamification.
“we searched the following databases: Google Scholar, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Explore and ScienceDirect using the following search terms: (gamification OR gamify OR gameful) AND (education OR learning OR training) AND (since 2014).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 51 empirical papers reviewed are representative of the empirical research on educational gamification in the survey period.
“The result was a list of 51 empirical research papers.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The reviewed studies' reported outcomes are sufficiently comparable to draw conclusions about the field.
“A literature survey typically employs a framework for structuring the evaluation of the works in the targeted area.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Video games are explicitly designed for entertainment and can produce states of desirable experience and motivate users to remain engaged in an activity with unparalleled intensity and duration.
“Since video games are explicitly designed for entertainment, they can produce states of desirable experience and motivate users to remain engaged in an activity with unparalleled intensity and duration.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Success in one educational context does not guarantee that the same mechanism will be motivationally successful in another educational context.
“Additionally, success in one educational context does not guarantee that the same mechanism will be motivationally successful in another educational context.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Performance is an indirect measure of motivation that is influenced by many non-motivational factors such as ability, prior knowledge, and quality of instruction.
“Performance is an indirect measure of motivation that is influenced by many non-motivational factors such as ability, prior knowledge, and quality of instruction, while motivation is the actual driving force which makes individuals want to do something and help them continue doing it.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Motivation is the actual driving force which makes individuals want to do something and helps them continue doing it.
“Performance is an indirect measure of motivation that is influenced by many non-motivational factors such as ability, prior knowledge, and quality of instruction, while motivation is the actual driving force which makes individuals want to do something and help them continue doing it.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Motivation is associated with a number of learning related concepts such as engagement, effort, goals, focus of attention, self-efficacy, confidence, achievement, interest, etc.
“Motivation is associated with a number of learning related concepts such as engagement, effort, goals, focus of attention, self-efficacy, confidence, achievement, interest, etc.”
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Game-based learning can be an effective approach to foster collaboration among students, essential communication and teamwork skills, which are critical in developing computational thinking (CT) and preparing students for STEM fields [38].”
From Fostering computational thinking in young students through student generated challenges in tangible mobile augmented reality games (2025) · cites this paper as [38]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The large numbers of inconclusive studies in these reviews point toward a general problem: Gamification research lacks methodological rigor.”
From The gamification of learning: a meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Dichev and Dicheva 2017
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Whereas the majority of studies found in reviews focusing on education were conducted in higher education settings, some of them were performed in primary and secondary school settings (see Dichev and Dicheva 2017).”
From The gamification of learning: a meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Dichev and Dicheva 2017
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Gamification has emerged as a promising pedagogical strategy, with the potential to capture students' attention, foster active learning, and enrich the overall learning experience, particularly in subjects where disengagement and low motivation are common (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017).”
From Gamification on Mathematics Engagement and Motivation in Secondary School and Higher Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2026) · cites this paper as Dichev & Dicheva, 2017
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.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ How conclusive are the reported results? · p. 18
“A surprising fact is that the vast majority of the empirical works (25 studies) report inconclusive outcomes”
§ How conclusive are the reported results? · p. 19
“| Inconclusive | 26 (50%) |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Search strategy and sources · p. 5
“The review was restricted to papers appearing in the searched databases between June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2015.”
§ How conclusive are the reported results? · p. 20
“| B | (Holman et al., 2013) | Badges, leveling, autonomy, leaderboard, grade predictor”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ What combinations of game elements are studied? · p. 10
“| Leaderboards only | 3 (6%) | (Christy & Fox, 2014; Landers & Landers, 2015; Poole et al., 2014)”
§ What types of goals? · p. 15
“| (Poole et al., 2014) | Points, leaderboards”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“The end result was a list of 11 theoretical papers appearing in the searched databases between June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2015. Thus the final number of selected papers (empirical and theoretical) amounted to 63 in total.”
Reported 63 · recomputed 62
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ How conclusive are the reported results? · p. 18
“For example, (Hakulinen et al., 2015) present convincing evidence that points, badges and leaderboard incorporated in online Java exercises increases the use of an open learning environment.”
§ How conclusive are the reported results? · p. 20
“| A | (Hakulinen et al., 2015) | Badges | Homework exercises | Improves motivation |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ What combinations of game elements are studied? · p. 10
“| Badges only | 9 (18%) | (Boticki et al., 2015; Davis & Klein, 2015; Hakulinen et al., 2015; Leach et al., 2014; Long & Aleven, 2014; Pedro et al., 2015a; Perry, 2015; Tu et al., 2015; Tvarozek & Brza, 2014)”
§ What types of goals? · p. 15
“| (Perry, 2015) | Points, badges”
Citations
Cites
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 54,599 · cited 2×
“According to the Self Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000), humans seek out activities to satisfy intrinsic motivational needs, such as competence, autonomy, or relatedness.”
From game design elements to gamefulness: defining "gamification"
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011) · Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments · doi:10.1145/2181037.2181040 · Cited by 8,402 · cited 4×
“What combinations of game elements are studied? According to (Deterding et al., 2011) gamification is the use of game design elements in non-game contexts.”
InfluentialDoes Gamification Work? -- A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014) · 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.1109/hicss.2014.377 · Cited by 5,201 · cited 2×
“This findings are in line with the conclusions reported by (Koivisto & Hamari, 2014), who have shown in a more general context that women experience a greater effect when the gamification contains social aspects and men - when there is a sort of competition.”
The motivational pull of video games: a self-determination theory approach
Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S., & Przybylski, A. (2006) · Motivation and Emotion · doi:10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8 · Cited by 3,332 · cited 1×
“More specifically, (Ryan et al., 2006) argue that the intrinsic appeal of games is due to their ability to satisfy the basic psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness.”
Reality is Broken Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World
(2012) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.49-6095 · Cited by 2,933 · cited 1×
“The motivational outcome category concerns concepts derived from motivational principles of games such as explicit goals, rules, a feedback system, and voluntary participation (McGonigal, 2011).”
Gamification in theory and action: a survey
Seaborn, K., & Fels, D. I. (2015) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.006 · Cited by 2,515 · cited 2×
“array of practical motivations (Seaborn & Fels, 2015).”
(2012) · Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) · Cited by 2,354
Hanus, M. D., & Fox, J. (2015) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019 · Cited by 1,918 · cited 8×
“(Attali & Arieli-Attali, 2015; Hanus & Fox, 2015; Long & Aleven, 2014) Inconclusive 26 (50”
Influential(2015) · Educational Technology & Society · Cited by 1,551
Self-citationFrom Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining “Gamification”
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. E. (2011) · IT University Of Copenhagen (IT University of Copenhagen) · Cited by 1,341
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Boskic, N., & Hu, S. (2015). Gamification in higher education: how we changed roles. European Conference on Games Based Learning, (pp. 741–748). Reading, UK: Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited.
- Dicheva, D., & Dichev, C. (2015). Gamification in education: where are we in 2015? World Conference on E-Learning (ELEARN 2015), Kona, Hawaii, October 19–22 (pp. 1276–1284). Chesapeake: AACE.
- Leach, D., Laur, B., Code, J., Bebbington, T., & Broome, D. (2014). Gamification for online engagement in higher education: a randomized controlled trial (pp. 151–159). Madison: Games Learning + Society Conference.
- Tvarozek, J., & Brza, T. (2014). Engaging students in online courses through interactive badges. In 2014 International Conference on e-Learning, September 2014, Spain (pp. 89–95). Retrieved from http://elearning-conf.eu/docs/cp14/paper-12.pdf .
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,100 of 1,434
Gamification Elements in E-Library Services in Higher Education: A Systematic Review
Adedokun, F. O., Ahmad, N., & Miskon, S. (2022) · Lecture notes on data engineering and communications technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-98741-1_61 · Cited by 1
García-Álvarez, A., & Serradell-López, E. (2022) · Research on Education and Media · doi:10.2478/rem-2022-0001 · Cited by 1
Learning Finance with Games: An Empirical Study
Ingram, S., Islambouli, R., Andrianantenaina, M., Weisskopf, J., Masset, P., & Baudat, N. (2021) · International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI) · doi:10.1109/csci54926.2021.00205 · Cited by 1
“A systematic review [17] of empirical evidence for game-based learning benefits stress the lack of evidence for the long-term benefits of gamifying education, and the lack of sufficient guidelines for adapting and tailoring gamified activities to the actual learning context.”
BackgroundAn Empirical Study of the Effects of Virtual Currency on Learners in Out of Class Practicing
Dicheva, D., Cassel, L. N., Styer, R., Dichev, C., Guy, B. S., & Irwin, K. (2022) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-16290-9_6 · Cited by 1
Self-citationHuang, Y. (2023) · The Educational Review USA · doi:10.26855/er.2023.02.004 · Cited by 1
ESP on the border between tradition and innovation
Stoichkova, E. (2023) · Indian Journal of Language and Linguistics · doi:10.54392/ijll2313 · Cited by 1
Konsep Inovasi Menurut Pandangan Guru Inovatif Pendidikan Islam
Abdullah, W. A. A. W., Razak, K. A., Hamzah, M. I., et al. (2020) · ATTARBAWIY Malaysian Online Journal of Education · doi:10.53840/attarbawiy.v4i1.24 · Cited by 1
Gamification Elements in the Process of Ukrainian Language Training of Pedagogy Specialists
Humeniuk, I. M. (2023) · Journal of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University · doi:10.15330/jpnu.10.1.126-132 · Cited by 1
“The term ‚gamification‛ is most often interpreted by foreign scientists as a process that makes an activity seem like a game (Werbach, 2014, p. 266), a process of introducing game principles into the educational environment (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017, p. 25).”
Robotics learning model on the example of blended learning “flipped classroom”
Soboleva, E. V. (2019) · Perspectives of science and education · doi:10.32744/pse.2019.4.13 · Cited by 1
Improve Aircraft Pilots’ Training Using Structural Failure Incidents: A Serious Game Approach
Lekea, I. K., Stamatelos, D. G., & Giannopoulos, S. (2023) · Sustainable aviation · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-42041-2_11 · Cited by 1
Gamificação personalizada baseada no perfil do jogador
Andrade, F. R. H. (2018) · Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (Universidade de São Paulo) · doi:10.11606/t.55.2018.tde-18102018-111511 · Cited by 2
Tailoring gamified educational systems to users and context
Rodrigues, L. (2022) · Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (Universidade de São Paulo) · doi:10.11606/t.55.2022.tde-13022023-172407 · Cited by 1
van Gaalen, A. (2023) · University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) · doi:10.33612/diss.574752301 · Cited by 1
Alshumaimeri, Y. A. (2023) · doi:10.22541/au.170146994.49065271/v1 · Cited by 1
Adaptive Gamification: Application in Online Learning and Collaboration
Peng, R. (2024) · doi:10.32920/26052622 · Cited by 5
Gamification as a Teaching Strategy to Develop Action-Research Competencies in Social Work StudentsPreprint
Gallo, V. H. P. (2025) · Preprints.org · doi:10.20944/preprints202505.0226.v1 · Cited by 1
Saluja, O. B., Sharma, D., Shukla, M. M., & Kumar, H. (2026) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-026-06787-y · Cited by 1
Borges, S. S. (2018) · Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (Universidade de São Paulo) · doi:10.11606/t.55.2018.tde-30012018-165553
O livro do conhecimento: Uma aventura medieval pela aprendizagem de Gramática
Michel, F., Bernardo, J. R. S., Pires, F., et al. (2018) · Anais ... Workshops do Congresso Brasileiro de Informática na Educação · doi:10.5753/cbie.wcbie.2018.288
Robô Euroi: Estratégias Matemáticas para desenvolver o Pensamento Computacional
Melo, D., Júnior, R. J. D. R. S., Duarte, J. C., et al. (2018) · Anais ... Workshops do Congresso Brasileiro de Informática na Educação · doi:10.5753/cbie.wcbie.2018.242
“…os jogos que em sua maioria ferramentas de entretenimento, podem ser utilizados como ferramentas educacionais, se criados de maneira a proporcionar situações que levem ao exercício da análise e da reflexão (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017), embora muitas discussões venham sendo realizadas sobre esse tema.”
BackgroundTHE USE OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE TRAINING OF FUTURE TEACHERS
Popov, N. I., Isakova, V. V., Kalimova, A. V., et al. (2018) · Informatics and Education · doi:10.32517/0234-0453-2018-33-9-44-52
Gestão da Produção em Foco - Volume 33
Melo, A. C. S., Vergara, B. M., de Oliveira, K. U., et al. (2019) · doi:10.5935/978-85-7042-044-2
Comparison of Recommender Systems in an Ed-Tech Application.Preprint
Baldominos, A., & Quintana, D. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University)
Configurations of Community and Collaboration in Online Learning: An Assemblage Approach
Scott, J. (2018) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.14363.52002
Massively Multiplayer Game-based Education
Godwod, P. (2019) · Journal of Modern Science · doi:10.13166/jms/108947
“However, this does not exclude possibility of gains from simply framing into being labeled as a game (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017, passim; see also Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, 2014, passim) – be it only even those resulting from community emerging around a game, which alone promotes social interaction…”
BackgroundEstudo de caso da conceção e aplicação de um jogo educativo
Júnior, C. A. B., Lopes, R. P., & Júnior, J. A. (2018) · International Conference on Innovation, Documentation and Education (INNODOCT) · doi:10.4995/inn2018.2018.8833
Turkawka, G. (2019) · EDULEARN proceedings · doi:10.21125/edulearn.2019.2218
“Dichev’s review about gamifying education [6] “reveals that (i) insufficient evidence exists to support the long-term benefits of gamification in educational contexts; (ii) the practice of gamifying learning has outpaced researchers’ understanding of its mechanisms and methods; (iii) the knowledge of how to gamify an…”
BackgroundA Game-Based Student Response System
Ergüleç, F., & Mısırlı, Ö. (2019) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-0119-1.ch009
HIGH SCORE : A qualitative study on how gaming can further awareness in office environments
Bergqvist, J., & Breuer, S. (2019) · DiVA at Umeå University (Umeå University)
A Study on the Use of Gameful Approaches in Self-paced "learn to code" (SPL2C) Apps.
Arnedo-Moreno, J., Tesconi, S., Galindo, M. J. M., et al. (2019)
Kliuchnikova, M. V., Rakhmatullina, R. I., & Chigashova, A. S. (2020) · doi:10.31483/r-74584
Udeani, U., & Akhigbe, J. N. (2020) · International Journal of Innovative Technology Integration in Education
Gamified Feedback in Electronic Negotiation Training
Meyer, M., Schmid, A., Melzer, P., et al. (2020) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems
الرحمن, إ. ا. م. أ. ع., & المحمدي, م. م. ج. ا. (2020) · المجلة التربوية لکلية التربية بسوهاج · doi:10.21608/edusohag.2020.110363
Culture-Based Gamification for Global Education
Ribeiro, N. F. (2020) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-4993-3.ch011
The Perceived Appropriateness of Digital Games From ELL Teachers
Alshaya, K., & Beck, P. (2020) · Advances in early childhood and K-12 education · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-4739-7.ch011
Training on Social Entrepreneurship
Padilla-Zea, N., Aceto, S., & Burgos, D. (2021) · Advances in human and social aspects of technology book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-4156-2.ch014
Assessment of professional competencies of pedagogy students in the conditions of distance learning
Aigunova, O., & Salikova, E. M. V. (2021) · SHS Web of Conferences · doi:10.1051/shsconf/20219805003
Padres y educación en la era digital
Martínez Sánchez, I. (2021) · Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha eBooks · doi:10.18239/estudios_2021.169.00
Prada, P. C. R., Ortiz-Beltrán, A., & Lobo-Quintero, R. (2020) · Revista Educación en Ingeniería · doi:10.26507/rei.v15n29.1031
Συμμετοχικός σχεδιασμός εκπαιδευτικής εφαρμογής για φορητές συσκευές
Gatsou, C., Τεμπέλη, Μ., & Σταυράκης, Μ. (2021) · Open Journal of Animation Film and Interactive Media in Education and Culture [AFIMinEC] · doi:10.12681/afiinmec.25676 · Cited by 1
“Κύριος σκοπός του είναι να αυξήσει το ενδιαφέρον και να ωθήσει τον άνθρωπο σε εκπαιδευτικά περιβάλλοντα (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017).”
Mirodilova, N. M. (2021) · CyberLeninK (CyberLeninka) · doi:10.24411/2181-1385-2021-00908
Oliinyk, O., Derevianko, I., & Bevz, N. (2021) · CyberLeninK (CyberLeninka)
Parra, G., & Tan, E. B. (2021) · International Journal for Innovation Education and Research · doi:10.31686/ijier.vol9.iss7.3226
“Furthermore, gamification popularity became widespread in 2010 when it eventually became a trend used by diverse domains such as commerce, marketing, healthcare, and human resources, etc. (Bilgin, 2020; Dichev & Dicheva, 2017; Huotari & Hamari, 2020).”
BackgroundHarnessing the Power of Gamification
Karasavvidis, I. (2021) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-5021-2.ch004
Desafios na educação contínua dos Técnicos de Radiologia: uma revisão narrativa
Almeida, R., da Silva, C. A., Vicente, B., et al. (2021) · ROENTGEN-Revista Científica das Técnicas Radiológicas · doi:10.46885/roentgen.v2i2.56
Board game for the engineering students to promote interest in city infrastructure courses
Kokina, K., Mežule, L., & Borodiņecs, A. (2021) · International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd) · doi:10.4995/head21.2021.13027
LABESCAPE AND BREAKOUT. GAMIFICATION FOR PHOTONICS STUDENTS
Pérez-Herrera, R. A., Tainta, S., & Elosúa, C. (2021) · EDULEARN proceedings · doi:10.21125/edulearn.2021.0525
“Nevertheless, the planning of lecturing activities following game design principles is a challenge because currently there are no practical guidelines to accomplish it with coherence and efficiency [3].”
BackgroundInfluentialГеймификацияланған бағдарламалық құралдар мен платформаларды талдау
Токжигитова, А. Н. (2021) · Bulletin of the Karaganda University Pedagogy series · doi:10.31489/2021ped2/98-104
Gamification for Photonics Students: Labescape
Pérez-Herrera, R. A., Tainta, S., & Elosúa, C. (2021) · Optics · doi:10.3390/opt2040021
“However, organizing activities using game design ideas is a difficult task because there are currently no practical recommendations for doing so in a consistent and efficient manner [3].”
BackgroundGamification of Project Business Studies
Koivisto, M. (2021) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-90677-1_18
False friends’ en metodologías innovadoras: una revisión narrativa
Cartagena-Ceballos, P., Martínez, S. G., & Férriz-Valero, A. (2021) · RUA, Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Alicante (Universidad de Alicante)
Mayer, R. E., & Fiorella, L. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108894333.002 · Cited by 1
A Game-Based Student Response System
Ergüleç, F., & Mısırlı, Ö. (2021) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-3710-0.ch041
Culture-Based Gamification for Global Education
Ribeiro, N. F. (2021) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-3710-0.ch052
Wong, T. T. K., & Kwan, Y. W. (2021) · Education and new developments · doi:10.36315/2021end017
“However, Dichev & Dicheva (2017) reviewed that factors like students’ negative perceptions of competition, some game elements undermining feeling of competence, and short duration of the approach negatively influenced intrinsic motivation, in particular for students with low ability.”
BackgroundFurnham, A. F. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108953276.007
Assessing Gamification Effectiveness in Education Through Analytics
Yordanova, Z. B. (2021) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-91885-9_47
Possibilities of gamification in online learning at the University of Žilina
Gajanová, Ľ. (2021) · SHS Web of Conferences · doi:10.1051/shsconf/202112902004
“The authors Dichev and Dicheva (2017) confirmed that gamification has a positive response from students.”
BackgroundVol. 2, N.º 2, Jul-Dez 2021 - "Uma Profissão, diferentes caminhos"
Editorial, C. (2021) · ROENTGEN-Revista Científica das Técnicas Radiológicas · doi:10.46885/roentgen.v2i2.68
Reinheimer, W. S., & Medina, R. D. (2021) · RENOTE · doi:10.22456/1679-1916.121195
Особенности сотрудников, занятых интеллектуальным трудом, их образования и развития
(2021) · Экономические науки · doi:10.14451/1.203.205
‘Spin to Win’ tips for healthy kidneys: a kid-friendly health education game
Shakir, R. G., Schmidt, N. M., Papazian, W. G., et al. (2022) · Journal of Nephrology · doi:10.1007/s40620-022-01333-w
The Perceived Appropriateness of Digital Games From ELL Teachers
Alshaya, K., & Beck, P. (2021) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-3710-0.ch082
- (2021) · Universidad de Zaragoza eBooks · doi:10.26754/uz.978-84-09-29715-3
Sanchez, É., van Oostendorp, H., Fijnheer, J. D., & Lavoué, É. (2019) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-60013-0_38-1 · Cited by 4
Web-Games As A Tool For Teaching Maths At University
Eyrikh, N. V., & Markova, N. V. (2022) · The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences · doi:10.15405/epsbs.2022.06.31
Effects of Gamification on the Students' Engagement and Behavior in English 11
Ramirez, R. M. (2022) · International Journal of Research Publications · doi:10.47119/ijrp1001031620223464
Lampert, C., & Tolks, D. (2022) · Springer Reference Pflege, Therapie, Gesundheit · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-62800-3_48-1 · Cited by 1
The Place of Gamification in the Educational Context
Miškov, J. (2022) · Advances in game-based learning book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-4287-6.ch001
Fostering Motivation to Learn Through Gamification
Marinensi, G., & Botte, B. (2022) · Advances in game-based learning book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-4287-6.ch030
Rajyaguru, C., Sahni, P., Jain, M., et al. (2022) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/u5qrz
Alexander, P. E. (2019) · American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting (AERA) · doi:10.3102/1445619
Schöb, S., Koschorreck, J., Biel, C., & Brandt, P. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-35059-8_13
Future Prospect of Gamification-Based Mobile in Physics Learning
Amiruddin, M. Z. B., Nisa', W. Z., Rahman, S. M. I. B., & Saini, N. A. M. B. (2022) · JPPS (Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Sains) · doi:10.26740/jpps.v12n1.p40-55
Innovación docente en materias geo-tecnológicas
Guerra, O. D. C., & Díaz, S. P. (2022) · HUMAN REVIEW International Humanities Review / Revista Internacional de Humanidades · doi:10.37467/revhuman.v11.3945
Training on Social Economy Entrepreneurship
Padilla-Zea, N., Aceto, S., & Burgos, D. (2022) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-7593-5.ch011
Soboleva, E. V., Suvorova, T. N., Gerasimova, E. K., et al. (2022) · Perspectives of science and education · doi:10.32744/pse.2022.6.10
“Эта технология предполагает использование игровых элементов с целью повышения мотивационной составляющей творческого процесса [10].”
The Role of Mechanics in Gamification
Helmefalk, M., Lundqvist, S., & Marcusson, L. (2022) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-7589-8.ch091
Same old, same old? Breaking the traditional teaching mold in the age of Covid-19
Thewissen, J., Temmerman, T., Vincent, A., & Gauthier, J. (2022) · Presses universitaires Saint-Louis Bruxelles eBooks · doi:10.4000/books.pusl.27987 · Cited by 1
Igrifikacija u STEM obrazovanju
Bošnjaković, N., & Babić, I. Đ. (2022) · Danubius Noster · doi:10.55072/dn.2022.3.45
PGE-UML: Uma Plataforma Web Gamificada para o Estudo da Unified Modeling Language
Feichas, F. A., & Seabra, R. D. (2023) · RENOTE · doi:10.22456/1679-1916.129180
Proceedings - 4th International Conference Business Meets Technology 2022
BMT Scientific Committee (2022) · doi:10.4995/bmt2022.2022.16007
Cotter, K. J. (2023) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-6092-4.ch011
GAMIFICACAO E CONCEITOS MATEMATICOS NA EDUCACAO DE JOVENS E ADULTOS [EJA]
Trentin, V. B., & Trentin, L. (2023) · CONTECSI - International Conference on Information Systems and Technology Management · doi:10.5748/19contecsi/pse/edu/7105
Design Gamification Model in Local History Learning
Shavab, O. A. K., & Sofiani, Y. (2023) · doi:10.2991/978-2-38476-010-7_20
Tsurkan, L., Dubìnka, M., Сергіївна, С. Н., Slipchyshyn, L., & Kalenyk, M. (2023) · Journal for Educators Teachers and Trainers · doi:10.47750/jett.2023.14.01.024
Sustainable Education and Social Networks
Chaves-Montero, A. (2023) · MDPI eBooks · doi:10.3390/books978-3-0365-7028-0
ENSINO E APRENDIZADO EM ENGENHARIA QUÍMICA: DESAFIOS E PERSPECTIVAS DE MODERNIZAÇÃO NA ERA DIGITAL
dos Santos, M. T. (2023) · Revista de Ensino de Engenharia · doi:10.37702/ree2236-0158.v42p70-91.2023
A Diffraction Experiment Kit with an Arduino based Programmable Rotational Sample Platform
da Costa, M. G., Tai, O. T., Chu, H.-L., et al. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering · doi:10.1109/tale54877.2022.00142
Singh, B. R., Gajabe, U., Jangir, K., & Bandre, G. R. (2023) · doi:10.2196/preprints.49960
Buenas Prácticas de Innovación Docente en el Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior (vol. X)
Jorge, U. S. (2023) · Universidad San Jorge eBooks · doi:10.54391/123456789/918
Rodríguez, L. R. (2023) · Universidad San Jorge eBooks · doi:10.54391/123456789/921
Metadata
- Authors
- Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D.
- Affiliations
- Winston-Salem State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Dicheva, Darina
- Venue
- International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
- Published
- 2017-02-20
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2365-9440 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2590009086
- Semantic Scholar
- 9eccfc54e7b125f3c3e044e0fca40c3e80dccbac
- Cited by
- 2,112
- References
- 88
- Citations by year
- 2026: 458 · 2025: 435 · 2024: 316 · 2023: 257 · 2022: 194 · 2021: 194 · 2020: 119 · 2019: 74 · 2018: 51 · 2017: 14
- FWCI
- 112.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Division of Human Resource Development (1623236)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
- Keywords
- gamification, game elements, student motivation, student engagement, research evidence base, higher education
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-07, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-07 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (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
