Undergraduates’ Increased Acceptance and Positive Attitude toward Gamification: Its Relation to Increased Engagement
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Some studies in secondary and higher education have used validated tools to assess engagement, such as the Student Course Engagement Questionnaire and the EGameFlow scale.
“Yet, some studies in secondary and higher education contexts have used validated tools to assess engagement.For example, the Student Course Engagement Questionnaire (SCEQ) (Handelsman et al., 2005) has been utilized to measure skill use, interaction, and emotional involvement (Feroz et al., 2020;Pimentel et al., 2022).The EGameFlow scale has been applied to assess dimensions such as concentration,”
From Gamification on Mathematics Engagement and Motivation in Secondary School and Higher Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2026) · cites this paper as Feroz et al., 2020
Game elements most frequently implemented were points, leaderboards, and rewards, often through platforms such as Kahoot!.
“Game elements most frequently implemented were points, leaderboards, and rewards, often through platforms such as Kahoot!(Feroz et al., 2020;Stoyanova et al., 2018)”
From Gamification on Mathematics Engagement and Motivation in Secondary School and Higher Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2026) · cites this paper as Feroz et al., 2020
Interventions that combined gamification with interactive or narrative structures tended to increase participation and attention.
“Interventions that combined gamification with interactive or narrative structures tended to increase participation and attention (Feroz et al., 2020;Pimentel et al., 2022;Wang et al., 2024).”
From Gamification on Mathematics Engagement and Motivation in Secondary School and Higher Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2026) · cites this paper as Feroz et al., 2020
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ratinho, E., Figueiredo, M., Estêvão, D., Faísca, L., & Martins, C. (2026) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-025-10108-1 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“For example, the Student Course Engagement Questionnaire (SCEQ) (Handelsman et al., 2005) has been utilized to measure skill use, interaction, and emotional involvement (Feroz et al., 2020; Pimentel et al., 2022).”
InfluentialGamification in mathematics education: a bibliometric analysis
Supriyadi, E., Dahlan, J. A., Juandi, D., Sugiarni, R., & Fauzi, A. L. (2023) · International Journal on Teaching and Learning Mathematics · doi:10.18860/ijtlm.v5i1.17879 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Chen, Y., Jones, A., Ko, E., Nguyen, S., Tanui, L., Zipter, A., Thomas, A., & Rugh, M. (2023) · Frontiers in Education Conference · doi:10.1109/fie58773.2023.10343075 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Feroz, F. S., Subramaniam, I. D., & Subramaniam, S. K.
- Venue
- The International Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Learning
- Publisher
- Common Ground Research Networks
- Published
- 2020
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 13-24
- ISSN
- 2327-7971 (ISSN-L)
- 2327-915X
- OpenAlex
- W3083703826
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 0.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The International Journal of Science Mathematics and Technology Learning (publishedVersion)
- 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, undergraduate students, acceptance, attitudes, student engagement, 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.
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
