CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 439Educational Games and GamificationDigital Games and MediaOnline Learning and Analytics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 105 of the 107 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Examining the effectiveness of gamification as a tool promoting teaching and learning in educational settings: a meta-analysis

Open access
Li, Minzi, Ma, Siyu, Shi, Yuyang·2023·Frontiers in Psychology
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1253549PMC PMC10591086
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The integration of gamification into educational settings has gained recognition for its potential to boost student motivation, engagement, interest, and learning outcomes. Despite its popularity, research on gamification has produced mixed results regarding student learning outcomes. This meta-analysis aims to synthesize the existing empirical evidence on the effectiveness of gamification as a tool for promoting teaching and learning in educational settings. Forty-one studies with 49 independent samples involving more than 5,071 participants were included in our analysis. Results from random effects models showed an overall significant large effect size ( g = 0.822 [0.567 to 1.078]). The research performed the moderator analysis to scrutinize the effects of a number of factors on the relationship between gamification and student learning outcomes. The study uncovered significant moderating effects for user type, educational discipline, design principles for educational gamification, duration of “gameful” experience, and learning environment. However, measurement of student outcomes and publication type did not appear to have any significant moderating effect. Those findings hold important implications for improving and implementing gamification to promote teaching and learning in future research.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1253549

Cites

105 of 105 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 107 references

2 of the 107 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Borenstein, 2005, Comprehensive meta-analysis (computer program) version 2
  2. Caponetto, 2014, Gamification and education: a literature review
  3. Jacobs, 2013, Gamification: a framework for the workplace
  4. Marczewski, 2013, Gamification: A simple introduction

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 234

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Li, M., Ma, S., & Shi, Y.
Affiliations
  • Guangdong University of Foreign Studies (CN)
  • Peking University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Ma, Siyu
  • Shi, Yuyang
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2023-10-09
Volume
14
Pages
1253549-1253549
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1253549
PMC
PMC10591086
OpenAlex
W4387454440
Semantic Scholar
47a35e0c351194f41452f75bb40a5b69dad915ba
Cited by
439
References
107
Citations by year
2026: 279 · 2025: 121 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 3
FWCI
19.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
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, educational gamification, learning outcomes, student motivation, student engagement, gameful experience, educational design principles, learning environment, moderating effect

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