CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 201Educational Games and GamificationOnline Learning and AnalyticsTeaching and Learning Programming

The Effect of Achievement Badges on Students’ Behavior: An Empirical Study in a University-Level Computer Science Course

Open access
Hakulinen, Lasse, Auvinen, Tapio, Korhonen, Ari·2015·International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET)
DOI 10.3991/ijet.v10i1.4221
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Achievement badges are a form of gamification that are used in an attempt to increase user engagement and motivation in various systems. A badge is typically a graphical icon that appears as a reward for the user after reaching an achievement but that has no practical value. In this study, we describe and evaluate the use of achievement badges in the TRAKLA2 online learning environment where students solve interactive, automatically assessed exercises in a Data Structures and Algorithms course throughout the semester. We conducted an experiment where the students (N=281) were randomly divided into a treatment and a control group, with and without achievement badges. Students in the treatment group were awarded achievement badges, for example, for solving exercises correctly on the first attempt, doing exercises early, or solving all the exercises in a round with full points. Grading was the same for both groups, i.e. collecting badges did not affect the final grade, even though the exercise points themselves did. Students’ activity in TRAKLA2 was logged in order to find out whether the achievement badges had an effect on their behavior. We also collected numerical and open-ended feedback in order to find out students’ attitudes towards the badges. Our results show that achievement badges can be used to affect students’ behavior. Statistically significant differences were observed in the time used per exercise, number of sessions, total time, and normalized total number of badges. Furthermore, the majority of the students reported being motivated by the badges. Based on our findings, achievement badges seem to be a promising method to motivate students and to encourage desired study practices.

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 · 10.3991/ijet.v10i1.4221

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Hakulinen et al. (2015) present convincing evidence that points, badges and leaderboard incorporated in online Java exercises increase the use of an open learning environment.

    “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.”

    From Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review (2017) · cites this paper as Hakulinen et al., 2015

    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)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Two reviewed papers report positive outcomes for using single game elements, but one is for badges and the other one for leaderboards.

    “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.”

    From Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review (2017) · cites this paper as Hakulinen et al., 2015

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. K. Huotari and J. Hamari, "Defining gamification: A service marketing perspective," in Proceeding of the 16th International Academic MindTrek Conference, ser. MindTrek '12. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2012, pp. 17-22.
  2. S. Deterding, D. Dixon, R. Khaled, and L. Nacke, "From game design elements to gamefulness: defining "gamification"," in Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, ser. MindTrek '11. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2011, pp. 9-15.
  3. A. Decker and E. L. Lawley, "Life's a game and the game of life: How making a game out of it can change student behavior," in Proceeding of the 44th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, ser. SIGCSE '13. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2013, pp. 233-238.
  4. N. J. Falkner and K. E. Falkner, "A fast measure for identifying at- risk students in computer science," in Proceedings of the ninth annual international conference on International computing education research. ACM, 2012, pp. 55-62.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hakulinen, L., Auvinen, T., & Korhonen, A.
Affiliations
Aalto University (FI)
ORCID
Korhonen, Ari
Venue
International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET)
Publisher
International Association of Online Engineering (IAOE)
Published
2015-02-21
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
18
ISSN
1863-0383 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3991/ijet.v10i1.4221
OpenAlex
W1994917054
Cited by
201
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 55 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4
FWCI
21.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Aaltodoc (Aalto University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
Keywords
achievement badges, gamification, student motivation, student behavior, virtual learning environments, data structures and algorithms course, computer science education, student engagement, student attitudes, automated assessment, study habits

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