Gamification enhances student intrinsic motivation, perceptions of autonomy and relatedness, but minimal impact on competency: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Liuyufeng Li, Khe Foon Hew, Jiahui Du
{"title":"Gamification enhances student intrinsic motivation, perceptions of autonomy and relatedness, but minimal impact on competency: a meta-analysis and systematic review","authors":"Liuyufeng Li, Khe Foon Hew, Jiahui Du","doi":"10.1007/s11423-023-10337-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Although many studies in recent years have examined the use of gamification as a motivational strategy in education, evidence regarding its effects on intrinsic motivation is inconsistent. To make the case for or against the adoption of gamification in education, this study examines its effects on students’ intrinsic motivation and the underlying motivational factors: perceived competence, autonomy, and relatedness. In this review, we analyzed the results of studies comparing gamified learning with non-gamified learning published between 2011 and 2022. The results of our meta-analysis of 35 independent interventions (involving 2500 participants) indicated an overall significant but small effect size favoring gamified learning over learning without gamification (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.257, 95% CI [0.043, 0.471], <i>p</i> = .019) with no evidence of publication bias. Gamification also exerted a positive and significant effect on the students’ perceptions of autonomy (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.638, 95% CI [0.139, 1.136], <i>p</i> = .012) and relatedness (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 1.776, 95% CI [0.737, 2.814], <i>p</i> = .001), but minimal impact on competence (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.277, 95% CI [0.001, 0.553], <i>p</i> = .049). To further investigate the possible reasons for the small impact on intrinsic motivation, a systematic review of 31 studies was conducted. The findings revealed two major challenges encountered in the adoption of gamification to increase students’ intrinsic motivation: students’ lack of perceived competence and lack of perceived autonomy in gamified classes.</p>","PeriodicalId":501584,"journal":{"name":"Educational Technology Research and Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Technology Research and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10337-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although many studies in recent years have examined the use of gamification as a motivational strategy in education, evidence regarding its effects on intrinsic motivation is inconsistent. To make the case for or against the adoption of gamification in education, this study examines its effects on students’ intrinsic motivation and the underlying motivational factors: perceived competence, autonomy, and relatedness. In this review, we analyzed the results of studies comparing gamified learning with non-gamified learning published between 2011 and 2022. The results of our meta-analysis of 35 independent interventions (involving 2500 participants) indicated an overall significant but small effect size favoring gamified learning over learning without gamification (Hedges’ g = 0.257, 95% CI [0.043, 0.471], p = .019) with no evidence of publication bias. Gamification also exerted a positive and significant effect on the students’ perceptions of autonomy (Hedges’ g = 0.638, 95% CI [0.139, 1.136], p = .012) and relatedness (Hedges’ g = 1.776, 95% CI [0.737, 2.814], p = .001), but minimal impact on competence (Hedges’ g = 0.277, 95% CI [0.001, 0.553], p = .049). To further investigate the possible reasons for the small impact on intrinsic motivation, a systematic review of 31 studies was conducted. The findings revealed two major challenges encountered in the adoption of gamification to increase students’ intrinsic motivation: students’ lack of perceived competence and lack of perceived autonomy in gamified classes.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
游戏化增强了学生的内在动力、自主感和相关性,但对能力的影响微乎其微:荟萃分析和系统综述
尽管近年来有许多研究探讨了游戏化作为一种激励策略在教育中的应用,但有关其对内在动机影响的证据并不一致。为了证明在教育中采用游戏化的正确与否,本研究探讨了游戏化对学生内在动机的影响以及潜在的动机因素:感知能力、自主性和相关性。在这篇综述中,我们分析了2011年至2022年间发表的比较游戏化学习与非游戏化学习的研究结果。我们对 35 项独立干预措施(涉及 2500 名参与者)进行的荟萃分析结果表明,游戏化学习与非游戏化学习相比,总体效果显著,但影响较小(Hedges' g = 0.257, 95% CI [0.043, 0.471], p = .019),没有证据表明存在发表偏差。游戏化还对学生的自主感(Hedges' g = 0.638, 95% CI [0.139, 1.136],p = .012)和相关感(Hedges' g = 1.776, 95% CI [0.737, 2.814],p = .001)产生了积极而显著的影响,但对能力(Hedges' g = 0.277, 95% CI [0.001, 0.553],p = .049)的影响甚微。为了进一步研究对内在动机影响较小的可能原因,我们对 31 项研究进行了系统回顾。研究结果表明,在采用游戏化提高学生内在学习动机的过程中遇到了两大挑战:学生缺乏感知能力,以及在游戏化课堂中缺乏感知自主性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The effect of combining emphasis manipulation and simplifying conditions sequencing method in gaining expertise while utilizing whole task sequencing Education and technology: elements of a relevant, comprehensive, and cumulative research agenda Analyzing the impact of basic psychological needs on student academic performance: a comparison of post-pandemic interactive synchronous hyflex and pre-pandemic traditional face-to-face instruction Evidence-based development of an instrument for the assessment of teachers’ self-perceptions of their artificial intelligence competence DUDA: a digital didactic learning unit based on educational escape rooms and multisensory learning activities for primary school children during COVID-19 lockdown
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1