You are here:

Learning to be better at the game: Performance vs. completion contingent reward for game-based learning
ARTICLE

, , ,

Computers & Education Volume 139, Number 1, ISSN 0360-1315 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

Abstract

The difficulty of designing intrinsically integrated game-based learning systems has led to alternative design strategies based on extrinsic integration. This study extends prior work on extrinsic integration design by examining the effectiveness of alternative reward structures in integrating learning and game. Specifically, a performance-contingent reward is proposed as a new integration mechanism and its effects on learning, motivation, engagement, and system perception are assessed, vis-à-vis a completion-contingent reward. A group of university students (N = 64) were involved in an empirical experiment designed to determine the effectiveness of the new reward structure in the context of English vocabulary learning and arrow-shooting gaming. The results from the experiment show that the proposed reward structure produces a statistically significant increase in the level of learning, motivation, and engagement. The results are highly encouraging for game-based learning research as the proposed approach is easily extendable, with design implications that are widely applicable.

Citation

Park, J., Kim, S., Kim, A. & Yi, M.Y. (2019). Learning to be better at the game: Performance vs. completion contingent reward for game-based learning. Computers & Education, 139(1), 1-15. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved March 24, 2023 from .

This record was imported from Computers & Education on June 3, 2019. Computers & Education is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.016

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24, pp. 665-694.
  2. Ahuja, M.K., & Thatcher, J.B. (2005). Moving beyond intentions and toward the theory of trying: Effects of work environment and gender on post-adoption information technology use. MIS Quarterly, 29, pp. 427-459.
  3. Amabile, T.M. (1993). Motivational synergy: Toward new conceptualizations of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the workplace. Human Resource Management Review, 3, pp. 185-201. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(93)90012-S.
  4. Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1990). Trying to consume. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, pp. 127-140. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1086/208543.
  5. Braghirolli, L.F., Ribeiro, J.L.D., Weise, A.D., & Pizzolato, M. (2016). Benefits of educational games as an introductory activity in industrial engineering education. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, pp. 315-324. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.063.
  6. Brezovszky, B., McMullen, J., Veermans, K., Hannula-Sormunen, M.M., Rodrguez-Aflecht, G., & Pongsakdi, N. (2019). Effects of a mathematics game-based learning environment on primary school students' adaptive number knowledge. Computers & Education, 128, pp. 63-74.
  7. Cheng, M.T., Lin, Y.W., & She, H.C. (2015). Learning through playing virtual age: Exploring the interactions among student concept learning, gaming performance, in-game behaviors, and the use of in-game characters. Computers & Education, 86, pp. 18-29.
  8. Cheong, C., Cheong, F., & Filippou, J. (2013). Using design science research to incorporate gamification into learning activities. Pacific asia conference on information systems, p. 156.
  9. Cooper, S., Khatib, F., Treuille, A., Barbero, J., Lee, J., & Beenen, M. (2010). Predicting protein structures with a multiplayer online game. Nature, 466, pp. 756-760.
  10. Deci, E.L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R.M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125, pp. 627-668.
  11. Deci, E.L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R.M. (2001). Extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivation in education: Reconsidered once again. Review of Educational Research, 71, pp. 1-27.
  12. Derboven, J., Zaman, B., Vissers, J., Geerts, D., & De Grooff, D. (2015). The fun and the serious in an educational game: The monkey tales case. Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 2829-2832.
  13. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining ”gamification”. Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments, pp. 9-15. New York, NY, USA: ACM.
  14. Eseryel, D., Law, V., Ifenthaler, D., Ge1, X., & Miller, R. (2014). An investigation of the interrelationships between motivation, engagement, and complex problem solving in game-based learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17, pp. 42-53.
  15. Filsecker, M., & Hickey, D.T. (2014). A multilevel analysis of the effects of external rewards on elementary students' motivation, engagement and learning in an educational game. Computers & Education, 75, pp. 136-148.
  16. Fu, F.L., Su, R.C., & Yu, S.C. (2009). Egameflow: A scale to measure learners enjoyment of e-learning games. Computers & Education, 52, pp. 101-112.
  17. Glover, I. (2013). Play as you learn: Gamification as a technique for motivating learners. Proceedings of EdMedia 2013–world conference on educational media and technology, association for the advancement of computing in education (AACE), victoria, Canada, pp. 1999-2008.
  18. Gunter, G., Kenny, R.F., & Vick, E.H. (2006). A case for a formal design paradigm for serious games. The Journal of the International Digital Media and Arts Association, 3, pp. 93-105.
  19. Habgood, M.P.J., & Ainsworth, S.E. (2011). Motivating children to learn effectively: Exploring the value of intrinsic integration in educational games. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20, pp. 169-206.
  20. Hitt, D.D., Marriott, R.G., & Esser, J.K. (1992). Effects of delayed rewards and task interest on intrinsic motivation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13, pp. 405-414.
  21. Howard, J., & McInnes, K. (2012). The impact of children's perception of an activity as play rather than not play on emotional well- being. Child: Care, Health and Development, 39, pp. 737-742.
  22. Huang, B., & Hew, K.F. (2015). Do points, badges and leaderboard increase learning and activity: A quasi-experiment on the effects of gamification. Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on computers in education, asia-pacific society for computers in education, pp. 275-280.
  23. Hwang, G.J., Hsu, T.C., Lai, C.L., & Hsueh, C.J. (2017). Interaction of problem-based gaming and learning anxiety in language students' English listening performance and progressive behavioral patterns. Computers & Education, 106, pp. 26-42.
  24. Infante, C., Weitz, J., Reyes, T., Nussbaum, M., Gómez, F., & Radovic, D. (2010). Co-located collaborative learning video game with single display groupware. Interactive Learning Environments, 18, pp. 177-195.
  25. Ke, F. (2016). Designing and integrating purposeful learning in game play: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research & Development, 64, pp. 219-244.
  26. Kim, Y.J., & Shute, V.J. (2015). The interplay of game elements with psychometric qualities, learning, and enjoyment in game-based assessment. Computers & Education, 87, pp. 340-356.
  27. Linehan, C., Kirman, B., Lawson, S., & Chan, G. (2011). Practical, appropriate, empirically-validated guidelines for designing educational games. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp. 1979-1988. New York, NY, USA: ACM.
  28. Liu, D., Santhanam, R., & Webster, J. (2017). Towards meaningful engagement: A framework for design and research of gamified information systems. MIS Quarterly, 41, pp. 1011-1034.
  29. Lomas, D., Patel, K., Forlizzi, J.L., & Koedinger, K.R. (2013). Optimizing challenge in an educational game using large-scale design experiments. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp. 89-98. New York, NY, USA: ACM.
  30. McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. New York, NY, USA: Penguin.
  31. Mekler, E.D., Brühlmann, F., Opwis, K., & Tuch, A.N. (2013). Do points, levels and leaderboards harm intrinsic motivation?: An empirical analysis of common gamification elements. Proceedings of the first international conference on gameful design, research, and applications, pp. 66-73. New York, NY, USA: ACM.
  32. Meyer, B., & Sørensen, B.H. (2009). Designing serious games for computer assisted language learning – a framework for development and analysis. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
  33. Perry, D., Robinson, J., Cruz, S., Aragon, C., Chowning, J.T., & Peters, M. (2014). Game design for bioinformatics and cyberinfrastructure learning: A parallel computing case study. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 26, pp. 2303-2315.
  34. Plass, J.L., Homer, B.D., Hayward, E.O., Frye, J., Huang, T.T., & Biles, M. (2012). The effect of learning mechanics design on learning outcomes in a computer-based geometry game. E-learning and games for training, education, health and sports, pp. 65-71. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
  35. Preist, C., & Jones, R. (2015). The use of games as extrinisic motivation in education. Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, pp. 3735-3738. New York, NY, USA: ACM.
  36. Prensky, M. (2003). Digital game-based learning. ACM Computers in Entertainment, 1, pp. 21-23.
  37. Ronimus, M., Kujala, J., Tolvanen, A., & Lyytinen, H. (2014). Children's engagement during digital game-based learning of reading: The effects of time, rewards, and challenge. Computers & Education, 71, pp. 237-246. Available online: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131513002935.
  38. Ryan, R.M., & Connell, J.P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, pp. 749-761.
  39. Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, pp. 68-78.
  40. Salomon, G. (1984). Television is” easy” and print is” tough”: The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, pp. 647-658.
  41. Sandberg, J., Maris, M., & Hoogendoorn, P. (2014). The added value of a gaming context and intelligent adaptation for a mobile learning application for vocabulary learning. Computers & Education, 76, pp. 119-130.
  42. Santhanam, R., Liu, D., & Shen, W.C.M. (2016). Research notegamification of technology-mediated training: Not all competitions are the same. Information Systems Research, 27, pp. 453-465.
  43. Tobias, S., Fletcher, J.D., & Wind, A.P. (2014). Game-based learning. New York, NY: Springer New York.
  44. Tomaselli, F., Sanchez, O., & Brown, S. (2015). How to engage users through gamification: The prevalent effects of playing and mastering over competing. Proceedings of the 36th international conference on information systems.
  45. Van Eck, R. (2006). Digital game-based learning: It's not just the digital natives who are restless. Educause Review, 41, p. 16.
  46. Vandercruysse, S., Vandewaetere, M., Cornillie, F., & Clarebout, G. (2013). Competition and students' perceptions in a game-based language learning environment. Educational Technology Research & Development, 61, pp. 927-950.
  47. Zapata-Rivera, D., VanWinkle, W., Doyle, B., Buteux, A., & Bauer, M. (2009). Combining learning and assessment in assessment-based gaming environments: A case study from a New York city school. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 6, pp. 173-188.
  48. Zhonggen, Y. (2018). Differences in serious game-aided and traditional English vocabulary acquisition. Computers & Education, 127, pp. 214-232.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References