literature review in games and learning

Systematic Literature Review of Game-Based Learning: Objectives, Methods, Applications, Measurement Parameters, and Types of Games

Ieee account.

• Change Username/Password
• Update Address

Purchase Details

• Payment Options
• Order History
• View Purchased Documents

Profile Information

• Communications Preferences
• Profession and Education
• Technical Interests
• US & Canada: +1 800 678 4333
• Worldwide: +1 732 981 0060
• Contact & Support
• About IEEE Xplore
• Accessibility
• Terms of Use
• Nondiscrimination Policy
• Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. © Copyright 2024 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.

• Review article
• Open access
• Published: 10 July 2017

The effect of games and simulations on higher education: a systematic literature review

• Dimitrios Vlachopoulos 1 &
• Agoritsa Makri 2  

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education volume  14 , Article number:  22 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

405k Accesses

297 Citations

41 Altmetric

Metrics details

The focus of higher education institutions is the preparation of future professionals. To achieve this aim, innovative teaching methods are often deployed, including games and simulations, which form the subject of this paper. As the field of digital games and simulations is ever maturing, this paper attempts to systematically review the literature relevant to games and simulation pedagogy in higher education. Two researchers collaborate to apply a qualitative method, coding and synthesizing the results using multiple criteria. The main objective is to study the impact of games and simulations with regard to achieving specific learning objectives. On balance, results indicate that games and/or simulations have a positive impact on learning goals. The researchers identify three learning outcomes when integrating games into the learning process: cognitive, behavioural, and affective. As a final step, the authors consolidate evidence for the benefit of academics and practitioners in higher education interested in the efficient use of games and simulations for pedagogical purposes. Such evidence also provides potential options and pathways for future research.

Introduction

As rapidly evolving technological applications, games and simulations are already widely integrated in the traditional educational process. They are deployed extensively in the field of education, with an existing body of work examining the relation between games and education (Yang, Chen, & Jeng, 2010 ; Chiang, Lin, Cheng, & Liu, 2011 ). In recent years, digital or web-based games have increasingly supported learning. In the context of online education, this research area attracts a significant amount of interest from the scientific and educational community, for example tutors, students and game designers. With the growing expansion of technology, instructors and those who create educational policy are interested in introducing innovative technological tools, such as video games, virtual worlds, and Massive Multi-Player Online Games (MMPOGs) (Buckless, 2014 ; Gómez, 2014 ).

Games and simulations show mixed effects across a number of sectors, such as student performance, engagement, and learning motivation. However, as these studies focus only on certain disciplines, there remains a gap in the literature concerning a clear framework of use across academic programmes. As a result, the issue of efficiently integrating games and simulations in the educational process is often up to the instructor’s discretion. Accordingly, the aim of this paper is to develop a framework to allow educators across disciplines to better understand the advantages and draw backs of games and simulations specific to their pedagogical goals.

Rationale of the study

The researchers set out to examine the effectiveness of games and simulations in the learning experience, and immediately encounter the first challenge, which relates to a lack of clear empirical evidence on the issue (Farrington, 2011 ). The scientific field is too extensive and requires further investigation. Furthermore, there is currently no formal policy framework or guidelines recommended by governments or educational institutions on the adoption of games and simulations in education. This is the case for many countries in Europe, the US, and Australia, where it is the responsibility of the instructor or institution to incorporate games into the curriculum.

The main motivation for the current review lies in the fact that games are already, to a certain degree, integrated into educational systems to achieve a variety of learning outcomes (Connolly, 2012 ), yet a comprehensive policy is still lacking. In this paper, the first step was an attempt to conceptualize the terms “game” and “simulations”. Although the two terms are neither wholly synonymous, or completely differentiated, in the main body of this review, the focus will be on lumping them together and perceiving them as points across a multidimensional continuum (Aldrich, 2009 ; Renken, 2016 ), since these educational technologies are consolidated under the umbrella of an interactive virtual environment in digital education.

A primary aim is to identify studies concentrating on the use of games and simulations for learning purposes, and to analyse the results by comparing them to prior studies’ findings. Two research questions guide the review analysis: a) How can the best practices/methods for designing and incorporating games and simulations in student learning be identified? b) How can games/simulations enhance Higher Education?

The major difference between the current review and the previous reviews in the field is the conceptualization of the terms “games and simulations”, which acts as an umbrella for further typologies. In other words, the researchers include more genres of games and simulations in their systematic review, compared to the other literature reviews. In addition, the researchers’ intention is to focus on the impacts of games and simulations on learning outcomes. The researchers don’t focus only on the cognitive outcomes, which is the most obvious and common topic among other researchers but, simultaneously, they analyze behavioural and affective effects as well. Furthermore, most of the previous reviews focus on the impacts of games and simulations on the learning process of certain subjects (e.g. Science, Business, Nursing, etc.), whereas this study expands research in a wide spectrum of academic disciplines and subjects. Overall, the current study offers a systematic review that opens new areas for further discussion, highlighting that collaborative learning, teamwork and students’ engagement also play a significant role for a successful learning process.

Conceptualising games and simulations

In recent years, the interest in examining game use in higher education has increased. This includes educational games (Çankaya & Karamete, 2009 ), digital game-based learning (DGBL) (Yang, 2012 ), and applied games (van Roessel & van Mastrigt-Ide, 2011 ). In addition, scholars, sometimes, include interactive exercises (Mueller, 2003 ), video games (Biddiss & Irwin, 2010 ), or even expand to next generation video games (Bausch, 2008 ), in the category of games. With respect to web-based games, the technological platforms that implement digital game code include computers and consoles (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004 ). They can run on a web browser on mobile phones and other mobile gaming devices (Willoughby, 2008 ) (e.g., tablets).

Despite the abundance of game types, there is a lack of clear, shared definitions and terminology among scholars and educators, which has led to “terminological ambiguity” (Klabbers, 2009 ). Nevertheless, the need for shared terminology remains when discussing the different forms of games and simulations in higher education. Although academics and game developers may use varying taxonomy to categorise games, the majority broadly agree on the following seven genres (Gros, 2007 ):

Action games: response-based video games.

Adventure games: the player solves problems to progress through levels within a virtual world.

Fighting games: these involve fighting with computer-controlled characters or those controlled by other players.

Role-playing games: players assume the roles of fictional characters.

Simulations: games modelled after natural or man-made systems or phenomena, in which players have to achieve pre-specified goals.

Sports games: these are based on different kinds of sports.

Strategy games: these recreate historical scenes or fictional scenarios, in which players must devise an appropriate strategy to achieve the goal.

In recent years, several well-designed empirical studies investigating the effects of serious games on learning outcomes have been published. Sawyer refers to serious games as those games produced by the video game industry that have a substantial connection to the acquisition of knowledge (Sawyer, 2002 ). Zyda ( 2005 ) expands Sawyer’s definition, adding that serious games are games whose primary purpose is not entertainment, enjoyment or fun. Serious games, educational gaming, as well as virtual worlds developed for educational purposes reveal the potential of these technologies to engage and motivate beyond leisure activities (Anderson et al., 2009 ). At the same time, there is extensive literature exploring the potential learning benefits offered by game-based learning (GBL), which can be defined as the use of game-based technology to deliver, support, and enhance teaching, learning, assessment, and evaluation (Connolly, 2007 ).

• Simulations

Simulations create a scenario-based environment, where students interact to apply previous knowledge and practical skills to real-world problems, also allowing teachers to reach their own goals, as well (Andreu-Andrés & García-Casas, 2011 ; García-Carbonell & Watts, 2012 ; Angelini, 2015 ). During scenario-based training, the player acquires important skills, such as interpersonal communication, teamwork, leadership, decision-making, task prioritising and stress management (Flanagan, 2004 ). The practical scenario may be carried out individually or within a team (Robertson et al., 2009 ), leading to collaboration and knowledge sharing.

With the explosion of Web 2.0 technology, increased opportunities to engage with technological applications in a collaborative and participatory way have emerged, promoting information access, shared ideas, knowledge exchange, and content production (McLoughlin & Lee, 2008 ). Digital simulations, which engage students in the interactive, authentic, and self-driven acquisition of knowledge, are being adopted in higher education. Connolly and Stansfield ( 2006 ) define game-based e-learning as a digital approach which delivers, supports, and enhances teaching, learning, assessment, and evaluation. Game-based e-learning is differentiated from GBL, which tends to cover both computer and non-computer games.

Delivery platforms are an essential aspect for game designers when creating and distributing games and simulations (e.g. computer, video, online, mobile, 3D, etc.). Designers must pay attention to characteristics such as the technical challenges, modules and techniques associated with the game design, the players involved in gaming, and the teaching modes (e.g. single, multi-player, collaborative, synchronous, etc.). This study examines the diverse curricular areas and learning objectives each game intends to access. The above-mentioned game classification is presented below (Fig. 1 ).

Classification of games and simulations

The main difference between games and simulations is the following: games are tools which are artificial and pedagogical; they include conflict, rules, and predetermined goals, whereas simulations are dynamic tools, representing reality, claiming fidelity, accuracy, and validity (Sauve, 2007 ).

Previously conducted reviews/meta-analyses on games and simulations in higher education

To establish a context , the researchers, initially, examined the relevant literature on the effectiveness of all types of games and simulations in learning outcomes. Many papers are analysed and summarised as follows, providing useful guidance for this study.

Through their systematic review, Tsekleves et al. ( 2014 ) provide insight into the barriers and benefits of using serious games in education. (Regarding benefits, the authors catalogue: achievement and rewards, interactivity and feedback, motivation and competition, playfulness and problem-based learning, collaborative learning, progression and repetition, as well as realism and immersion. Finally, they propose some guidelines to help stakeholders better implement serious games in education. Similarly, Bellotti, ( 2013 ) suggest useful guidelines for the performance assessment of serious games. Following user performance assessments, they offer an overview on the effectiveness of serious games in relation to learning outcomes. Results reveal the effectiveness of serious games in motivating and achieving learning goals, the importance of providing appropriate user feedback, while emphasizing that new types of games are best deployed through proper instructor guidance. Moreover, they stress aspects they consider important, such as performance assessment with a view to fostering adaptivity, as well as personalisation, and meeting needs on an individual basis (e.g. learning styles, information provision rates, feedback, etc.).

The instructor’s role is also outlined by Lameras et al. ( 2016 ) who provide conceptual and empirical evidence on the manner in which learning attributes and game mechanics should be designed and incorporated by faculty, specifically with a view to fully integrate these into lesson plans and the learning process as a whole. Games allow practitioners to quickly come to grips with the way in which learning activities, outcomes, feedback and roles may vary, as well as to enhance the in-game learning experience. Similarly, the systematic review of 64 articles by de Smale, ( 2015 ) concludes that there is a positive or neutral relationship between the use of simulations and games and learning achievement. The researchers arrive at three recurring conditions for the successful use of simulations and games: the specificity of the game, its integration in the course, and the role of a guiding instructor, which are all conditions in line with Bellotti et al. ( 2013 )‘s results.

Young et al. ( 2012 ) choose 39 articles that meet the inclusion criteria related to video games and academic achievement, concentrating on the use of traditional games versus video games for educational purposes. The studies are categorised by subject, namely History, Mathematics, Physical Education, Science, and Languages. Results indicate that there exists limited evidence of the benefits of including education games in the traditional classroom environments, a finding which is contrary to the aforementioned studies. Smetana and Bell ( 2012 ) examine computer simulations to support instruction and learning in Science. In their comparative study between computer games and traditional games, they conclude that computer games can be as effective, if not more so, than traditional games in promoting knowledge, developing procedural skills and facilitating conceptual change. To integrate them properly as supplementary elements (Rajan, 2013 ), games require the adoption of high-quality support structures, student participation, as well the promotion of cognitive and metacognitive skills. This finding contradicts the study carried out by Girard, ( 2013 ). This study treats video games as serious games but considers their effectiveness as a controversial issue, finding that only few games result in improved learning, while others have no positive effect on knowledge and skills acquisition, when compared to more traditional methods of teaching.

In contrast, in their meta-analysis, Clark et al. ( 2015 ) systematically review articles to study the detailed effects of digital games on learning outcomes, concluding that games are important in supporting productive learning and highlighting the significant role of gaming design beyond its medium. Prior to this review, but running along the same lines, Backlund and Hendrix ( 2013 ), in their meta-analysis reported positive outcomes in learning when using serious games in the educational process. Wouters, ( 2013 ) performing meta-analytic techniques, used comparisons as well, to investigate whether serious games are more effective and more motivating than conventional instructional methods. They found higher effectiveness in terms of learning and retention, but less motivation compared to traditional instructional methods. Indeed, serious games tend to be more effective if regarded as a supplement to other instructional methods, and involve students in groups and multiple training sessions.

These findings are compatible with those in the survey conducted by Rutten, ( 2012 ), which focuses on implementing games as laboratory activities, concluding that simulations have gained a prominent position in classrooms by enhancing the teacher’s repertoire, either as a supplement to traditional teaching methods or as a partial replacement of the curriculum. Nevertheless, they stress that the acquisition of laboratory skills cannot be wholly conducted via simulations. However, in areas where simulations have been widely accepted as a training tool, simulations can play a significant role in making lab activities more effective when offered as pre-lab training. Fu, ( 2016 ), through a systematic literature review, identify the multi-dimensional positive impact of serious games in business education, with the most frequent outcomes being knowledge acquisition and content understanding. The study also confirms that GBL and serious games can influence player engagement, perpetual and cognitive skills and social or soft skills. The affective and motivational outcomes are examined in entertainment games, games for learning and serious games, which reflects the trend of using gaming elements as both a medium of entertainment as well as a mode of learning. Ritzhaupt, ( 2014 ) produce meta-analysis based on 73 articles, demonstrating that achievement measures (e.g., standardised test scores) are the most commonly investigated, while the second most frequent is affective measures (e.g., usability or attitudes towards technology) followed by behavioural measures (e.g., task behaviour).

Merchant, ( 2014 ), via a meta-analysis, compare the effectiveness of games, simulations and virtual worlds in improving learning outcomes. Findings indicate that playing games individually enhance student performance more than playing collaboratively. Nonetheless, the researchers claim that there is no statistically significant difference between the effects of individual and cooperative instructional modules regarding simulations. Student learning outcomes deteriorate after repeated measures, since after spending a certain amount of time playing games, the learning outcome gains start to diminish. On the contrary, Shin, ( 2015 ), through meta-analysis, aim to identify the effects of patient simulation in nursing education. They find significant post-intervention improvements in various domains for participants who receive simulation education compared to the control groups, thus leading to the conclusion that simulations are more effective than traditional learning methods, enhancing the player’s psychomotor, affective, and cognitive skills. In their work, simulations provide students with authentic clinical situations, allowing them to practice and experience in realistic and safe environments.

Connolly et al. ( 2012 ) develop a multi-dimensional approach to categorising games and offer a review of 129 papers on computer games and serious games, explicitly targeting cognitive, behavioural, affective and motivational impacts, as well as engagement. The most frequent outcomes are knowledge acquisition and content understanding, as well as affective and motivational outcomes. Gegenfurtner, ( 2014 ) in their meta-analysis of the cognitive domain, examine how design elements in simulation-based settings affect self-efficacy and transfer of learning. They conclude that gathering feedback post-training, as opposed to during the process, results in higher estimates of self-efficacy and transfer of learning.

Researchers also look at games and simulations from a theoretical perspective. Li and Tsai ( 2013 ), examine the theoretical background and models employed in the study of games and simulations. They focus principally on the theories of cognitivism, constructivism, enactivism, and the socio-cultural perspective. Results indicate that although cognitivism and constructivism are the major theoretical foundations employed by game-based science learning researchers, enactivism and the socio-cultural perspective are the emerging theoretical paradigms drawing increasing attention in this field. This literature review indicates an increasing recognition of the effectiveness of digital games in promoting scientific knowledge and concept learning, while giving lesser importance to facilitation of problem-solving skills, exploring outcomes from the viewpoint of scientific processes, affect, engagement and socio-contextual learning. This view is echoed by other researchers, such as Warren, ( 2016 ), who systematically review and demonstrate the effectiveness of simulation games on satisfaction, knowledge, attitudes, skills and learning outcomes within nurse practitioner programmes. After comparing online simulation-based learning with traditional lectures, they find an increase in student knowledge and confidence when using simulation games. Peterson ( 2010 ) also performs a meta-analysis, examining the use of computerised games and simulations in language education from a psycholinguistic and socio-cultural viewpoint. Results show valuable opportunities for effective language learning, confirming that games are beneficial in helping students learn another language.

Sitzmann ( 2011 ), using interactive cognitive complexity theory, offers a comparative review on the instructional effectiveness of computer simulations. To perform the review, she examines three affective outcomes (motivation, effort, and self-efficacy), one behavioural (effort), two cognitive (declarative knowledge and retention), and two skill-based learning outcomes (procedural knowledge and transfer). She concludes that, post-training, simulation-trained learners demonstrate higher self-efficacy and procedural knowledge. Furthermore, she highlights the significance of using specific methods to improve simulation learning, namely, integration of game use within an instructional programme, high level of learner activity, no gaming time limit, and adopting the simulation game as a supplement to other methods, which is inconsistent with Wouters et al.’s survey ( 2013 ). Hsu et al. ( 2012 ) provide a cross-analysed content analysis agreeing with the previous researchers that topics such as “Motivation, Perceptions and Attitudes” are of utmost importance.

In a recent review of business literature, Carenys and Moya ( 2016 ) discuss the impact of digital game-based learning (DGBL) on students. They examine DGBL both from a theoretical point of view and on a practical basis through three stages: a) the evaluation of digital games in the preparatory stage, b) specifying which research has been deemed appropriate for DGBL deployment, and c) the learning outcomes (cognitive, behavioural, affective, and multi-dimensional) that can be attained through digital games. This study moved current research forward in understanding the effectiveness of digital games and advanced the use of digital games in the classroom.

A variety of meta-analyses and systematic reviews have examined the implementation of games and simulations in the learning process, either as a main course element or as a supplement to conventional lectures, illustrating the ever increasing interest of researchers in this promising field.

Synthesis of previous reviews/meta-analyses

After studying the previous reviews, it is evident that the most commonly referred games in past reviews are digital and computerized games (Sitzmann, 2011 ; Young et al., 2012 ; Smetana & Bell, 2012 ; Girard et al., 2013 ; Merchant et al., 2014 ; Clark et al., 2015 ; Carenys & Moya, 2016 ; Warren et al., 2016 ). The technological revolution and the invasion of Internet in Higher Education urge students to build digital and collaborative skills for the twenty-first century through gaming. Also, the emergence of a participatory culture in education spurs researchers to get involved with digital games and simulations. Other games mentioned are serious games and their impact on the learning process (Connolly et al., 2012 ; Bellotti et al., 2013 ; Backlund & Hendrix, 2013 ; Wouters et al., 2013 ; Tsekleves et al., 2014 ; Fu et al., 2016 ). The researchers refer to serious games since they are basically considered as games with educational orientation and not with just entertaining ones.

Another important element we have identified is whether games should be fully or partially integrated into the learning process. Most of the researchers agree that games should be treated mainly as supplementary elements (Sitzmann, 2011 ) since full integration requires high-quality mechanisms, students’ engagement, and instructors’ support. In other cases, the integration of games in the curriculum could either function as a supplement to existing teaching techniques or as a partial substitute for traditional teaching methods (Rutten et al., 2012 ). Moreover, games could even be fully integrated for achieving better learning outcomes (Lameras et al., 2016 ) because games add diversity in educational teaching modules. Nevertheless, the integration of games depends on instructors’ contribution and the way they design and incorporate games in their teaching. This means that instructors should be equipped with knowledge and experience, and be aware of providing guidance to students as regards the proper way of playing games.

The beneficial contribution of game-based learning is broadly identified by the majority of previous reviewers, especially regarding cognitive outcomes. Results indicate that games can be as effective as traditional learning modes, revealing their effectiveness in promoting knowledge acquisition (Smetana & Bell, 2012 ; Backlund & Hendrix, 2013 ; Clark et al., 2015 ; Warren et al., 2016 ), as well as content understanding and concept learning (Connoly et al., 2012 ; Li & Tsai, 2013 ; Fu et al., 2016 ). Additionally, students achieve their learning goals through playfulness and problem-based learning (Tsekleves et al., 2014 ), thus leading to self-efficacy and transfer of learning (Gegenfurtner et al., 2014 ).

Another substantial impact emerged is the effectiveness of games not only in the cognitive domain but also in the affective and behavioural domains (Ritzhaupt et al., 2014 ; Shin et al., 2015 ; Tsekleves et al., 2014 ; Fu et al., 2016 ; Carenys & Moya, 2016 ). The affective domain is thoroughly discussed by the reviewers. In particular, games influence students’ motivation, engagement, and satisfaction of the game-based learning. Regarding behavioural outcomes, few reviews have been conducted, showing that games offer a plethora of opportunities for collaborative learning, enhance interactivity and feedback among players, and develop social and soft skills as well. Some other studies contradict these findings, in a way that they do not reveal positive effects of games (Young et al., 2012 ; Girard et al., 2013 ; Merchant et al., 2014 ), or reveal a rather neutral effect (de Smale et al., 2015 ). In these reviews, games and simulations appear to have some or no positive effects on knowledge and skills acquisition when comparing with traditional instructional methods.

Research method

Research selection.

The authors developed a pre-defined review protocol to answer the research questions, specifically aimed at minimising researcher bias. The literature review was carried out between July and October 2016 and followed the design stages described below.

The reviewed papers are identified through keywords in referenced electronic databases, such as Google Scholar, Web of Science, ERIC, PsycInfo, PsycArticles Fulltext Search, InterDok, ProQuest, Scopus, BEI, and SearchPlus. The keywords for learning outcomes are a combination of the term games or simulations paired with the term higher education , employing the Boolean operator “AND”. Additional keywords for learning outcomes are learning objectives, learning goals, learning objectives and effects . Keywords for platform and delivery methods include computer-based, web-based, digital, virtual, online, and technology. Keywords for games and simulations are educational games, business simulations, role-playing simulations, game-based learning, video games, and serious games . Moreover, the Boolean operator “OR” is employed to combine all these keywords. The study sets the broadest range of keywords, so as not to limit the scope of related articles.

Furthermore, the researchers conducted a comprehensive database search in bibliographic indices for the data selection. The search is related to a variety of scientific fields of study, including Education, Psychology, Information Technology, Management, and other scientific areas (e.g., Engineering, STEM, Health, etc).

Assessment and extraction

The dataset consists of journal articles referring to games, simulations or learning in their title and/or abstract. The researchers piloted and evaluated their selection criteria based on prior studies. The study selection process was conducted in two separate phases: a) the researchers, working independently, initially, and, subsequently, together, screened the titles and abstracts for inclusion criteria, and b) in the event of disagreement or insufficient information, they carried out a thorough consideration of the body of the articles (i.e. methodology and results), again independently, first, and, then, together, resulting in consensus. Then, whether to include the text or not was discussed, based on pre-determined criteria. The inclusion criteria used are as follows:

Only empirical articles across a variety of study designs may be included, so as to achieve rich data.

The participants should be over the age of 18 (e.g., students in higher education, college students, instructors, etc.)

Articles that provide an evaluation of student learning outcomes (via the use of games for pedagogical purposes) may also be included.

The resources should, mainly, consist of journal articles and conference papers, which, due to the peer review process, ensure a high quality of material to examine. Existing meta-analysis and systematic literature reviews should be included as well, in order to cross-validate the review findings.

The articles should be available in either English or French.

The articles should adhere to the objective of the study and the definition of the terms games and simulations as pedagogical applications.

Studies containing samples from higher education institutions should also be included. Conversely, research on the effects of games in primary or secondary education should be discarded.

The review should include games and simulations used in traditional, as well as in online environments.

Only peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2010 and 2016 should be included, as the intention is to include the most current research.

Several exclusion criteria, listed below, were also applied in this study:

Non-empirical studies or studies which solely describe the design of a learning environment.

Participants who are younger than 18 years old.

Non-GBL tools and entertainment games.

Book chapters -not only are books difficult to search for on databases, they are, also, hard to access as full texts. Additionally, books are not always subject to the same peer review process as scientific articles. Dissertations, theses, editorials, book reviews and reports are also excluded for similar reasons.

Articles that cannot be accessed as full texts are excluded.

Articles that do not match the research objectives.

Research focused on types of education other than higher education.

As mentioned above, articles published before 2010.

The following figure illustrates the inclusion and exclusion criteria (Fig. 2 ):

The inclusion and exclusion criteria

Application of these criteria resulted in an initial dataset, yielding 8859 studies, published between 2010 and 2016. The selected papers are derived from 67 academic journals representing a variety of disciplines. Most papers come from the scientific journal “Computers & Education”, while “British Journal of Educational Technology”, and “Simulation & Gaming” were the next two journals appearing with the most frequency. In the final stage, several meetings were organized between researchers to discuss the findings, and to decide on presentation.

The results show a steady increase in published papers discussing games from 2012 onwards. After systematically reviewing their abstracts, a final shortlist of 628 potential full text articles emerged. Two hundred and seventeen out of the 628 were excluded, primarily, due to undesirable focus (e.g. theoretical scenarios for using simulations in education). For each of the remaining 411 studies, the researchers identified and recorded some basic themes, for example, types of learning outcomes, effect or impact of game and simulation methods on learning goals, participants and settings, research questions, research methodology and results. Of these, 123 papers, which are found to contribute data, are selected for the review, whereas the remaining 288 articles are excluded, due to the fact that they are written in a language that the researchers do not understand, or because they are focused on a field other than higher education. The majority of these articles are published in scientific journals or conference proceedings, whereas 25 studies are either meta-analyses and/or systematic reviews. An outline of the entire review is depicted in the following figure (Fig. 3 ):

Research review methodological scheme

Data analysis and synthesis

The identified articles are analysed using a qualitative content analysis technique, which leads to a coding scheme, including a main category, three sub-categories and several associated topics related to the main categories. The researchers unanimously agree upon the coding that emerged from the analysis of the reviewed papers. To ensure inter-rater reliability (p) with respect to the quality of article coding procedures, a small random sample ( n  = 20) of the selected articles is coded in duplicate. The calculated reliability exceeds 93%, which is a high quality of agreement across coding categories. Furthermore, a review of mixed-methodology studies provides high-quality evidence, due to a combination of quantitative and qualitative elements in terms of methodological triangulation.

The researchers examined the studies from varying viewpoints. Firstly, they analysed the data set characteristics, such as the continent on which the studies are conducted, the subject discipline, the methodological research design, the types of games and simulations identified, and the time period in which the majority of the studies took place. The emphasis is on the analysis, measures, and design of the quantitative methodology (experimental, quasi-experimental, pre-test, post-test surveys, etc.), as well as the qualitative methods used in the reviewed surveys.

To sum up, the review studies are selected through a systematic process with pre-arranged criteria. There is no intended bias applied to the selected studies, and although the majority of studies come from Europe, this is simply the result of the systematic selection process.

Data set characteristics

When analysing the data, the researchers came across some interesting characteristics. Other than the meta-analytic studies and review research, the locations of the remaining surveys are as follows: 33% conducted in Europe, 22% in Asia, and 18% in the USA, whereas 24% of the articles do not directly mention a location (Fig. 4 ). Most of the articles come from the USA, the UK, and the Netherlands.

Continets where studies are conducted

With respect to genre, there is a diverse representation of games and simulations. The most prominent game genre identified in the relevant literature seems to be simulation games in general, that is to say, virtual/online games or simulations, computer-based learning, role-playing games, serious games, and business simulation games. This representation is illustrated below (Fig. 5 ):

Representation of the game genres

With respect to the busiest publication period, the majority of studies that meet the inclusion criteria were published between 2013 and 2016, as shown in the following bar chart (Fig. 6 ). This finding demonstrates a notable trend amongst researchers discussing the topic of games and simulations in recent years, due to increased awareness of the use of technological games in higher education.

Years of published articles

The data also represents a wide range of subject areas. Some cover multiple areas, for example Engineering, Management, Science, Law, Social Sciences and Humanities (Tao et al., 2015 ), or even just two areas, such as Biology and Computer Sciences (Yang & Chang, 2013 ), while others refer to only one academic discipline. The subject areas are sorted into larger categories, with the most common area being Business Management and Marketing. The results are shown in the figure below (Fig. 7 ):

Subject disciplene

The reviewed articles include data from 99 samples and 20,406 participants, which is a considerably large grouping. The population tested in the literature review ranges from 5 participants in small qualitative studies (Ke et al., 2015 ) to 5071 participants in extensive quantitative quasi-experimental research (Lu et al., 2014 ). Most of the participants are young undergraduate, graduate or post-graduate students, and faculty members. The studies consistently indicate a good gender balance in participants. In some studies, there is both student and faculty participation (Kapralos et al., 2011 ; Felicia, 2011 ; Hess & Gunter, 2013 ; Hämäläinen & Oksanen, 2014 ; Beuk, 2015 ; Crocco, 2016 ), whereas in others, only instructors are chosen as participants (Tanner, 2012 ; Badea, 2015 ; Franciosi, 2016 ). On the whole, most studies use students as participants.

Procedures and research methodologies

Most studies use either an experimental or a quasi-experimental design employing a pre-test and/or a post-test evaluation, with four using only a pre-test questionnaire, and six using only post-test evaluations. The effects of games and simulations on learning outcomes are measured through calculating the difference between pre-test and post-test scores of the experimental or quasi-experimental design. More specifically, the researchers compare the increases in scores between control and experimental groups to evaluate the effectiveness of using the tested games and simulations. The studies include longitudinal surveys (e.g. Hainey, 2011 ) conducted for a specified number of years, whereas others are comparative studies (e.g., Boeker, 2013 ; Poikela, 2015 ).

Researchers use quantitative methods in the majority of studies (68.6%), while13.1% use qualitative methodology. Some studies follow a mixed research methodology (nearly 18.2%), providing pragmatic perceptions and methodological triangulation of the results. The measures utilized in quantitative studies include knowledge questionnaires, as well as academic, evaluation, and cognitive tests, while in qualitative studies the methods used include interviews, case studies, observations and focus groups.

The studies portray a variety of time periods spent playing games and simulations: some of the participants interact with games over a single session, while others are involved in the gaming process for several weeks or even months (e.g., Yang & Chang, 2013 ; Woo, 2014 ). The studies include multi-player games (e.g., Silvia, 2012 ; Yin, 2013 ), as well as single-player games.

Learning outcomes of games and simulations

In the present review, keeping in mind the aforementioned research questions (p.3), the researchers break down their findings in relation to the learning outcomes of games and simulations into three categories, namely cognitive, behavioural, and affective outcomes. A map of the emerging concepts, which will be further discussed, is illustrated below (Fig. 8 ):

Learning outcomes of Games/Simulations

Cognitive outcomes

Many reviewed studies discuss the impact of GBL activities in learner knowledge acquisition and conceptual understanding (Hainey et al., 2011 ; Connolly et al., 2012 ; Fu et al., 2016 ; Geithner & Menzel, 2016 ). There has been an impact evaluation across subject disciplines, such as Computer Science (Strycker, 2016 ), Engineering (Chaves et al., 2015 ), Physics (Adams, 2016 ), Medicine (Dankbaar, 2016 ), Nursing (Sarabia-Cobo, 2016 ), Management (Geithner & Menzel, 2016 ), Political Sciences (Jones & Bursens, 2015 ), Education (Ke, 2015 ), Languages (Franciosi, 2016 ), and Social Sciences (Cózar-Gutiérrez & Sáez-López, 2016 ).

Knowledge acquisition

Cognitive outcomes refer “to the knowledge structures relevant to perceiving games as artefacts for linking knowledge-oriented activities with cognitive outcomes” (Lameras et al., 2016 , p. 10). Tasks framed as games and simulations are deployed to develop a diverse range of cognitive skills, such as deep learning (Vos & Brennan, 2010 ; Young et al., 2012 ; Erhel & Jamet, 2013 ; Crocco et al., 2016 ), critical thinking and scientific reasoning (Beckem & Watkins, 2012 ; Halpern et al., 2012 ; Ahmad, 2013 ), action-directed learning (Lu et al., 2014 ), transformative learning (Kleinheskel, 2014 ), decision-making (Tiwari, 2014 ), knowledge acquisition and content understanding (Terzidou, 2012 ; Elias, 2014 ; Fu et al., 2016 ), spatial abilities (Adams et al., 2016 ), and problem solving (Liu, 2011 ; Lancaster, 2014 ).

The effect of games and simulations on learning remains a controversial issue amongst researchers in the field, as it will be further confirmed in this article. Some reviewed studies indicate improved learning, while others show no positive effect on knowledge and skill acquisition compared to traditional learning methods. The value of simulations can be examined from the perspective of content change as discussed in Kovalic and Kuo’s study ( 2012 ). Simulations are directly linked to the course content and students are given the opportunity to apply and better understand theoretical concepts. Additionally, simulations provide an environment in which students can experiment with different strategies, adopt different roles, and take charge of their own decisions by assuming responsibility. The latter issue is discussed at length by Liu et al. ( 2011 ), who find that, when solving problems, students are more likely to learn via playing a game than via a traditional learning experience.

Serious gaming, especially given the context of enthusiastic students, has proved to be an effective training method in domains such as medical education, for example, in clinical decision-making and patient interaction (de Wit-Zuurendonk & Oei, 2011 ). Similarly, Kleinheskel ( 2014 ) illustrates the importance of designing self-reflective simulating activities for nursing students, and aligning such design with cognitive outcomes. When students self-reflect on simulated clinical experiences, they add to their existing knowledge, and apply new knowledge to transformative learning. Poikela et al. ( 2015 ), in a simulated nursing procedure, compare a computer-based simulation with a lecture to examine the meaningful learning students may achieve via the two teaching methods. They conclude that students who participate in the computer simulation are more likely to report meaningful learning outcomes than those taking the lecture, due to the strong presence of reflection-based activities and metacognitive themes. Similar results are present in Chen, ( 2015 ), survey in which both solitary players and collaborative groups achieve equally positive learning outcomes in a game. Students significantly improve judging by their pre- and post-test assessments, which indicates that the gaming experience affects their overall performance, and, most likely, promotes conceptual understanding. Moreover, collaborative GBL allows students to re-construct and co-construct knowledge, thus encouraging problem-solving through peer discussion.

Challenging games enhance participant performance (Wang & Chen, 2010 ; Gold, 2016 ). This finding is supported by von Wangenheim, ( 2012 ), who analyse the cognitive dimension of an educational game focusing on memory, understanding and conceptual application. The validity of micro-simulation games is identified by participants in Lukosch, ( 2016 ), research who evaluate a specific microgame as an excellent instrument for enhancing situated and experiential learning by transferring knowledge to an actual situation at the workplace. The results comply with those of Riemer and Schrader ( 2015 ), where the application of comprehension and transfer of knowledge are best achieved using simulations.

Furthermore, the impact of game-based learning on learning performance has been observed by numerous researchers across diverse subjects, as reported above (Zacharia & Olympiou, 2011 ; Rutten et al., 2012 ; Beckem & Watkins, 2012 ; Boeker et al., 2013 ; Shin et al., 2015 ; Hou, 2015 ; Chen et al., 2015 ; Tao et al., 2015 ). For instance, Divjak and Tomić ( 2011 ) provide evidence that computer games impact mathematical learning, revealing the positive effect of games on student learning outcomes. Reviews by Young et al. ( 2012 ) confirm the effectiveness of using videogames on History, Languages, and Physical Education. The analysis of four experimental virtual conditions in pre- and post-test assessments reveal that virtual experimentation promotes conceptual understanding in Physics students (Zacharia & Olympiou, 2011 ). A 3D visualisation and simulation laboratory activity on protein structure is more effective than traditional instruction modules, as described in White, ( 2010 ), research resulting in students preferring to work with visualized simulations.

Simulation games also positively affect clinical practice situations. “The Ward”, a simulation game in Stanley and Latimer’s ( 2011 ) research proves to be an enjoyable and valuable learning tool in addressing clinical skill practice, nursing practice knowledge, critical thinking and decision-making. Vos and Brennan ( 2010 ) highlight the effectiveness of marketing simulation games, where students perceive simulations as an enjoyable learning approach, contributing to decision-making, as well as other valuable knowledge and skills, a finding consistent with Tiwari et al. ( 2014 ) survey. Swanson et al. ( 2011 ) created a rubric to measure the effectiveness of teaching strategies in nursing education. The experimental post-test assessment survey aims to evaluate the effects of three teaching strategies on the outcome of performance and retention of intervention activities, student satisfaction, self-confidence and practical educational preferences. Results reveal significantly higher retention scores compared to the first assessment, indicating that high scores in the improved rubric are related to the interactivity of the simulation scenario.

Nevertheless, it should not be taken for granted that students consistently prefer virtual learning settings to more traditional face-to-face environments (Hummel et al., 2011 ). Serious games concerning cognitive perceptions show varying results. For example, simulations are shown to support the comprehension and application of knowledge, albeit less effectively than quizzes and adventures (Riemer & Schrader, 2015 ). In Fu et al. ( 2016 ) review, despite GBL providing a motivating and enjoyable experience, there is a lack of strong evidence to show that games lead to effective learning outcomes. In some cases, there is inconsistency in student views regarding the integration of online games as a positive learning method (Bolliger, 2015 ). Similar views are supported by some researchers, who acknowledge students’ and educators’ hesitation towards virtual simulations and serious games, but they insist on the inclusion of games into course material, and on instructors’ familiarization with their use (Kapralos et al., 2011 ).

Perceptual skills

Other studies confirm the power of games and simulations in developing cognition abilities, especially in the instances of virtual simulations enhancing complex cognitive skills (Helle et al., 2011 ; Siewiorek, 2013 ), such as self-assessment (Arias Aranda, 2010 ), or higher-order thinking (Crocco et al., 2016 ). These are meta-cognitive skills, regarded as essential elements of in-depth learning. The incorporation of game mechanisms into simulations is widely recognised by researchers as beneficial, especially regarding laboratory tasks, where simulation scenarios urge students towards problem-solving and, reflection, thus achieving metacognitive outcomes (Hou & Li, 2014 ; Hou, 2015 ). Kikot, ( 2013 ) concur with the above researchers, stating that students perceive simulation-based learning (SBL) environments positively when asked to achieve dynamic learning outcomes, including thinking, interpreting, and associative skills.

Silvia ( 2012 ) also references cognitive and metacognitive outcomes derived from a multi-role simulation. The simulation helps students apply the concepts they learn in class by connecting the theoretical issues with real-world situations, thus developing their analytical skills, and through comparing different viewpoints, which leads to enhanced critical thinking. Students use the interactive nature of simulations to develop arguments, make judgements and evaluate situations. More importantly, simulations encourage students to develop self-awareness. Similarly, Cela-Ranilla, ( 2014 ) conducted a study in which students display a tendency to perform better in analytical work, such as monitoring, planning and assessment rather than in action-based work. Wouters et al. ( 2013 ), on the other hand, find serious games to be more effective in terms of learning and retention.

Learners can also actively participate in a web-based simulation to facilitate immersion and reflection, leading to deeper understanding of the content (Helle et al., 2011 ). A simulation framework can facilitate learning in terms of flow experience and learning strategies. Indeed, in a study conducted by Li, Cheng, and Liu ( 2013 ), the framework helps students lacking background knowledge to balance challenge and skill perceptions, while for students with average to advanced levels of knowledge, it facilitates the learning experience by either reducing the challenge perception or promoting the skill perception. Along the same lines, Pasin and Giroux ( 2011 ), analyse the mistakes students make in simulations using an empirical prototype. Results show that, although simple decision-making skills are easily acquired through conventional teaching methods, simulation games are useful tools for mastering managerial skills, such as complex and dynamic decision-making. Lin and Tu ( 2012 ) also confirm that simulations enable students to train themselves in decision-making.

Instructors’ engagement

Students are challenged to develop interpersonal, analytical and creative skills, discouraging absenteeism, feelings of boredom and reluctance, leading to academic achievement. However, simulations not only exhibit positive effects in the learning experience of the student, but, also, do so for instructors, as well, in the context of teaching experience. For academics, simulations raise the level of performance, encouraging students to be more alert and attentive during class activities (Navidad, 2013 ), and thus to achieve better learning outcomes. In this vein, instructors are urged to design simulations to be as challenging as possible to stimulate student interest in interacting with the simulation as well as with their peers. Felicia ( 2011 ) denotes that instructors agree with students in acknowledging the educational benefits of video games, such as an understanding of difficult concepts, improvement of spatial awareness and analytical skills, critical thinking, and problem-solving strategies. To enable them to do so, instructors emphasize the importance of clearly expressed learning goals to guide students when using simulations in an online instructional technology course (Kovalik & Kuo, 2012 ).

Even setting aside the potential learning benefits derived from participation in GBL, a stronger connection between games and curricula remains to be forged, as well as the application of more dynamic academic challenges, so as to better adapt to the knowledge of diverse learners (Pløhn, 2013 ). Following such reasoning, as indicated in the literature, faculty plays a key role in achieving learning goals via the use of games and simulations. The instructor role correlates with the demand for abstract learning concepts. In their meta-analysis, Wouters and Van Oostendorp ( 2013 ) show how instructors, acting in a facilitating and supporting role, can foster learning, particularly in selecting and discussing new information and where higher order skills are involved in the learning outcomes. Similarly, instructors can monitor student behaviour and evaluate not only the capabilities, but also the attitudes of tomorrow’s higher education managers during the decision-making process. Rutten et al. ( 2012 ) focus in their literature review on the level of instructional support in GBL, and suggest that a pedagogical framework for the application of computer simulations in education requires a corresponding integration of the educator’s role.

Behavioural outcomes

Behavioural objectives for higher education students refer to the enhancement of teamwork and improvement in relational abilities (Ranchhod, 2014 ), as well as stronger organisational skills, adaptability and the ability to resolve conflicts (Vos & Brennan, 2010 ).

Social skills/teamwork

Simulation games are often seen as powerful tools in promoting teamwork and team dynamics (Stanley & Latimer, 2011 ; Tiwari et al., 2014 ; Lin, 2016 ; Wang, 2016 ), collaboration (Hanning, 2012 ), social and emotional skills (Ahmad et al., 2013 ), and other soft skills, including project management, self-reflection, and leadership skills (Siewiorek, 2012 ; Wang et al., 2016 ), which are acquired through a reality-based scenarios with action-oriented activities (Geithner & Menzel, 2016 ).

In a Spanish management course, simulations enabled students to build pivotal capacities, such as management abilities and team working to enable the success of future managers (Arias Aranda et al., 2010 ). A computer simulation at a university in Taiwan led to comparatively higher learning gains against traditional teaching through collaborative laboratory activities (Shieh, 2010 ), by facilitating students to carry out more active learning and improving their conceptual understanding. Simulation scenarios provide improved social and communication skills, which lead to the enhancement of student knowledge (Sarabia-Cobo et al., 2016 ).

Additionally, collaboration is considered an essential element in the learning process (Elias, 2014 ). The findings of Hummel et al. ( 2011 ) reveal that serious online games improve the quality of learning when it comes to problem-based situations in the workplace by using active collaboration. For this reason, faculty members are urged to create learning environments to support active participation by students in the educational process. Moreover, according to the constructivist approach, the instructor’s role is a significant factor in empowering groups to construct knowledge in a collaborative manner (Hämäläinen & Oksanen, 2014 ). The instructors engage higher education students in the process of formulating hypotheses, interpreting context, providing explanations, and describing observations, by designing and implementing a collaborative and interactive GBL environment. In Yin et al.’s study ( 2013 ), students react positively to participatory simulations, due to the belief that the system helps them advance their conceptual understanding effectively through scaffolding, discussion, and reflection. Participants in Cózar-Gutiérrez and Sáez-López’s study ( 2016 ), while stating that video games are non-essential tools in an educational context, nevertheless, value GBL as an immersive environment that facilitates increased activity and student engagement.

Teamwork, however, seems to be a controversial issue in Costa, ( 2014 ) which evaluates improvement of knowledge sharing. Some learners consider teamwork as a means to facilitate decision making in a game, while others express dissatisfaction due to their peers, be it the latter’s reluctance to take on responsibility or poor negotiation capabilities. Research by Bolliger et al. ( 2015 ) similarly indicates that some learners remain hesitant, as they feel the use of games may actually decrease opportunities for communication with peers and instructors. Merchant et al. ( 2014 ) conclude that student performance is enhanced when playing individually rather than in a group.

Interaction and feedback

In GBL methods, meaningful feedback is a key factor in students achieving the objectives, as well as in being encouraged to reflect on misunderstandings and to transfer learning to new educational contexts (Swanson et al., 2011 ). In the current study, the scope is to investigate learner-learner interaction and social feedback through game mechanics. Higher education students evaluate games and simulations focusing on behavioural change and improvement of interactive abilities. The computer game DELIVER! for example, is evaluated very positively by students due to its focus on active student participation and overall positive impact on social interaction (von Wangenheim et al., 2012 ). Simulations provide visual feedback, encouraging active exploration of the student’s own understanding, enabling a move beyond knowing-in action and beginning to reflect-on and in-action during training, resulting in the contextual application of prior knowledge (Söderström, 2014 ). Real-time feedback in simulation games enables students to clearly define the objectives and expectations in the interactive environment, leading to a reduction in anxiety and uncertainty, thus encouraging better performance (Nkhoma et al., 2014 ).

The literature extensively documents the interaction between behavioural outcomes, learning performance and communication especially in Online Distance Learning (ODL). Indeed, regular feedback on student performance during DGBL facilitates deep learning (Erhel & Jamet, 2013 ). A survey conducted by Chen, ( 2010 ) shows that online games can be social and interactive technologies, helping students form friendships with their peers and providing multiple types of interaction.

Ke et al. ( 2015 ) stress the importance of player interaction, indicating that the inherent interaction between players and their gaming-situated learning environment supplies structured challenges and feedback. Huang, ( 2010 ) share the same view, confirming that, due to the necessity of receiving feedback from peers and the game itself, increased interaction opportunities arise in game-play, adding that interaction is a decisive factor in the construction of knowledge (Seng & Yatim, 2014 ). In a survey conducted by Denholm et al. ( 2012 ), students report improved team working through the use of serious games. They attribute this to receiving feedback, and stressing that even conflict is often considered valuable as it brings diverse views to the fore.

To conclude, the main body of literature explores the impact of games and simulations on learning outcomes on the behavioural level, especially when students are involved in interactive and participatory simulation tasks. The majority of studies reveal a positive effect on behavioural outcomes, concluding that students benefit from appropriate feedback, and reflection through game-based communication activities.

Affective outcomes

Many studies highlight the affective outcomes of using games and simulations in the learning process. The majority of them includes student engagement (Auman, 2011 ; Hainey et al., 2011 ; Lin & Tu, 2012 ; Kikot et al., 2013 ; Lu et al., 2014 ; Ke et al., 2015 ), motivation (Liu et al., 2011 ; Liao & Wang, 2011 ; Costa et al., 2014 ; Lukosch et al., 2016 ), and satisfaction (Cvetić et al., 2013 ; Dzeng, 2014 ; Lancaster, 2014 ; Sarabia-Cobo et al., 2016 ).

Motivation and engagement

Engagement and motivation are major factors in enhancing higher education learning objectives (Connolly et al., 2012 ; Erhel & Jamet, 2013 ; Ke et al., 2015 ; Nadolny & Halabi, 2015 ). Motivation is considered a central factor in the majority of reviewed studies (Felicia, 2011 ; Ljungkvist & Mozelius, 2012 ; von Wangenheim et al., 2012 ; Bellotti et al., 2013 ; Hannig et al., 2013 ; Ahmad et al., 2013 ; Pløhn, 2013 ; Li et al., 2013 ; Denholm et al., 2012 ; Dzeng et al., 2014 ; Lancaster, 2014 ; Ariffin et al., 2014 ; Bolliger et al., 2015 ; Cózar-Gutiérrez, & Sáez-López, 2016 ; Dankbaar et al., 2016 ; Fu et al., 2016 ). Some results suggest the effectiveness of GBL in motivating and achieving learning goals can be found at the lower levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (e.g. Connolly et al., 2012 ). In the context of digital SBL environments, other motivational dimensions are highlighted, such as self-efficacy (Sitzmann, 2011 ), in conjunction with the transfer of learning (Gegenfurtner et al., 2014 ).

Motivation is a combination of elements such as attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction, which can increase germane cognitive loads. Chang, ( 2010 ) examine the effects of motivation in an instructional simulation game, called SIMPLE. According to the post-game evaluation, student motivation comes from peer learning and user cooperation. Moreover, when instructors teach strategy, this enhances student motivation and engagement, encouraging acceptance of the game, and leading to stronger interest in course-directed learning. Thus, teachers should create a flexible learning environment, giving due consideration to peer interaction, learning motivation, pedagogical support and encouragement to help students develop their autonomy and retain an interest in learning.

Another important element contributing to affective outcomes is challenge. Hainey et al. ( 2011 ) find the presence of a challenge to be the top ranked motivation for online game players, while recognition is the lowest ranked motivation regardless of gender or amount of players in the game. Gamers in a multiplayer environment tend to report competition, cooperation, recognition, fantasy and curiosity when playing games, while online players experience challenge, cooperation, recognition and control. By contrast, fanatical computer game players experience disappointment and a lack of challenge, as they tend to value the technical aspect over the challenges presented by game play. In Hess and Gunter’s survey ( 2013 ), students in a game-based course are motivated, because of the positive social interaction they experience while playing the game; this intrinsic motivation is positively correlated to student performance. Computer games can thus be seen as a learning tool motivating players to acquire many competences. Connolly et al. ( 2012 ) share the same view, seeing the role of challenge as a predictive factor with respect to game engagement and achievement. Similarly, in Ke et al.’s study ( 2015 ), the game-play actions include optimal challenge expectation for the user. These results can also be seen in Badea ( 2015 ), who concludes that the majority of participants in her study acknowledge the highly motivating quality of games, which are complemented by the relaxed class atmosphere when games are used.

However, despite the benefits reaped from the implementation of games and simulations concerning affective outcomes, some researchers underline that motivation is not always related to GBL, emphasizing cases where students who use games in solitary or collaborative environments experience no significant difference in terms of learning motivation (Chen et al., 2015 ). There are indeed cases where serious games are no more motivating than conventional instructional methods (Wouters et al., 2013 ). In Cela-Ranilla et al.’s survey ( 2014 ), despite the suitability of the 3D simulation environment, students do not feel highly motivated or particularly engaged, mostly because they prefer analysis to actions in the particular learning process.

Faculty role

The benefits of a pedagogical shift from a teacher-focused and lecture-based classroom to a student-centred, active-learning environment through the adoption of simulation-based strategies to achieve engagement are relevant to both students and instructors (Auman, 2011 ). There is a progression in student emotion from uncertainty and nervousness to satisfaction and excitement within the gaming experience. Auman ( 2011 ), as an instructor, provides a positive description: she is drawn in by student enthusiasm, her interest in the material is reinvigorated, she feels empowered in her teaching, and ready to guide her class. In this context, it’s easy to see how instructors ought to play a significant role in motivating and engaging students to achieve learning goals. De Porres and Livingston ( 2016 ) concur with Auman ( 2011 ), as their study also indicates increased levels of excitement in doctoral students studying Computer Science, when evaluated in a post-test intervention.

Faculty acting as motivators are key in engaging students in the learning process, working to ensure focus on pre-existing knowledge, as well as to transfer knowledge to game settings (Lameras et al., 2016 ), to reward students for their effort, and support them by providing continuous guidance and pathways for further consideration. The quality of the teacher/facilitator has a strong influence on the learning satisfaction of the students. Also, instructors should facilitate and engage students via in-game discussion forums to help overcome misconceptions, and to lead the game-based learning. The way instructors interact, facilitate and motivate students to construct GBL experiences depends on the design stage, particularly on the way games are incorporated into the curriculum in a traditional course (Wouters et al., 2013 ). This is because motivation exhibits a significant correlation with cognitive and skill performance (Woo, 2014 ). In research conducted by Franciosi ( 2016 ), despite faculty acknowledging the beneficial impact of games on student motivation, they nevertheless, remain doubtful about the effectiveness of games in learning outcomes, thus resulting in neutral attitudes. Interestingly, although instructors perceive simulations as engaging learning technologies, they do not however consider them superior to traditional teaching methods (Tanner et al., 2012 ).

Another aspect, less frequently discussed in the relevant literature, is students’ performing self-assessments with regard to effective learning, as seen in Jones and Bursens study ( 2015 ). This ability is supported by constructivism, since simulations are developed in an active learning environment, where faculty act more as facilitators rather than as instructors and students are provided with feedback to carry out their self-assessments.

Attitudes and satisfaction

A vital element in achieving learning goals is the relationship between motivational processing and the outcome processing (satisfaction), especially in an online instructional game, as seen in the experiment carried out by Huang et al. ( 2010 ). There seems to be a significant relation between these two variables, which suggests that designers of DGBL need to consider extrinsic rewards to achieve motivational development and satisfaction. Learning satisfaction is strongly correlated with student motivation and attitude towards GBL before the game, with actual enjoyment and effort during the game, as well as with the quality of the teacher/facilitator (Mayer, 2013 ). Specifically, students with a higher level of inner motivation and positive attitude towards GBL are more likely to have higher learning expectations, and to experience more satisfaction in their GBL participation.

In general, most studies report that students develop a positive attitude toward the pedagogical adoption of games and simulations in education (Divjak & Tomić, 2011 ; Bekebrede, 2011 ; Ibrahim et al., 2011 ; Beckem & Watkins, 2012 ; Tanner et al., 2012 ; von Wangenheim et al., 2012 ; Halpern et al., 2012 ; Terzidou et al., 2012 ; Hanning et al., 2013 ; Giovanello, 2013 ; Cvetić et al., 2013 ; Kovalik & Kuo, 2012 ; Li & Tsai, 2013 ; Hainey et al., 2011 ; Boeker et al., 2013 ; Nkhoma et al., 2014 ; Costa et al., 2014 ; Chaves et al., 2015 ; Riemer & Schrader, 2015 ; Angelini, 2016 ; Geithner & Menzel, 2016 ). The participants in Dudzinski et al. ( 2013 ) respond positively towards a serious web-based game, describing the experience as interesting, stimulating and helpful, as well as a valuable addition to their pharmacy curriculum. Other students perceive simulation games as fun, but not particularly useful as an instructional method compared to lectures, and about equally useful as case discussions (Beuk, 2015 ). In another study, the majority of students show a positive attitude towards games, positing that they make subjects more fun and provide more opportunities for learning (Ibrahim et al., 2011 ). This finding is consistent with Bekebrede et al. ( 2011 ) on the perceptions of Dutch students belonging to the “net generation”, who have been raised with technology-based games. Data reveals student preference towards active, collaborative and technology-rich learning via digital games that bring added value to the educational process.

For students, satisfaction is a deciding factor in their decision to continue using such learning methods (Liao & Wang, 2011 ; Liao, 2015 ). Terzidou et al. ( 2012 ) discuss affective outcomes, especially the way interviewees feel before and after their participation in the game. Prior to participating, the interviewees report feelings of entertainment, fascination, and satisfaction before their participation in the game, which increase after use, indicating that participants find the use of 3D virtual game appealing.

Chen et al. ( 2010 ) reveal that the majority of students show negative feelings about online gaming. Shieh et al.’s ( 2010 ) mixed methodology research reveals that experimental groups show positive attitudes toward an innovative learning environment and outperform the control groups (in conventional classes). Some studies depict either neutral effects (Rajan et al., 2013 ; Beuk, 2015 ; Bolliger et al., 2015 ; Dankbaar et al., 2016 ; Strycker, 2016 ) or negative attitudes towards game use in the learning experience (Jiménez-Munguía & Luna-Reyes, 2012 ). Students experience more anxiety and boredom during conventional courses, which acts as an impediment to acquiring substantial problem-solving skills. The educational benefits of GBL are particularly apparent in subjects over which students report greater anxiety, where it can be proven that increased enjoyment levels correlate positively with improvements in deep learning and higher-order thinking (Crocco et al., 2016 ). Liarokapis, ( 2010 ) show Computer Science students evaluating a serious online game, and finding it a valuable pedagogical tool, which is both useful and entertaining.

Genre/familiarity issues

Students achieving high scores respond more positively to online games compared to low achieving students. Regarding genre perceptions, male students express more enthusiasm towards digital gaming than female students, or at least spend more time playing computer games compared to girls (Hainey et al., 2011 ). This may be due to the fact that boys tend to be more familiar with computers and web-based technologies. Girls may choose to avoid digital game-based learning methods, due to their negative preconceptions about gaming, preventing them from harnessing the positive aspects of online gaming (Chen et al., 2010 ). These studies indicate a difference in perception based on gender when engaging in DGBL environments. However, research by Riemer and Schrader ( 2015 ) concluded that female students reported a more positive attitude and perception of affective quality compared to the male students. Also, high assessment scores in web-based games depend on the professional experience of the players. Unexpectedly, in Dzeng et al.’s experimental survey ( 2014 ), despite the high test scores achieved in both web-based and paper-based games, students without work experience achieve the highest post-test scores, probably because they are more familiar with using technological tools. The experiments in Erhel and Jamet’s study ( 2013 ) indicate that serious games promote learning and motivation, provided they include features that prompt learners to actively process the educational content.

To sum up, games and simulations lead to improved affective outcomes for university students such as attitudes, motivation, emotional involvement, self-efficacy and satisfaction. A growing body of literature supports the positive attitude shown by students towards games and simulations, as they consider them essential instructional tools that provide motivation and engagement in an active learning environment.

Research interest in the incorporation of games and simulations in higher education is constantly developing (Girard et al., 2013 ). The pedagogical shift, from lecture-centred to student-centred environments and the increasing use of games as innovative learning technologies, calls for a transformation in higher education. In this respect, games and simulations are expected to play a significant role in the learning process. In the present study, the focus is on the positive effects of games and simulations on university students’ learning outcomes. The reviewed papers are diverse in terms of research objectives, theoretical background, methodological avenues adopted, game genres, scientific domain or delivery platform, and various perspectives concerning cognitive, behavioural and affective outcomes employed. Many articles ( n  = 123) are identified, providing either empirical results or offering meta-analytic evidence.

There seems to be a lack of shared definitions or taxonomy necessary for a common classification, which, therefore, results in terminological ambiguity (Klabbers, 2009 ). The majority of GBL researchers compare the effectiveness of implementing web-based learning games to conventional instructional options (Shin et al., 2015 ).

Mapping the results, empirical evidence is identified with respect to cognitive learning outcomes including knowledge acquisition, conceptual application, content understanding and action-directed learning. Games and simulations are educational interventions, which create a supportive environment in which students may acquire knowledge across subjects and disciplines. Students have the opportunity to better understand theoretical concepts, provided that games are used as a supplement in traditional lecture-based courses. Additionally, simulations are often perceived as enjoyable learning tools, which require active and collaborative participation and contribute to the improvement of critical thinking and reasoning, higher-order- and metacognitive thinking. Simulations provide students the opportunity to observe the outcomes of their actions, and take responsibility for decision-making via problem-solving competencies, thus leading to a more active, transformative and experiential reception of knowledge.

Another important finding is that simulations have positive effects on both students and instructors. Positive outcomes exist when instructors set achievable learning goals, interact with students promoting knowledge, support, facilitate, and motivate them to construct new game-based knowledge (Kovalik & Kuo, 2012 ; Lameras et al., 2016 ). Instructors are encouraged to design games and simulations in order to make students fully aware of game activities, providing all the while continuous instructional guidance. These results generally confirm the findings from prior systematic reviews and meta-analyses. However, findings diverge slightly in Young et al.’s survey ( 2012 ), who claim that there is limited or no evidence about the effective implementation of games in the lecture-based curriculum.

This review also covers behavioural outcomes, mainly the development of social, emotional, and collaborative skills, helping students to foster strong relationships with peers, empowering them to collaborate and work in groups more efficiently, become organised, adapt to new tasks, and resolve emerging conflicts. Furthermore, reality-based scenarios and action-oriented game activities promote fruitful interactions and meaningful feedback, which leads to collaborative construction of knowledge. Overall, digital games and simulations urge students to interact not only with the game, but with their instructors and co-players as well. These results have been extensively covered in the literature review, with the majority of researchers agreeing with the current study’s results, confirming the positive effects of games and simulations on the behavioural level of learning outcomes (Bellotti et al., 2013 ; Tsekleves et al., 2014 ; Fu et al., 2016 ; Carenys & Moya, 2016 ).

However, although most reviews acknowledge the positive effects of games in behavioural outcomes, some reviewed studies contradict these positive findings, claiming that teamwork is a controversial issue when it comes to the improvement of knowledge sharing. The use of games seems to decrease opportunities for peer interaction and communication with instructors (Bolliger et al., 2015 ), whereas playing individually is sometimes considered better than working in a team (Merchant et al., 2014 ). Also, in some cases, games and simulations through collaborative activities distract students and hinder learning (Dankbaar et al., 2016 ).

The current review makes a significant contribution by investigating the affective outcomes when incorporating games and simulations in the curriculum, especially motivational and engagement outcomes, emotional development, satisfaction, attitude, emotion, self-assessment, and self-efficacy. Results show that games and simulations motivate, engage and promote effective learning goals by providing opportunities for learners to actively experience, practice, interact, and reflect in a collaborative, game-based, and learner-centred setting. The measures evaluating student attitudes reveal an increasingly positive trend towards games and simulations, especially in post-interventions (Bekebrede et al., 2011 ; Giovanello et al., 2013 ; Costa et al., 2014 ; Angelini, 2016 ; Geithner & Menzel, 2016 ).

To this end, there has been a purposeful highlighting of the instructor’s role as facilitator and motivator in this literature review. Through in-game activities and extended discussion, instructors promote student interaction and help them overcome the lack of understanding of content curriculum and achieve better learning outcomes. The literature also stresses the role of emotional development, which facilitates improvement of learning outcomes. Specifically, there seems to be a progression in student emotion, from negative feelings including uncertainty, anxiety, nervousness, and disappointment during pre-intervention, to positive feelings of satisfaction, confidence, excitement, enjoyment, effort, fascination, and enthusiasm during in-game and post-game interventions (Huang et al., 2010 ; Hummel et al., 2011 ; Liao & Wang, 2011 ; Terzidou et al., 2012 ; Woo, 2014 ; Liao et al., 2015 ).

Most of the pre-existing evidence is compatible with the findings of this systematic review (Sitzmann, 2011 ; Connolly et al., 2012 ; Wouters et al., 2013 ; Ritzhaupt et al., 2014 ; Gegenfurtner et al., 2014 ; Shin et al., 2015 ; Lameras et al., 2016 ; Carenys & Moya, 2016 ; Fu et al., 2016 ; Warren et al., 2016 ). Nevertheless, one study indicates that the overall positive perception of students depends on the different forms of games (Riemer & Schader, 2015 ), namely, simulations promote a less positive effect compared to quizzes and adventures. Some other studies diverge further in their findings, indicating either neutral (Rajan et al., 2013 ; Strycker, 2016 ; Franciosi, 2016 ) or negative student attitudes towards the use of games (Chen et al., 2010 ; Jiménez-Munguía & Luna-Reyes, 2012 ). Also, there are limited results on the effect of games on student self-efficacy, with one study demonstrating moderate post-training self-efficacy (Sitzmann, 2011 ).

Comparing the findings of the current study with the findings of previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses leads to an interesting discussion. The results of the present review illustrate that the majority of the revised articles focus on different genres of games and simulations. The mostly represented genres are virtual/online games and simulations since they can enhance learning in certain disciplines, such as Computer Studies. This finding is in agreement with most of the previous reviews (e.g. Clark et al., 2015 ; Carenys & Moya, 2016 ; Warren et al., 2016 ). Also, simulation games are found to be popular in this review, due to the fact that they are implemented in authentic learning environments, namely in Health Sciences and Biology. Also, in this study, a great representation of role - playing games and business simulation games are obviously resulted from the previous articles, due to the fact that they are implemented in specific academic disciplines, such as Business Management and Marketing. Nevertheless, in this review, serious games are not represented as much as in other reviews (e.g.Tsekleves et al., 2014 ; Fu et al., 2016 ).

Additionally, this study concentrates on the positive effects of games and simulations on learning outcomes, a finding that is compatible with previous reviews (e.g. Bellotti et al., 2013 ; Lameras et al., 2016 ; Clark et al., 2015 . This review confirms that games and simulations contribute to cognitive learning outcomes, including knowledge acquisition, conceptual application, content understanding, and action-directed learning. Other previous reviewers echoed these findings (Smetana & Bell, 2012 ; Shin et al., 2015 ; Wouters et al., 2013 ; Fu et al., 2016 ) emphasizing the important role of games in knowledge acquisition and content understanding. It has been illustrated that university students benefit from the incorporation of games into the learning process, if used as a supplement in traditional lectures, a finding that complies with other reviews (Sitzmann, 2011 ; Wouters et al., 2013 ). However, simulations’ implementation is influenced by instructors’ guidance and motivation, as these factors encourage faculty to design simulations to achieve learning outcomes.

This review also sheds light on behavioural outcomes of using games in instructional design. The emphasis is on the positive effects, namely the development of social and soft skills, emotional skills, the empowerment of collaboration with peers, and the promotion of interaction and feedback, findings that are in line with past reviews (Shin et al., 2015 ; Carenys & Moya, 2016 ). Despite the positive behavioural effects of utilizing games, some reviews find collaboration and teamwork as a hindrance for learning. The application of games seems to decrease peer interaction and communication with faculty, whereas in Merchant et al.’s review ( 2014 ), playing individually is more preferable than playing collaboratively. The current review concludes by highlighting the affective outcomes, and the emphasis is given on motivational and engaging factors that lead to emotional development, satisfaction, self-efficacy and self-assessment, findings that are also documented in other reviews (Sitzmann, 2011 ; Hsu et al., 2012 ; Tsekleves et al., 2014 ).

To conclude, this review discusses the multitude of surveys on the cognitive, behavioural, and affective outcomes related to the use of playing games and simulations in higher education. The multi-dimensional analysis of the empirical data provides a framework for understanding the major outcomes of GBL. Despite the significant benefits in learning outcomes highlighted in this paper, the high cost of designing games and simulations is still a significant challenge. To overcome this cost barrier, governments, researchers, instructors, and game designers should collaborate to find affordable solutions, for enabling the development of games and simulations. Since this review does not concern itself with advanced aspects of learning, the focus should next turn to a metacognitive-oriented survey, which will study the promotion of metacognitive skills in students, such as self-regulation, self-reflection, self-awareness, evaluation, planning, building on the ideas of others, debating, and so forth.

Future research

Considering the above discussion points, and the importance of games and simulations as derived from the relevant literature, some suggested avenues for future research are as follows:

Researchers should focus on applying the relevant theoretical frameworks, such as cognitivism, constructivism, and socio-cultural perspectives to cognitive, behavioural and affective outcomes, respectively.

More research should be conducted investigating gender issues with respect to the effectiveness of games on developmental aspects of behaviour, such as scaffolding and immersion, to counteract the present gap in the existing literature.

Comparative surveys should be included with a design focused on different target groups (adult students, or K-12 students in laboratory conditions).

Evaluation models via a mixed-method design are encouraged, especially to investigate how game designers could tailor game designs to applying different learning preferences and styles.

University instructors should take a more active role in the alignment of games with the curriculum ensuring that games and simulations are implemented in a blended learning module (face-to-face, online material, etc.), or even acting as games masters, scaffolding virtual experiences to university learners.

Faculty should design games with a view to multiplayer cooperation to achieve effectiveness in learning outcomes. Students should also be involved as co-designers, recommending innovative ideas and radical approaches in an effort to meet their own needs. An innovative approach is the adoption of metagames (Young et al., 2012 ), which consist of additional learning resources (blogs, wikis, etc.) encouraging collaboration between players.

This study makes a significant contribution to research, since no other literature review or meta-analysis has been conducted so far investigating educational and web-based games and simulations with such an extensive subject and discipline coverage in higher education. Today’s demand for student-centred teaching methods to develop highly qualified learners, capable of learning in an active and collaborative environment, calls for the deployment of game-based activities and simulations that will enable them to face the challenges of the dawning era.

Adams, D. M., Pilegard, C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Evaluating the cognitive consequences of playing portal for a short duration. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54 (2), 173–195.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ahmad, S. M. S., Fauzi, N. F. M., Hashim, A. A., & Zainon, W. M. N. W. (2013). A study on the effectiveness of computer games in teaching and learning. International Journal of Advanced Studies in Computers, Science and Engineering, 2 (1), 1.

Google Scholar  

Aldrich, C. (2009). Virtual worlds, simulations, and games for education: A unifying view. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 5 (5), 1.

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Anderson, E. F., McLoughlin, L., Liarokapis, F., Peters, C., Petridis, P., & Freitas, S. D. (2009). Serious games in cultural heritage. In M. Ashley & F. Liarokapis (Eds.), VAST 2009: 10th International Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archaeology and Cultural Heritage 22-25 September 2009 (pp. 29–48). St. Julians, Malta: Eurographics Association.

Andreu Andrés, M. A., & García Casas, M. (2011). Perceptions of gaming as experiential learning by engineering students. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27 (4), 795–804.

Angelini, M. L. (2016). Integration of the pedagogical models “simulation” and “flipped classroom” in teacher instruction. SAGE Open, 6 (1). doi: 10.1177/2158244016636430 .

Angelini, M. L., García-Carbonell, A., & Martínez-Alzamora, N. (2015). Estudio cuantitativo discreto sobre la simulación telemática en el aprendizaje del ingles. [Quantitative study about telematic simulation in learning]. RIE Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 69 (2), 51–68.

Arias Aranda, D., Haro Domiguez, C., & Romerosa Martinez, M. M. (2010). An innovative approach to the learning process in management: The use of simulators in higher education. REVISTA DE EDUCACION, 353 , 333–334.

Ariffin, M., Oxley, A., & Sulaiman, S. (2014). Evaluating game-based learning effectiveness in higher education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123 , 20–27 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1393 . Accessed 11 Sept 2016.

Auman, C. (2011). Using simulation games to increase student and instructor engagement. College Teaching, 59 (4), 154–161.

Backlund, P., & Hendrix, M. (2013). Educational games-are they worth the effort? A literature survey of the effectiveness of serious games. In Games and virtual worlds for serious applications (VS-GAMES), 2013 5th international conference on (pp. 1-8). IEEE.

Badea, M. (2015). English classes and effectiveness of games in higher education. Journal Plus Education, 13 (2), 79–85.

Bausch, L., Beran, J., Cahanes, S., & Krug, L. (2008). Physiological responses while playing Nintendo Wii sports. Journal of Undergraduate Kinesiology Research, 3 , 19–25.

Beckem, J. M., & Watkins, M. (2012). Bringing life to learning: Immersive experiential learning simulations for online and blended courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16 (5), 61–70.

Bekebrede, G., Warmelink, H. J. G., & Mayer, I. S. (2011). Reviewing the need for gaming in education to accommodate the net generation. Computers & Education, 57 (2), 1521–1529.

Bellotti, F., Kapralos, B., Lee, K., Moreno-Ger, P., & Berta, R. (2013). Assessment in and of serious games: An overview. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, 2013 , 1.

Beuk, F. (2015). Sales simulation games student and instructor perceptions. Journal of Marketing Education , 1-13 (2015). Doi: 0273475315604686.

Biddiss, E., & Irwin, J. (2010). Active video games to promote physical activity in children and youth. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 164 , 664–672.

Boeker M, Andel., P, Vach, W., & Frankenschmidt, A. (2013). Game-based E-learning is more effective than a conventional instructional method: A randomized controlled trial with third-year medical students. PloS One 8(12): e82328. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0082328 .

Bolliger, D. U., Mills, D., White, J., & Kohyama, M. (2015). Japanese students’ perceptions of digital game use for English-language learning in higher education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53 (3), 384–408 0735633115600806.

Buckless, F. A., Krawczyk, K., & Showalter, D. S. (2014). Using virtual worlds to simulate real-world audit procedures. Issues in Accounting Education, 29 (3), 389–417.

Çankaya, S., & Karamete, A. (2009). The effects of educational computer games on students’ attitudes towards mathematics course and educational computer games. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1 (1), 145–149.

Carenys, J., & Moya, S. (2016). Digital game-based learning in accounting and business education. Accounting Education , 25 (6), 598-651.

Cela-Ranilla, J. M., Esteve-Mon, F. M., Esteve-González, V., & Gisbert-Cervera, M. (2014). Developing self-management and teamwork using digital games in 3D simulations. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30 (6), 634–651.

Chang, Y. C., Peng, H. Y., & Chao, H. C. (2010). Examining the effects of learning motivation and of course design in an instructional simulation game. Interactive Learning Environments, 18 (4), 319–339.

Chaves, R. O., von Wangenheim, C. G., Furtado, J. C. C., Oliveira, S. R. B., Santos, A., & Favero, E. L. (2015). Experimental evaluation of a serious game for teaching software process modeling. IEEE Transactions on Education, 58 (4), 289–296.

Chen, L., Chen, T.-L., & Liu, H.-K. J. (2010). Perception of young adults on online games: Implications for higher education. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9 (3), 76–84.

Chen, C. H., Wang, K. C., & Lin, Y. H. (2015). The Comparison of solitary and collaborative modes of game-based learning on Students' science learning and motivation. Educational Technology & Society, 18 (2), 237–248.

Chiang, Y. T., Lin, S. S. J., Cheng, C. Y., & Liu, E. Z. F. (2011). Exploring online game players’ flow experiences and positive affect. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10 (1), 106–114.

Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Killingsworth, S. S. (2015). Digital games, design, and learning a systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 86 (1), 79–122 0034654315582065.

Connolly, T. M., Boyle, E. A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., & Boyle, J. M. (2012). A systematic literature review of the empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Computers & Education, 59 (2), 661–686.

Connolly, T., & Stansfield, M. (2006). Using games-based eLearning technologies in overcoming difficulties in teaching information systems. Journal of Information Technology Education, 5 (1), 459–476.

Connolly, T. M., Stansfield, M., & Hainey, T. (2007). An application of games-based learning within software engineering. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38 (3), 416–428.

Costa, G. J. M. D., Kikot, T., Fernandes, S., & Águas, P. (2014). Why use-centered game-based learning in higher education? The case of cesim simbrand. Journal of Spatial and Organizational Dynamics , 2 (3), 229-241.

Cózar-Gutiérrez, R., & Sáez-López, J.M. (2016). Game-based learning and gamification in initial teacher training in the social sciences: An experiment with MinecraftEdu. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education , 13 (1), 1 (2016). doi: 10.1186/s41239-016-0003-4 .

Crocco, F., Offenholley, K., & Hernandez, C. (2016). A proof-of-concept study of game-based learning in higher education. Simulation & Gaming, 47 (4), 403-422 (2016). Doi: 1046878116632484.

Cvetić, B., Vasiljević, D., & Danilović, M. (2013). DRP game: New tool to enhance teaching and learning in logistics and supply chain management. In 1st Logistics International Conference (pp. 299-303).

Dankbaar, M. E. W., Alsma, J., Jansen, E. E. H., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., van Saase, J. L. C. M., & Schuit, S. C. E. (2016). An experimental study on the effects of a simulation game on students’ clinical cognitive skills and motivation. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 21 (3), 505–521.

DePorres, D., & Livingston, R. E. (2016). Launching new doctoral students: Embracing the Hero’s journey. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 43 (1), 121–128.

de Wit-Zuurendonk, L. D., & Oei, S. G. (2011). Serious gaming in women’s health care. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 118 (s3), 17–21.

Denholm, J., Protopsaltis, A., & de Freitas, S. (2012). The value of team-based mixed-reality (TBMR) games in higher education. In European Conference on Games Based Learning (p. 571). Academic Conferences international limited.

de Smale, S., Overmans, T., Jeuring, J., & van de Grint, L. (2015). The effect of simulations and games on learning objectives in tertiary education: A systematic review. In Games and Learning Alliance 4 th International Conference , GALA 2015 Rome.

Divjak, B., & Tomić, D. (2011). The impact of game-based learning on the achievement of learning goals and motivation for learning mathematics-literature review. Journal of Information and Organizational Sciences, 35 (1), 15–30.

Dudzinski, M., Greenhill, D., Kayyali, R., Nabhani, S., Philip, N., Caton, H., Ishtiaq, S., & Gatsinzi, F. (2013). The design and evaluation of a multiplayer serious game for pharmacy students. In European Conference on Games Based Learning (p. 140). Academic Conferences international limited.

Dzeng, R. J., Lin, K. Y., & Wang, P. R. (2014). Building a construction procurement negotiation training game model: Learning experiences and outcomes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45 (6), 1115–1135.

Elias, A. (2014). Simulating the European Union: Reflections on module design. International Studies Perspectives, 15 (4), 407–422.

Erhel, S., & Jamet, E. (2013). Digital game-based learning: Impact of instructions and feedback on motivation and learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 67 , 156–167.

Farrington, J. (2011). From the research: Myths worth dispelling: Seriously, the game is up. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 24 , 105–110.

Felicia, P. (2011). Assessing how game-based learning is perceived in Irish education. In Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Management Leadership and Governance: ECGBL 2011 (p. 168). Academic Conferences limited.

Flanagan, B., Nestel, D., & Joseph, M. (2004). Making patient safety the focus: Crisis resource management in the undergraduate curriculum. Medical Education, 38 (1), 56–66.

Franciosi, S. J. (2016). Acceptability of RPG simulators for foreign language training in Japanese higher education. Simulation & Gaming, 47 (1), 31–50 (2015). Doi: 1046878115608621.

Fu, K., Hainey, T., & Baxter, G. (2016). A systematic literature review to identify empirical evidence on the use of computer games in business education and training. In 10th European Conference on Games Based Learning: ECGBL 2016 (p. 232).

García Carbonell, A., & Watts Hooge, F. I. (2012). Investigación empírica del aprendizaje con simulación telemática. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación (versión digital)., 59 (3), 1–11.

Gegenfurtner, A., Quesada-Pallarès, C., & Knogler, M. (2014). Digital simulation-based training: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45 (6), 1097–1114.

Geithner, S., & Menzel, D. (2016). Effectiveness of learning through experience and reflection in a Project Management simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 47 (2), 228–256 (2016). Doi: 1046878115624312.

Giovanello, S. P., Kirk, J. A., & Kromer, M. K. (2013). Student perceptions of a role-playing simulation in an introductory international relations course. Journal of Political Science Education, 9 (2), 197–208.

Girard, C., Ecalle, J., & Magnan, A. (2013). Serious games as new educational tools: How effective are they? A meta-analysis of recent studies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29 (3), 207–219.

Gold, S. (2016). Design and effectiveness of a self-study pedagogical approach to using a simulation game in the classroom. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 43 (1).

Gómez, M. (2014). Ciencias Sociales y gamificación, ¿una pareja con futuro? In J. Pagès (Ed.), Una mirada al pasado y un proyecto de futuro: investigación e innovación en didáctica de las ciencias sociales (pp. 257–262). Barcelona: Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona; Asociación Universitaria de Profesores de Didáctica de las Ciencias Sociales.

Gros, B. (2007). Digital games in education: The Design of Games Based Learning Environments. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40 (1), 23–39.

Hainey, T., Connolly, T. M., Stansfield, M., & Boyle, E. A. (2011). Evaluation of a game to teach requirements collection and analysis in software engineering at tertiary education level. Computers & Education, 56 (1), 21–35.

Halpern, D. F., Millis, K., Graesser, A. C., Butler, H., Forsyth, C., & Cai, Z. (2012). Operation ARA: A computerized learning game that teaches critical thinking and scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7 (2), 93–100.

Hämäläinen, R., & Oksanen, K. (2014). Collaborative 3D learning games for future learning: Teachers’ instructional practices to enhance shared knowledge construction among students. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 23 (1), 81–101.

Hannig, A., Kuth, N., Özman, M., Jonas, S., & Spreckelsen, C. (2012). eMedOffice: A web-based collaborative serious game for teaching optimal design of a medical practice. BMC Medical Education, 12 (1), 1.

Hannig, A., Lemos, M., Spreckelsen, C., Ohnesorge-Radtke, U., & Rafai, N. (2013). Skills-o-mat: Computer supported interactive motion-and game-based training in mixing alginate in dental education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48 (3), 315–343.

Helle, L., Nivala, M., Kronqvist, P., Gegenfurtner, A., Björk, P., & Säljö, R. (2011). Traditional microscopy instruction versus process-oriented virtual microscopy instruction: A naturalistic experiment with control group. Diagnostic Pathology, 6 (1), 1.

Hess, T., & Gunter, G. (2013). Serious game-based and nongame-based online courses: Learning experiences and outcomes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44 (3), 372–385.

Hou, H. T. (2015). Integrating cluster and sequential analysis to explore learners’ flow and behavioral patterns in a simulation game with situated-learning context for science courses: A video-based process exploration. Computers in Human Behavior, 48 , 424–435.

Hou, H. T., & Li, M. C. (2014). Evaluating multiple aspects of a digital educational problem-solving-based adventure game. Computers in Human Behavior, 30 , 29–38.

Hsu, Y.-C., Ho, H. N. J., Tsai, C.-C., Hwang, G.-J., Chu, H.-C., Wang, C.-Y., & Chen, N.-S. (2012). Research trends in technology-based learning from 2000 to 2009: A content analysis of publications in selected journals. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (2), 354–370.

Huang, W. H., Huang, W. Y., & Tschopp, J. (2010). Sustaining iterative game playing processes in DGBL: The relationship between motivational processing and outcome processing. Computers & Education, 55 (2), 789–797.

Hummel, H. G., Van Houcke, J., Nadolski, R. J., Van der Hiele, T., Kurvers, H., & Löhr, A. (2011). Scripted collaboration in serious gaming for complex learning: Effects of multiple perspectives when acquiring water management skills. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01122.x .

Ibrahim, R., Wahab, S., Yusoff, R. C. M., Khalil, K., Desaru, I. N. S. T. E. D. T., & Jaafar, A. (2011). Student perceptions of educational games in higher education: An empirical study. Issues in Information Systems, 12 (1), 120–133.

Jiménez-Munguía, M. C., & Luna-Reyes, L. F. (2012). Development of analytical abilities and collaborative learning assessment in undergraduate students through simulation games. In Electrical Communications and Computers (CONIELECOMP), 2012 22nd International Conference on (pp. 12–16). IEEE.

Jones, R., & Bursens, P. (2015). The effects of active learning environments: How simulations trigger affective learning. European Political Science, 14 (3), 254–265.

Kapralos, B., Hogan, M., Pribetic, A. I., & Dubrowski, A. (2011). Virtual simulations and serious games in a laptop-based university: Gauging faculty and student perceptions. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 8 (2), 106–120.

Ke, F., Xie, K., & Xie, Y. (2015). Game-based learning engagement: A theory-and data-driven exploration. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12314 .

Kikot, T., Costa, G., Magalhães, R., & Fernandes, S. (2013). Simulation games as tools for integrative dynamic learning: The case of the management course at the University of Algarve. Procedia Technology, 9 , 11–21.

Klabbers, J. H. G. (2009). Terminological ambiguity game and simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 40 (4), 446–463.

Kleinheksel, A. J. (2014). Transformative learning through virtual patient simulations: Predicting critical student reflections. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 10 (6), e301–e308.

Kovalik, C. L., & Kuo, C. L. (2012). Innovation Diffusion: Learner benefits and instructor insights with the Diffusion Simulation Game. Simulation & Gaming. 43 (6), 803-824.

Lameras, P., Arnab, S., Dunwell, I., Stewart, C., Clarke, S., & Petridis, P. (2016). Essential features of serious games design in higher education: Linking learning attributes to game mechanics. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12467 .

Lancaster, R. J. (2014). Serious game simulation as a teaching strategy in pharmacology. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 10 (3), e129–e137.

Li, Z. Z., Cheng, Y. B., & Liu, C. C. (2013). A constructionism framework for designing game-like learning systems: Its effect on different learners. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44 (2), 208–224.

Li, M. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). Game-based learning in science education: A review of relevant research. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22 (6), 877–898.

Liarokapis, F., Anderson, E. F., Oikonomou, A. (2010). Serious games for use in a higher education environment. In Proceedings of the Emerging Games Platforms, Technologies and Applications Workshop (EGPTA’10), 15th Int‟l Computer Games Conference: AI, Interactive Multimedia, Virtual Worlds and Serious Games Louisville, Kentucky, USA (pp. 28-31).

Liao, Y. W., Huang, Y. M., & Wang, Y. S. (2015). Factors affecting students’ continued usage intention toward business simulation games an empirical study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53 (2), 260–283.

Liao, Y.-W., & Wang, Y.-S. (2011). Investigating the factors affecting students’ continuance intention to use business simulation games in the context of digital learning. In International Conference on Innovation, Management and Service (pp. 119-124).

Lin, Y. L. (2016). Differences among different DGBLs learners. International Journal of Business and Management, 11 (1), 181–188.

Lin, Y. L., & Tu, Y. Z. (2012). The values of college students in business simulation game: A means-end chain approach. Computers & Education, 58 (4), 1160–1170.

Liu, C. C., Cheng, Y. B., & Huang, C. W. (2011). The effect of simulation games on the learning of computational problem solving. Computers & Education, 57 (3), 1907–1918.

Ljungkvist, P., & Mozelius, P. (2012). Educational games for self learning in introductory programming courses-a straightforward design approach with progression mechanisms. In Proceedings Of The 6th European Conference On Games Based Learning, ECGBL (pp. 285-293).

Lu, J., Hallinger, P., & Showanasai, P. (2014). Simulation-based learning in management education: A longitudinal quasi-experimental evaluation of instructional effectiveness. Journal of Management Development, 33 (3), 218–244.

Lukosch, H., Kurapati, S., Groen, D., & Verbraeck, A. (2016). Microgames for situated learning a case study in interdependent planning. Simulation & Gaming, 47 (3), 346–367 (2016). Doi: 1046878116635468.

Mayer, I., Warmelink, H., & Bekebrede, G. (2013). Learning in a game-based virtual environment: A comparative evaluation in higher education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 38 (1), 85–106.

McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2008). The three P’s of pedagogy for the networked society: Personalization, participation, and productivity. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20 (1), 10–27.

Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students' learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 70 , 29–40.

Mueller, F., Agamanolis, S., & Picard, R. (2003). Exertion interfaces: Sports over a distance for social bonding and fun. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 561–568). ACM.

Nadolny, L., & Halabi, A. (2015). Student participation and achievement in a large lecture course with game-based learning. Simulation & Gaming, 47 (1), 51–72 (2015). Doi: 1046878115620388.

Navidad, F. C. (2013). Students' devised classroom games-simulations: An innovative tool on mathematics achievement and motivation in nursing students. International Proceedings of Economics Development and Research, 60 , 14–18. doi: 10.7763/IPEDR .

Nkhoma, M., Calbeto, J., Sriratanaviriyakul, N., Muang, T., Ha Tran, Q., & Kim Cao, T. (2014). Towards an understanding of real-time continuous feedback from simulation games. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 11 (1), 45–62.

Pasin, F., & Giroux, H. (2011). The impact of a simulation game on operations management education. Computers & Education, 57 (1), 1240–1254.

Peterson, M. (2010). Computerized games and simulations in computer-assisted language learning: A meta-anlysis of research. Simulation & Gaming, 41 (1), 72–93.

Pløhn, T. (2013). Nuclear mayhem-a pervasive game designed to support learning. In European Conference on Games Based Learning (p. 475). Academic Conferences international limited.

Poikela, P., Ruokamo, H., & Teräs, M. (2015). Comparison of meaningful learning characteristics in simulated nursing practice after traditional versus computer-based simulation method: A qualitative videography study. Nurse Education Today, 35 (2), 373–382.

Rajan, P., Raju, P., & Sankar, C.S. (2013). Serious Games to Improve Student Learning in Engineering Classes . Paper presented at 120 th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , 23-26 June, 2013, Atlanta, Georgia. https://peer.asee.org/22448 Accessed 2 Oct 2016.

Ranchhod, A., Gurău, C., Loukis, E., & Trivedi, R. (2014). Evaluating the educational effectiveness of simulation games: A value generation model. Information Sciences, 264 , 75–90.

Renken, M., Peffer, M., Otrel-Cass, K., Girault, I., & Chiocarriello, A. (2016). Computer simulations on a multidimensional continuum: A definition and examples. In Simulations as Scaffolds in Science Education (pp. 5-14). London: Springer. 

Riemer, V., & Schrader, C. (2015). Learning with quizzes, simulations, and adventures: Students' attitudes, perceptions and intentions to learn with different types of serious games. Computers & Education, 88 , 160–168.

Ritzhaupt, A., Poling, N., Frey, C., & Johnson, M. (2014). A synthesis on digital games in education: What the research literature says from 2000 to 2010. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 25 (2), 261–280.

Robertson, B., Schumacher, L., Gosman, G., Kanfer, R., Kelley, M., & DeVita, M. (2009). Simulation-based crisis team training for multidisciplinary obstetric providers. Simululation in Healthcare, 4 (2), 77–83. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e3181917cd .

Rutten, N., van Joolingen, W. R., & van der Veen, J. T. (2012). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers & Education, 58 (1), 136–153.

Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals . Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.

Sarabia-Cobo, C. M., Alconero-Camarero, A. R., Lavín-Alconero, L., & Ibáñez-Rementería, I. (2016). Assessment of a learning intervention in palliative care based on clinical simulations for nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 45 , 219–224.

Sauve, L., Renaud, L., Kaufman, D., & Marquis, J. S. (2007). Distinguishing between games and simulation: A systematic review. Education Technology & Society, 10 (3), 247–256.

Sawyer, B. (2002). Serious games: Improving public policy through game-based learning and simulation . USA: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Seng, W. Y., & Yatim, M. H. M. (2014). Computer game as learning and teaching tool for object oriented programming in higher education institution. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123 , 215–224.

Shieh, R. S., Chang, W., & Tang, J. (2010). The impact of implementing technology-enabled active learning (TEAL) in university physics in Taiwan. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher (De La Salle University Manila), 19 (3).

Shin, S., Park, J. H., & Kim, J. H. (2015). Effectiveness of patient simulation in nursing education: Meta-analysis. Nurse Education Today, 35 (1), 176–182.

Siewiorek, A., Saarinen, E., Lainema, T., & Lehtinen, E. (2012). Learning leadership skills in a simulated business environment. Computers & Education, 58 , 121–135.

Siewiorek, A., Gegenfurtner, A., Lainema, T., Saarinen, E., & Lehtinen, E. (2013). The effects of computer-simulation game training on participants’ opinions on leadership styles. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44 (6), 1012–1035.

Silvia, C. (2012). The impact of simulations on higher-level learning. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 18 (2), 397–422.

Sitzmann, T. (2011). A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games. Personnel Psychology, 64 (2), 489–528.

Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2012). Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 34 (9), 1337–1370.

Söderström, T., Häll, L., Nilsson, T., & Ahlqvist, J. (2014). Computer simulation training in health care education fuelling reflection-in-action? Simulation & Gaming, 45 (6), 805–828.

Stanley, D., & Latimer, K. (2011). ‘the Ward’: A simulation game for nursing students. Nurse Education in Practice, 11 (1), 20–25.

Strycker, J. (2016). Utilizing a simulation within an online school technology leadership course. Online Learning Journal, 20 (1), 130–144.

Swanson, E. A., Nicholson, A. C., Boese, T. A., Cram, E., Stineman, A. M., & Tew, K. (2011). Comparison of selected teaching strategies incorporating simulation and student outcomes. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 7 (3), e81–e90.

Tanner, J. R., Stewart, G., Totaro, M. W., & Hargrave, M. (2012). Business simulation games: Effective teaching tools or window dressing? American Journal of Business Education (Online), 5 (2), 115.

Tao, Y. H., Yeh, C. C. R., & Hung, K. C. (2015). Validating the learning cycle models of business simulation games via student perceived gains in skills and knowledge. Educational Technology & Society, 18 (1), 77–90.

Terzidou, T., Tsiatsos, T., Dae, A., Samaras, O., & Chasanidou, A. (2012). Utilizing virtual worlds for game based learning: Grafica, a 3D educational game in second life. In 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 624-628). IEEE.

Tiwari, S. R., Nafees, L., & Krishnan, O. (2014). Simulation as a pedagogical tool: Measurement of impact on perceived effective learning. The International Journal of Management Education, 12 (3), 260–270.

Tsekleves, E., Cosmas, J., & Aggoun, A. (2014). Benefits, barriers and guideline recommendations for the implementation of serious games in education for stakeholders and policymakers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47 (1), 164–183. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12223 .

van Roessel, L., & van Mastrigt-Ide J. (2011). Collaboration and team composition in applied game creation processes. DiGRA '11, proceedings of the 2011 DiGRA international conference, think design play, 1-14.

von Wangenheim, C. G., Savi, R., & Borgatto, A. F. (2012). DELIVER!–an educational game for teaching earned value management in computing courses. Information and Software Technology, 54 (3), 286–298.

Vos, L., & Brennan, R. (2010). Marketing simulation games: Student and lecturer perspectives. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 28 (7), 882–897.

Wang, C., Huang, C. C., Lin, S. J., & Chen, J. W. (2016). Using multimedia tools and high-fidelity simulations to improve medical students' resuscitation performance: An observational study. BMJ Open, 6 (9), e012195.

Wang, L. C., & Chen, M. P. (2010). The effects of game strategy and preference-matching on flow experience and programming performance in game-based learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47 (1), 39–52.

Warren, J. N., Luctkar-Flude, M., Godfrey, C., & Lukewich, J. (2016). A systematic review of the effectiveness of simulation-based education on satisfaction and learning outcomes in nurse practitioner programs. Nurse Education Today, 46 , 99–108.

White, B., Kahriman, A., Luberice, L., & Idleh, F. (2010). Evaluation of software for introducing protein structure. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 38 (5), 284–289.

Willoughby, T. (2008). A short-term longitudinal study of internet and computer game use by adolescent boys and girls: Prevalence, frequency of use, and psychosocial predictors. Developmental Psychology, 44 (1), 195–204.

Woo, J. C. (2014). Digital game-based learning supports student motivation, cognitive success, and performance outcomes. Educational Technology & Society, 17 (3), 291–307.

Wouters, P., & van Oostendorp, H. (2013). A meta-analytic review of the role of instructional support in game-based learning. Computers & Education, 60 (1), 412–425.

Wouters, P., Van Nimwegen, C., Van Oostendorp, H., & Van Der Spek, E. D. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105 (2), 249–265.

Yang, J. C., Chen, C. H., & Jeng, M. C. (2010). Integrating video-capture virtual reality technology into a physically interactive learning environment for English learning. Computers & Education, 55 (3), 1346–1356.

Yang, J. C., Chien, K. H., & Liu, T. C. (2012). A digital game-based learning system energy for energy education: An energy conservation pet. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11 (2), 27–37.

Yang, Y. C., & Chang, C. L. (2013). Empowering students through digital game authorship: Enhancing concentration, critical thinking, and academic achievement. Computers & Education, 68 , 334–344.

Yin, C., Song, Y., Tabata, Y., Ogata, H., & Hwang, G. J. (2013). Developing and implementing a framework of participatory simulation for mobile learning using scaffolding. Educational Technology & Society, 16 (2), 137–150.

Young, M. F., Slota, S., Cutter, A. B., Jalette, G., Mullin, G., Lai, B., Simeoni, Z., Tran, M., & Yukhymenko, M. (2012). Our princess is in another castle a review of trends in serious gaming for education. Review of Educational Research, 82 (1), 61–89.

Zacharia, Z. C., & Olympiou, G. (2011). Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learning and Instruction, 21 (3), 317–331.

Zyda, M. (2005). From visual simulation to virtual reality to games. Computer, 38 (9), 25–32.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research was sponsored by Laureate International Universities, through the “David Wilson Award for Excellence in Teaching and Learning”, won by Dr. Dimitrios Vlachopoulos (2015-2017).

Authors' contributions

DV conceived the study. AM conducted the literature review and prepared the summaries and critical reflection on the corresponding literature. DV participated in the design of the study and analysis. AM participated in the preparation of the article's structure, graphs, and reference list. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interest

The authors declared that they have no competing interest.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Laureate Online Education / European University Cyprus, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Dimitrios Vlachopoulos

European University Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

Agoritsa Makri

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dimitrios Vlachopoulos .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Vlachopoulos, D., Makri, A. The effect of games and simulations on higher education: a systematic literature review. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 14 , 22 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0062-1

Download citation

Received : 28 November 2016

Accepted : 30 May 2017

Published : 10 July 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0062-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Game-based learning
• Digital games
• Pedagogical use
• Higher education
• Learning outcomes
• Cognitive goals
• Behavioural goals
• Affective goals

• Open access
• Published: 06 September 2023

Game-based learning in computer science education: a scoping literature review

• Maja Videnovik   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9859-5051 1 ,
• Tone Vold   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4850-3363 2 ,
• Linda Kiønig   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8768-9370 2 ,
• Ana Madevska Bogdanova   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0906-3548 3 &
• Vladimir Trajkovik   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8103-8059 3  

International Journal of STEM Education volume  10 , Article number:  54 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

12k Accesses

3 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

Using games in education has the potential to increase students’ motivation and engagement in the learning process, gathering long-lasting practical knowledge. Expanding interest in implementing a game-based approach in computer science education highlights the need for a comprehensive overview of the literature research. This scoping review aims to provide insight into current trends and identify research gaps and potential research topics concerning game-based learning in computer science. Using standard methodology for scoping review, we identified 113 articles from four digital libraries published between 2017 and 2021. Those articles were analyzed concerning the educational level, type of the game, computer science topic covered by the game, pedagogical strategies, and purpose for implementing this approach in different educational levels. The results show that the number of research articles has increased through the years, confirming the importance of implementing a game-based approach in computer science. Different kinds of games, using different technology, concerning different computer science topics are presented in the research. The obtained results indicate that there is no standardized game or standardized methodology that can be used for the creation of an educational game for computer science education. Analyzed articles mainly implement a game-based approach using learning by playing, and no significant focus is given to the effectiveness of learning by designing a game as a pedagogical strategy. Moreover, the approach is mainly implemented for developing computational thinking or programming skills, highlighting the need for its implementation in other topics beyond programming.

Introduction

The world is changing very fast due to the emergence of technology in our everyday lives. This tremendous change can be noticed in different areas, including education. Students are influenced by the digital era, surrounded by technology and working with a massive amount of digital information on an everyday base. They are used to interactive environments and fast communication and prefer learning by doing (Unger & Meiran, 2020 ). Traditional learning environments, where students should sit and listen to the information provided by the teachers are unacceptable for them (Campbell, 2020 ). Students require active learning environments, using the possibilities of various technology applications to gain knowledge. They seek more interesting, fun, motivating and engaging learning experiences (Anastasiadis et al., 2018 ).

Creating engaging learning environments can develop students' critical thinking, problem-solving skills, creativity and cooperation, preparing students for living in a constantly changing world (Joshi et al., 2022 ; Lapek, 2018 ; Tang et al., 2020 ). Education needs to shift toward active learning approaches that will encourage students to engage on a deeper level than traditional lecture-based methods (Boyer et al., 2014 ). To achieve this, teachers must find an approach tied to digital tools that students use daily (Videnovik et al., 2020 ).

Implementation of a game-based learning approach for creating engaging learning environments

Game-based learning is considered one of the most innovative learning approaches for increasing students' interest in education by playing games (Priyaadharshini et al., 2020 ). It refers to using games as an educational tool or strategy to facilitate learning and engagement (Li et al., 2021 ). Game-based learning involves designing and incorporating educational content within a game format, where players actively participate and interact with the game mechanics to acquire knowledge or develop skills. Many approaches tackle the umbrella of application of game-based learning in different educational fields. Different playful experiences can enable children to construct knowledge by playing and exploring a real-world problem often driven by students’ interest in inquiry (Hirsh-Pasek, 2020 ). Gamification is a process that uses game elements, such as points, rewards, badges and competition during the learning process, establishing interactive and engaging learning environments (Turan et al., 2016 ). Gamification aims to enhance motivation, engagement, and participation using the inherent appeal of games. Designing interactive and entertaining games, primarily for education, is a step forward in implementing game-based learning. Serious games enable players to cultivate their knowledge and practice their skills by overcoming numerous interruptions during gaming (Yu, 2019 ). Effectively designed serious games facilitate learning by stimulating creativity, igniting interest, promoting discourse, and cultivating a competitive drive for exploration in diverse fields. Different mobile and location-based technologies provide opportunities to embed learning in authentic environments and thereby enhance engagement and learning outside traditional formal educational settings (Huizenga et al., 2009 ). Those games can simulate various aspects of reality, such as driving a vehicle, managing a city, or piloting an aircraft, allowing players to experiment and make decisions in a safe space without real-world consequences (Toh & Kirschner, 2020 ).

Games enable the integration of intrinsic and extrinsic motivational components to create an environment, where players feel more motivated to engage in the activities (Hartt et al., 2020 ). When digital game-based learning is implemented, including key game design elements (collaboration, choice, feedback), there is typically a positive impact on student engagement (Serrano, 2019 ; Wang et al., 2022 ). Students approach gameplay with interest and dedication and are persistent in progressing it. Therefore, teachers must find different ways to implement a game-based approach in the classroom, utilizing students' engagement, persistence and motivation during gameplay for classroom activities. During game-based learning, students have fun and enjoy themselves with increased imagination and natural curiosity, which can lead to high levels of participation and the student's involvement in the learning process. In this way, students can be more successfully engaged in meaningful learning than traditional teaching methods (Hamari et al., 2016 ; Huizenga et al., 2009 ; Karram, 2021 ).

Research on using a game-based learning approach in education

In the last decade, the game-based approach is receiving increasing attention in the research community due to its potential to increase students' motivation and engagement, promoting a student-centred learning environment. Many researchers show that digital game-based learning is becoming a powerful tool in education, making learning more enjoyable, easier and efficient (Boyle et al., 2016 ; Hafeez, 2022 ). Implementation of a game-based learning approach can provide students with an engaging, motivating and stimulating environment (Ghergulescu & Muntean, 2012 ; Hwang et al., 2014 ), supporting them to focus on the task and increasing overall learning experiences (Hamari et al., 2016 ). Moreover, game-based learning has the potential to improve students’ competencies and academic performance (Clark et al., 2016 ; López-Fernández et al., 2021a , 2021b ; Mezentseva et al., 2021 ; Noroozi et al., 2020 ; Sanchez Mena & Martí-Parreño, 2017 ; Vu & Feinstein, 2017 ). It presents the learners with rich, immersive environments and experiences that are not just about learning facts but enables the development of problem-solving, decision-making, and strategic planning (Lymbery, 2012 ; Sung & Hwang, 2013 ) skills. In addition, the student's academic achievement using a game-based approach is better than those learning through the traditional method (Arcagök, 2021 ; Partovi & Razavi, 2019 ; Roodt & Ryklief, 2022 ; Wang et al., 2022 ). Educational games promote active and self-directed learning, enabling students to learn from authentic situations and receive immediate feedback (Pellas & Mystakidis, 2020 ; Zhao et al., 2021 ). It can be highly personalized, allowing students to learn at their own pace and in a way best suited to their individual needs and learning styles, engaging them in the self-assessment process (Videnovik et al., 2022 ). In a gaming environment, students can explore different scenarios, make choices, and learn from the consequences of their actions without fear of making a mistake.

Despite the great potential of the game-based approach for learning, it must be noted that developing educational games can be very complex and costly, and faces significant challenges (Boyle et al., 2016 ). The process of designing an educational game needs a lot of planning and requires a lot of skills (Hussein et al., 2019 ). Teachers do not have necessary skills to develop a game that combines entertainment and educational elements to increase student's interest and motivation during learning (Qian & Clarck, 2016 ). On the other side, game developers have problem to align educational goals within the game. In addition, the games must be well-designed and with the right level of complexity so the learners should not be bored or frustrated during the play (Liu et al., 2020 ; Vlahu-Gjorgievska et al., 2018 ), taking into account both educational and entertainment elements. That is why educators cannot depend solely on professional game designers and must take on the responsibility of creating these immersive learning experiences themselves or by engaging their students in the design process.

Game-based learning approach in computer science education

The game-based approach provides a dynamic and effective way for students to learn and apply their knowledge in a variety of subjects, such as math (Vankúš, 2021 ), physics (Cardinot & Fairfield, 2019 ), languages (Lee, 2019 ), and history (Kusuma et al., 2021 ). This approach allows students to learn complex concepts and skills in a fun and interactive way while also fostering critical thinking and collaboration. It is particularly effective in computer science, where students can learn about algorithms, data structures, networks, software testing and programming languages by designing and testing their games and simulations (Kalderova et al., 2023 ). In addition, game-based learning can help to bridge the gap between theory and practice, allowing students to apply their knowledge in a real-world context (Barz et al., 2023 ).

The importance of computer science has been emphasized in the last decade through different campaigns and online platforms. Their main aim is to develop students' computational thinking skills and attract students to coding, mainly through a game-based approach (code.org, codeweek.org). They offer teachers access to materials and learning scenarios covering different unplugged activities and block-based programming. Students have an opportunity to play games and learn basic programming concepts through fun and interactive activities, developing collaboration and competitiveness at the same time. Game narratives, collecting points, and immediate feedback through these games increase students’ engagement. These platforms are a valid option for developing computational thinking at an early age and a good way for students to develop creativity, critical thinking and problem-solving skills (Barradas et al., 2020 ).

Various block-based programming languages, which are also accessible online (Scratch, Footnote 1 Snap, Footnote 2 Blockly Footnote 3 ), are used to develop students' computational thinking and block-based programming skills, especially in primary education. In addition, they support the development of interactive projects that students can use afterward (Tsur & Rusk, 2018 ). Moreover, students can develop animations, interactive stories, and games, which allow them to engage in the coding process, learn programming concepts and even learn about other computer science topics during game design.

Topics connected with programming are the most common in computer science, but learning how to program is often recognized as a frustrating activity (Yassine et al., 2018 ). Learning object-oriented programming languages is especially difficult for students, because programming concepts are complex, cognitively demanding, require algorithmic thinking and problem-solving skills, and is a long-term process (Zapušek & Rugelj, 2013 ). Game-based learning stimulates active learning and enables students to learn about programming concepts in fun and engaging ways through visual interfaces and engaging environments (CodeCombat, Footnote 4 Alice, Footnote 5 Greenfoot Footnote 6 ). Those engaging and motivating environments enable simplifying complex programming concepts, such as inheritance, nested loops, and recursion (Karram, 2021 ).

Different pedagogical strategies can be used to implement game-based learning in computer science, empowering students' skills and increasing their active engagement in learning. For example, students can deepen their knowledge and skills on a given topic by playing the game (Hooshyar et al., 2021 ; Shabalina et al., 2017 ) or through the process of game design (Denner et al., 2012 ; Zhang et al., 2014 ). In both cases, the game-based approach can increase students' motivation and engagement in learning (Chandel et al., 2015 ; Park et al., 2020 ).

Existing reviews of game-based approach in computer science

Existing reviews of game-based approach in computer science provide valuable information about the latest trends in the implementation of game-based approach in the last few years. Table 1 presents latest trends in the implementation of game-based learning in computer science education.

Most of the review articles analyze publications that describe the implementation of game-based approach for learning programming (Abbasi et al., 2017 ; Diaz et al., 2021 ; Dos Santos et al., 2019 ; Laporte & Zaman, 2018 ; Shahid et al., 2019 ), from different aspects: game design, game elements, or their evaluation. However, there are some of them tackling other topics, such as cybersecurity (Karagiannis et al., 2020 ; Tioh et al., 2017 ) or cyberbullying (Calvo-Morata et al., 2020 ). Sharma et al. ( 2021 ) analyzes the impact of game-based learning on girls’ perception toward computer science. There are review articles that focus on just one aspect of computer science. For example, Chen et al. ( 2023 ) provides meta-analyses to investigate potential of unplugged activities on computational thinking skills.

In our review, we aim to perform the broader analysis of the research articles referring to the game-based approach in various computer science topics, different educational levels and different types of games. For that purpose, instead of systematic review, we have opted to perform the scoping review on significantly larger set of articles.

Valuable insight regarding the game-based approach in computer science has been provided in research concerning different educational levels, computer science topics, and used games. However, computer science is a field that is changing very fast, and the number of games that can be used for developing students' knowledge and skills is increasing all the time. As a result, continuous research in this field should be done.

This research aims to elaborate on current trends concerning the game-based approach in computer science. It focuses on the educational level, covered computer science topic, type of the game, purpose for its use, and pedagogical strategies for the implementation of this approach. Moreover, possible gaps and potential research topics concerning game-based learning in computer science in primary education are identified.

Current review

This research represents scoping review that identifies the educational context and the type of games used for implementing a game-based learning approach in computer science. The scoping review method was selected over systematic literature review, because we wanted to determine the scope of the literature in the field of game-based learning in computer science education, to examine how research is done on this topic and to identify and analyze research gaps in the literature (Munn et al., 2018 ).

Following Arksey and O’Malley ( 2005 ) five-step framework, which adopts a rigorous process of transparency, enabling replication of the search method and increasing the reliability of the results, the steps of the applied review process are: to (1) identify research questions (2) identify relevant studies, (3) study selection of papers, (4) charting the data, (5) summarizing and reporting the results.

Research questions

The focus of our research was to analyze what type of games were used in computer science, the subject's topics that were covered by the game and pedagogical strategies for implementing game-based learning, comparing all these in different educational levels. Starting from this, our research questions are:

RQ1: What kind of educational games are usually used during the implementation of the game-based approach in computer science?

Various games are used to cover topics from computer science, from block-based serious games (Vahldick et al., 2020 ) to educational escape rooms (López-Pernas et al., 2019 ). Using different games influences the learning process differently (Chang et al., 2020 ). The RQ1 seeks to identify and understand the types of educational games that are commonly utilized in the context of teaching computer science. Exploration of the variety of used games provides insights into the different approaches, mechanics, and formats used to enhance learning outcomes.

RQ2: Which pedagogical strategy is mostly used in the published research?

There are various strategies for implementing game-based learning in computer science education. The implementation strategies refer to whether students should learn by playing the game (Malliarakis et al., 2014 ) or by designing a game (Denner et al., 2012 ). The strategies can differ based on the gender of students (Harteveld et al., 2014 ), students' age (Bers, 2019 ), or the adopted approach by policymakers (Lindberg et al., 2019 ). RQ2 aims to identify the predominant pedagogical strategy employed in the published research on game-based approaches in computer science education. By examining the pedagogical strategies, researchers can gain insights into the most effective instructional methods that facilitate learning through game-based approaches. Furthermore, the findings can inform educators and researchers in designing and implementing effective instructional strategies that align with the goals of computer science education.

RQ3: Which computer science topics are covered by the game-based approach?

Game-based learning can be used to teach different computer science topics, from introduction topics (Fagerlund et al., 2021 ; Mathew et al., 2019 ), to core topics (Karram, 2021 ). RQ3 aims to provide value in exploring the specific computer science topics addressed through game-based approaches. In addition, it helps identify the range of topics that have been integrated into educational games. By understanding the computer science topics covered, researchers can assess the breadth and depth of the game-based approach and identify potential gaps or areas for further exploration in the curriculum.

RQ4: What are the potential research topics concerning the implementation of a game-based approach in computer science?

RQ4 is essential as it seeks to identify potential areas for future research in the implementation of game-based approaches in computer science education. It might include specific computer science topics (Calvo-Morata et al., 2020 ), strategies to implement game-based learning in computer science (Hooshyar et al., 2021 ), or ways to analyze the effects of game-based learning (Scherer et al., 2020 ). By exploring research topics that have not been extensively studied or require further investigation, researchers can identify new directions and opportunities for advancing the field. This can contribute to the ongoing development and improvement of game-based approaches in computer science education, fostering innovation and addressing emerging challenges.

Methodology

To answer research questions, we analyzed the contents of articles published from 2017 to 2021. Due to the rapid development of technology and change in the learnt computer science topics as well as designed game with new technology and tools, we have decided to research the articles that refer just to the interval of 5 years. As technology progresses swiftly, studying 5 year interval of the published literature ensures that scoping review results analyze the most current tools, approaches, and methodologies being utilized in the field of computer science education.

The research was done according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines (Peters et al., 2020 ). The PRISMA-ScR methodology is a structured approach used to conduct comprehensive and transparent scoping reviews. It involves identifying a research question, performing a systematic search of relevant literature, applying inclusion and exclusion criteria to select studies, extracting data from the included studies, analyzing and synthesizing the data to identify key themes or patterns, and reporting the findings. It aims to map the existing literature on a particular topic, identify key concepts, and examine the extent, range, and nature of research available. It is particularly useful for exploring complex and diverse research questions.

There is a large number of articles regarding the topic, so performing this kind of research manually seemed like labor-intensive work. Therefore, we have identified the opportunity to use the Natural Language Processing (NLP) toolkit (Zdravevski et al., 2019 ) to automate the literature search, scanning, and eligibility assessment. We have used this toolkit for article identification and selection (i.e., scanning procedures and eligibility criteria assessment). The search considered articles indexed in four digital libraries: IEEE, PubMed, Springer and Elsevier. The NLP toolkit requires structured data input comprising keywords, properties, property groups, required relevance, included sources, and start and end years.

The provided keywords serve as search criteria within available libraries, acting as the primary filter to determine which articles will be gathered for further analysis. At the beginning of setting up the NLP toolkit for the research, to address different games that can be used in education, we have identified the main keywords to be "Serious Games", "Educational Games", "Games in education" or "Games for learning". The NLP toolkit used these keywords to identify the potentially relevant articles in the mentioned digital libraries.

Furthermore, the NLP toolkit was adjusted to search specific properties (words or phrases) within the title, abstract, or keywords of already identified articles to select relevant articles in more detail, according to the features (properties groups) of the game-based learning approach that we are interested in: subject, educational level, educational context, purpose and used technology. Properties groups address synonyms and various versions of the phrase (e.g., educational games and serious games). To be included in the results, at least one representative from each property group must appear in the title or abstract of the article, thereby functioning as a secondary filter for identifying relevant articles.

The property group "subject" was set as mandatory during the search, because we were interested in analyzing articles that refer to game-based learning just in computer science. Since the name of this subject is different in different countries, we have used synonyms, such as "programming", "coding", and "informatics". The property group "age" or educational level included different synonyms for primary and secondary education, as well as higher education, although we did not make this property mandatory. To search about the used technology (web, online, mobile, augmented reality, virtual reality), we have set one property group to include a different kind of used technology, and we also set a property group that refers to the aim of using these educational games (to achieve students' engagement, increase motivation, evaluation of educational results, etc.). A more detailed description of the properties groups is given in Table 2 .

The following input parameter for the NLP toolkit set-up is the minimum relevant properties. In this research, it was set that each article has to contain a minimum of two of the previously defined properties to be considered relevant. The quality analysis of the relevant articles followed in the next step of the methodology.

Study selection

The initial search in four digital libraries: IEEE, PubMed, Springer and Elsevier, has identified 43,885 articles concerning using game-based learning in computer science. After articles had been identified based on the specified keywords and retrieved from the publishers, the duplicates were identified according to the article DOI as their unique identifier and removed, which has decreased the number of articles to 21,002. In the next step, the articles selection (screening and eligibility assessment) procedures followed, discarding articles not published in the required period or for which the title or abstract could not be analyzed because of parsing errors, unavailability, or other reasons. The screening process eliminated 11,129 articles and the remaining 9873 articles underwent an automated eligibility assessment using the advanced NLP toolkit functionalities. The automated eligibility analysis involved the following processing: tokenization of sentences (Manning et al., 2014 ; Webster et al., 1992 ) and English stop words removal, stemming, and lemmatization using the Natural Language Toolkit library (Bird, 2006 ). Furthermore, articles containing less than two properties were removed, which left 1209 articles eligible for further manual analysis and inclusion in identifying the research trends and summarizing the results.

For each of the articles from the collection of relevant articles, the toolkit automatically generated a bibliographic file (as defined by BibTeX reference management software). This file was manually analyzed in more detail to identify the most relevant articles for the purpose of our study. First, the abstract was read to see whether the article was relevant, and if that did not provide enough information, the whole article was read. For each of the research questions we used the same approach, but with different focuses. For the first research question, we looked for any specific game name. For the second research question, we were looking for any mentioning of the pedagogical approaches or strategies. For the third research question, we looked for different computer science topics used in computer science curricula. In that way, the most relevant articles concerning first three research questions were identified. The last research question is related to future potential research topics in the field of game-based learning in computer science education, so it was not used during this phase of selection of relevant articles.

As a result of the manual analysis of articles’ titles, articles that did not refer to computer science subjects were excluded, which left just 206 articles. We could not obtain the full text for some of articles, so they were excluded from further analyses. Some articles did not refer to using games to teach computer science topics, so they were also removed. The same was the case with a few articles not written in English. Finally, we had 125 relevant articles.

Nine relevant articles were review papers that referred to different game-based learning approaches at different educational levels. Among identified articles is a book describing different teaching methods in computer science education, including game-based learning (Hazzan et al., 2020 ). Two book chapters refer to different approaches of using game-based learning in education (Bellas et al., 2018 ; Zaw & Hlaing, 2020 ). These articles were also excluded from the list.

Finally, we finished the selection process and got 113 relevant articles using educational games in computer science that were the subject of further analysis.

The information flowchart presenting the numbers of identified, screened, processed, and removed articles in the automated NLP procedure and articles removed during the manual analysis is presented in Fig.  1 .

Flowchart of the PRISMA-SCR-based selection process

After the final identification of the most relevant studies concerning game-based learning in computer science, summaries were developed for each article. Information about their correspondence to education, educational level, used game, type of the game, covered computer science topic, educational context and general usefulness of the article was provided.

Distribution of published articles through the years

The distribution of the articles concerning the game-based approach in computer science through the years is presented in Fig.  2 . It can be noticed that the number of articles was increasing through the years, but then suddenly, in 2021, that number decreased. The reason might be found in the situation with the pandemic, because in 2020 and 2021, most of the schools were closed. In some of them, the teaching was transferred online, which resulted in a huge change in the way of teaching and learning, and it was a period of adaptation for teachers and students at the same time, which might lead to a decrease of the research articles.

Distribution of the published articles through the years

Distribution of published articles per country

The distribution of the published articles per country differs from country to country. Figure  3 presents the distribution of published articles per country, showing only the countries that have more than five published articles concerning game-based learning between 2017 and 2021. Most articles are published in the United States, followed by Brazil and Greece.

Distribution of the published articles per country, showing countries with more than five published articles

Further analysis of the relevant articles depending on the country, where the research was conducted, shows that just 17 (of 113) articles are joint work of researchers from different countries. Moreover, just two present joint research on game-based learning from three countries. The first one describes the methodology implemented within the European initiative Coding4girls, which proposes to teach coding through a game design based on a design thinking methodological approach linked to creativity and human-centred solutions (De Carvalho et al., 2020 ). The second joint research (Agbo et al., 2021 ) describes the students’ online co-creation of mini-games to develop their computational thinking skills. Interestingly, all other published articles describe implementing a game-based learning approach in computer science in the local context, making it difficult to generalize the conclusions and the research outcomes.

Distribution of published articles by publisher

Most of the relevant researched articles are published by IEEE Xplore (86 of 113) but mostly published as part of the proceedings at different conferences. This might explain why the number of published articles from IEEE Xplore differs from other publishing companies. Figure  4 presents the distribution of the articles by each of the publishers in detail, comparing published articles in journals and at conferences.

Distribution of the published articles by different publishers

Distribution of published articles by educational level

Identifying the number of articles according to the educational level was more complicated due to the different educational systems in different countries, resulting in a different understanding of the terms “primary”, and “secondary” education. In some countries, the same educational level is entitled as “primary”, and in others as “lower secondary” or even “middle school”. For example, in some countries, the primary school includes 6–14-year-old students; in others, it is divided, so there are primary (from 6 to 10 years), middle (11–13 years) and high schools (14–18 years); and in some, there are even lower secondary school (12–16 years). Therefore, we have tried to combine different categories according to the student’s age and to gather three levels: primary, secondary and university, according to the local context (primary education includes 6–14 years, secondary education includes 15–18 years). The situation with the distribution of the relevant articles is presented in Fig.  5 .

Distribution of the published articles in different educational levels

It can be noticed that most of the articles concern universities, although the number of articles that concern using games in computer science in primary and secondary schools is not small. It can be expected, because most of the articles refer to using games for developing programming skills, which is present mainly at the university level. However, in some countries, primary school students learn fundamental programming concepts.

Distribution of published articles by the purpose of implementation

The purpose of the research concerning game-based learning in computer science is different and mostly depends on the type of the game as well as the topic that is covered by the game. The distribution of the published articles according to the purpose of the implementation of the research is presented in Fig.  6 . However, it must be mentioned that it was difficult to distinguish the purposes of implementing the game-based approach in computer science, because the purpose was not clearly stated in the articles or there was overlapping among different categories.

Distribution of the published articles according to the purpose of the implementation

In the most articles (66 of 113), the research is done to measure students’ learning achievement or to evaluate the benefits of the game-based approach by comparing students’ knowledge and skills before and after implementing this approach. In addition, some articles are interested in students’ engagement and raising students’ interest and motivation for the learning process by implementing a game-based approach. However, just a few articles refer to using this approach for measuring students’ overall satisfaction with the whole experience (3 of 113).

Distribution of published articles by implemented pedagogical strategy and used technology

Manual analyses of the included articles gave us insight into additional aspects of implementing a game-based approach in computer science. When we talk about the game-based approach, there are two main pedagogical strategies for implementation: students can learn by playing the game, and students can learn while creating the game. The distribution of those two approaches in the published articles indicates that learning by playing games is more frequently used than learning by creating games. Only 19 of 113 relevant articles refer to the implementation of a game-based approach, where students learn during the process of game design or are involved themselves in the creation of the game. In most of the articles, students just use the created game (previously created or designed for the purpose of the research) to develop their competencies on a given topic. Regarding the technology used for the creation of the games in the published articles, it can be noticed that most of the games are web-based (although they have a mobile version, too), and there are just a few articles concerning the use of the unplugged activities as a game-based approach for learning computer science.

Distribution of published articles by covered computer science topic

Most of the articles concerning computer science topics covered during the implementation of the game-based approach refer to using to develop students’ programming skills in object-oriented programming, followed by the articles concerning block-based programming and the development of computational thinking skills. The number of articles that utilize the game-based approach in all other computer science topics is significantly smaller (in total, 14 from 113 articles). Figure  7 contains more detailed information about this distribution.

Distribution of the published articles according to the covered computer science topics

Types of educational games used for implementation of the game-based approach in computer science

Our research aims to provide information about the latest research trends concerning game-based learning in computer science education. Table 3 gives information about the implemented game, the type of the game, the computer science topic covered by the game, and the educational level, where the research concerning the game-based approach in computer science was carried out. The type of the game refers to the origin of the game creation, whether the game was already created and can be used or is created for the research by the author or by the students (they are learning during the game design process).

Detailed analysis of these relevant articles shows that different educational games are used to implement game-based learning in computer science, implementing different technologies for their design. Articles refer to using different platforms, environments or engines for creating games using different technology. In primary education, most implemented approaches include block-based environments, such as Blocky, Snap!, and Scratch. Those platforms give access to the already created game (De Carvallho et al., 2020 ; Sáiz Manzanares et al., 2020 ; Vourletsis & Politis, 2022 ) but also offer possibilities a game to be created by a teacher (Bevčič & Rugelj, 2020 ; Holenko Dlab & Hoic-Bozic, 2021 ; Wong & Jiang, 2018 ) or by the students during the learning process (Funke et al., 2017 ; Zeevaarders & Aivaloglouor, 2021 ). Even more, their use as a platform to code Arduino boards is presented in two of the articles (Sharma et al., 2019 ; Yongqiang et al., 2018 ). Block-based environments are used in the research in secondary education, too. For example, Araujo et al. ( 2018 ) measured students’ motivation for learning block-based programming by involving students in creating games in Scratch. Schatten and Schatten ( 2020 ) involve students in creating different games using CodeCombat during the CodeWeek initiative to increase their interest in programming, and Chang and Tsai ( 2018 ) are implementing an approach for learning programming in pairs while coding Kinnect with Scratch.

However, in the research articles concerning secondary education, it can be noticed that some specified games are created by the researcher (or teacher) to develop some concrete computer science skills. In these cases, the articles focus on the evaluation of the effectiveness of the game as an approach. For example, the chatbot’s serious game “PrivaCity” (Berger et al., 2019 ) is designed to raise students’ privacy awareness, as a very important topic among teenagers.

Similarly, “Capture the flag” is a game designed for learning about network security in a vocational school (Prabawa et al., 2017 ). The effectiveness of using the educational game “Degraf” in a vocational high school as supplementary material for learning graphic design subjects is measured by Elmunsyah et al. ( 2021 ). Furthermore, Hananto and Panjaburee ( 2019 ) developed the semi-puzzle game “Key and Chest” to develop algorithm thinking skills and concluded that this digital game could lead to better achievement than if the physical game is used for the same purpose. The number of games developed at the university level on a specific topic by the researchers is even more significant. However, there is still no standardized game, and the games differ among themselves depending on the topic covered by the game and the country, where the game is implemented.

Only a few games are mentioned more than once in the list of relevant articles. The implementation of “Code defenders” to enable students to learn about software testing in a fun and competitive way is researched by Clegg et al. ( 2017 ) and Fraser et al. ( 2020 ). However, the studies continue each other, presenting improvements in the game. Different block-based programming languages and online platforms such as Scratch, Snap!, and Code Combat are mentioned in several articles, too. Implementation of a game-based approach during the assessment process through the creation of quizzes in Kahoot is presented by Abidin and Zaman ( 2017 ) and Videnovik et al. ( 2018 ). Finally, several articles refer to the use of Escape room as a popular game implemented in an educational context (Giang et al., 2020 ; López-Pernas et al., 2019 , 2021 ; Seebauer et al., 2020 ; Towler et al., 2020 ). However, all these Escape room-style games are created on different platforms and cover different topics. Therefore, it can be concluded that no standardized type of game is implemented at a certain educational level or concerning a specific topic.

Further analyses were done concerning the type of the game, referring to the origin of the game: already created and just used for the research, created by the researcher for the purpose of the research or created by the students during the learning process. The distribution of the number of articles according to the type of the game in different educational levels is presented in Fig.  8 .

Distribution of the published articles according to the game designer in different educational levels

Most of the articles describe the implementation of a game-based approach when the author creates the game to test the game’s efficiency and make improvements based on the feedback received by the students. The number of games created by the author is the biggest at the university level, and the most balanced distribution of different kinds of games (created by the author, students or already created) is present in primary education. Interestingly, the most significant number of articles that concern using games created by students is in primary education. It shows that students in primary education have been the most involved in the process of game design, although they are young and have less knowledge and skills than students at other educational levels. This could be result of the fact that the articles that refer to primary education present a game’s design only in a block-based environment and using basic programming concepts. However, research articles do not refer to a standardized methodology of a framework for the creation of a game, and each game is designed individually depending on the used technology, topic and educational level.

Pedagogical strategies for implementation of the game-based approach in computer science

A detailed analysis of the pedagogical strategies for implementing a game-based approach shows that most relevant articles use games as a tool for learning the content. This trend continues in the recent period as well (Kaldarova et al., 2023 ). Hence, students play the game (already created or created by an author) to gather knowledge or develop their skills. Detail distribution of the research articles regarding pedagogical strategies for implementing a game-based approach is presented in Fig.  9 and more detailed data can be found in Table 3 . Some articles explain how students learn during the process of the creation of a game. Those are different games at different educational levels, but they all concern the process of designing a game on some platform that will develop their programming skills. Unfortunately, no article describes the process of developing students’ knowledge and skills on different computer science topics than programming while designing a game. It is a critical gap that should be considered as a topic in future research: to see whether students can learn about other computer science topics during the game creation process (while they develop their programming skills).

Distribution of the published articles according to the implemented pedagogical strategy

Computer science topics covered by game-based approach in computer science

Figure  10 gives insight into the distribution of the relevant articles concerning the computer science topic covered by the game-based approach. The topic that is mainly taught by a game-based approach at university is object-oriented programming. The situation is similar in secondary schools. Game-based approach is suitable classroom strategy for fostering higher order thinking skills, such as problem solving, group collaboration, and critical thinking, that are developed during learning object-oriented programming, which is consistent with previous research conducted by Chen et al. ( 2021 ).

Distribution of the published articles concerning the covered computer science topics

This can be expected, because the topic is complex for the students, and teachers must find different approaches and strategies to make it more understandable. In addition, in those educational levels, there is a distribution of the articles in different mentioned computer science topics (although it is not equally distributed).

However, if we analyze the topics covered by the game-based approach in primary education, it can be noticed that this approach is implemented in several topics only, mainly connected with the development of students’ computational thinking skills and fundaments of programming languages (see Table 3 for detailed overview). This trend continues in the recent years (Cheng et al., 2023 ; Mozelius & Humble, 2023 ).

Students in primary education mostly learn block-based programming languages, so it is expected that this will be the most frequent topic covered by the game-based approach. However, some articles also refer to object-oriented programming taught in upper grades. The interesting finding is that there are no articles about using educational games to learn other computer science topics, such as hardware, some applications, networks, and cybersecurity, in primary education, as there are in other educational levels. For example, there are two articles that elaborate on learning about internet safety using games in secondary education (Berger et al., 2019 ; Prabawa et al., 2017 ), and no article on game-based learning for internet safety in primary education. This lack of research articles concerning using the game-based approach for learning other topics in computer science in primary education can help identify potential future research topics.

Potential research topics concerning the game-based approach in computer science

While the lack of research articles concerning using the game-based approach for learning other topics in computer science in primary education is a good starting point for identifying potential future research topics, it is important to consider it in combination with practical constraints such are lack of knowledge, access to technology or teacher training on a specific subject. In that context, “Identifying the challenges, opportunities and solutions for integrating game-based learning methods in primary schools for specific computer science topics” can be a future research topic. It should be noted, that although some articles on specific topics can be found in the recent literature (Alam, 2022 ), there is a huge pool of topics, such are internet safety and digital citizenship that can be explored in this context.

There is an evident lack of articles on the use of game-based learning in primary and secondary schools. The findings in the existing literature that elaborate on how specific game design elements influence the learning process are minimal (Baek & Oh, 2019 ; Dos Santos et al., 2019 ; Emembolu et al., 2019 ; Kanellopoulou et al., 2021 ). These findings, combined with the finding of a limited number of articles that use existing games in the process of learning, define the potential future research topic "Assessing the role of game design elements in enhancing engagement and understanding of computer science concepts among primary and/or secondary school students". This research topic can use conceptual framework that investigates how specific elements of game design can contribute to increased engagement and improved understanding of computer science concepts in primary or/and education.

This research topic includes various specific research questions and theoretical frameworks. One possible set of research questions can investigate the specific elements of game design that can be incorporated into educational games or learning activities to enhance the learning experience. These elements may include interactive interfaces, engaging narratives, immersive environments, feedback mechanisms, competition or collaboration features, levels of difficulty, rewards, and progression systems. Different theories such are social cognitive theory (Lim et al., 2020 ) and self-determination theory (Ryan et al., 2006 ) can be used to better understand the motivational factors of different game design elements (interactivity, challenges, and rewards), and how they influence student engagement and sustain student interest and active participation in computer science learning.

All mentioned research questions can be investigated by conducting experiments, surveys, observations, or interviews to gather quantitative and qualitative data on student experiences and perceptions. Combined with data from learning outcomes, these potential findings can provide the information about overall effectiveness of using the elements of a game-based approach to learning computer science in primary schools.

Limitations

This scoping review focuses on the articles in four digital libraries, potentially leaving a significant number of articles out of the analyzing process.

Using the NLP toolkit automates searching for relevant articles. Undoubtedly, a human reader might better understand the context and better assess the relevance of an article and potentially include some articles that NLP toolkit classified as irrelevant. In addition, after the initial selection by NLP toolkit, we performed the quality assessment of the identified articles, for each of the research questions. In that way, we ensured that only relevant articles are included in the study, but it might happen that, due to the phase of selection some relevant articles were omitted from the study.

Detailed meta-analyses within the selected group of articles concerning a particular research feature can further contribute to the existing body of knowledge. Similar analyses exist, but not on learning computer science (Gui et al., 2023 ). For example, in our manuscript, we did not consider the size of the student population, existence of the control group of students, or replicability of the studies.

This scoping review discusses implementation of game-based approach in computer science by analyzing research articles in four digital libraries published between 2017 and 2021. In total, 113 research articles were analyzed concerning the educational level, where the game-based approach is implemented, the type of the game, covered computer science topic, pedagogical strategy and purpose of the implementation. The results show that the number of research articles is increasing through the years, confirming the importance of implementing a game-based approach in computer science. Most of these articles refer to the research in just one country, in the local context, making it difficult to generalize the research outcomes and conclusions on the international level.

The article presents various games using various technologies concerning several computer science topics. However, there is no standardized game or methodology that can be used for designing an educational game. Implemented game in each of the researched articles depends on the educational level, covered topic and game type. From our findings, it is evident that most articles refer to the implementation of the game-based approach, where students gather the necessary knowledge and skills while playing a game. Just a few of them incorporate the process of learning by designing educational games, and this learning is connected to developing computational thinking or programming skills.

Potential future research might be focused on identifying the challenges, opportunities, and solutions for integrating game-based learning methods for a specific computer science topic. Example topics might be internet safety and digital citizenship.

The lack of research articles on game-based learning in primary and secondary schools, along with limited findings on the influence of game design elements, highlights the need to assess how different elements enhance engagement and understanding of computer science concepts.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated and analyzed during this study are included in this article.

https://scratch.mit.edu/

https://snap.berkeley.edu/

https://blockly.games/

https://codecombat.com/

https://www.alice.org/

https://greenfoot.org/door

Abbasi, S., Kazi, H., & Khowaja, K. (2017). A systematic review of learning object-oriented programming through serious games and programming approaches. In 2017 4th IEEE International Conference on Engineering Technologies and Applied Sciences (ICETAS) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICETAS.2017.8277894

Abdellatif, A. J., McCollum, B., & McMullan, P. (2018). Serious games quality characteristics evaluation: The case study of optimizing Robocode. In 2018 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE) (pp. 1–4). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SIIE.2018.8586730

Abidin, H. Z., & Kamaru Zaman, F. H. (2017). Students’ perceptions on game-based classroom response system in a computer programming course. In 2017 IEEE 9th International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED) (pp. 254–259). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEED.2017.8251203

Agalbato, F., & Loiacono, D. (2018). Robo 3 : A puzzle game to learn coding. In 2018 IEEE Games, Entertainment, Media Conference (GEM) (pp. 359–366). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/GEM.2018.8516515

Agbo, F. J., Oyelere, S. S., Suhonen, J., & Laine, T. H. (2021). Co-design of mini games for learning computational thinking in an online environment. Education and Information Technologies, 26 (5), 5815–5849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10515-1

Article   Google Scholar  

Alam, A. (2022). A digital game-based learning approach for effective curriculum transaction for teaching-learning of artificial intelligence and machine learning. In  2022 International Conference on Sustainable Computing and Data Communication Systems (ICSCDS)  (pp. 69–74). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/icscds53736.2022.9760932

Alatrista-Salas, H., & Nunez-Del-Prado, M. (2018). Teaching software engineering through computer games. In 2018 IEEE World Engineering Education Conference (EDUNINE) (pp. 1–4). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUNINE.2018.8450996

Anastasiadis, T., Lampropoulos, G., & Siakas, K. (2018). Digital game-based learning and serious games in education. International Journal of Advances in Scientific Research and Engineering., 4 (12), 139–144. https://doi.org/10.31695/IJASRE.2018.33016

Araujo, L. G. J., Bittencourt, R. A., & Santos, D. M. B. (2018). Contextualized spiral learning of computer programming in Brazilian vocational secondary education. In 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1–9). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2018.8658456

Arcagök, S. (2021). The impact of game-based teaching practices in different curricula on academic achievement. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 8 (2), 778–796.

Google Scholar  

Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International journal of social research methodology , 8 (1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616 .

Baek, J., & Oh, G. (2019). Development of a puzzle game to learn coding for elementary students. In C. Stephanidis (Ed.), HCI International 2019 – Late Breaking Papers (pp. 267–279). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30033-3_21

Barradas, R., Lencastre, J., Soares, S., & Valente, A. (2020). Developing computational thinking in early ages: A review of the code.org platform. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU2020) (pp. 157–168). SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications https://doi.org/10.5220/0009576801570168

Barriga, N. A., & Besoain, F. (2020). Artificial intelligence and mobile programming courses for a video game development program in Chile. Computing in Science & Engineering, 22 (4), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2020.2986758

Barz, N., Benick, M., Dörrenbächer-Ulrich, L., & Perels, F. (2023). The effect of digital game-based learning interventions on cognitive, metacognitive, and affective-motivational learning outcomes in school: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research . https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231167795

Bellas, F., Naya, M., Varela, G., Llamas, L., Prieto, A., Becerra, J. C., Bautista, M., Faiña, A., & Duro, R. (2018). The Robobo project: Bringing educational robotics closer to real-world applications. In W. Lepuschitz, M. Merdan, G. Koppensteiner, R. Balogh, & D. Obdržálek (Eds.), Robotics in education: Latest results and developments (pp. 226–237). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62875-2_20

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Berger, E., Sæthre, T. H., & Divitini, M. (2019). PrivaCity: A chatbot game to raise privacy awareness among teenagers. In S. N. Pozdniakov & V. Dagienė (Eds.), Informatics in schools. New ideas in school informatics (pp. 293–304). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33759-9_23

Bers, M. U. (2019). Coding as another language: A pedagogical approach for teaching computer science in early childhood. Journal of Computers in Education, 6 (4), 499–528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-019-00147-3

Bevcic, M., & Rugelj, J. (2020). Game design-based learning of programming for girls. In 2020 43rd International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology (MIPRO) (pp. 576–580). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.23919/MIPRO48935.2020.9245175

Bird, S. (2006). NLTK: the natural language toolkit. In  Proceedings of the COLING/ACL 2006 Interactive Presentation Sessions  (pp. 69–72). https://doi.org/10.3115/1225403.1225421

Borna, K., & Rad, H. M. (2018). Serious games in computer science learning goals. In 2018 2nd National and 1st International Digital Games Research Conference: Trends, Technologies, and Applications (DGRC) (pp. 161–166). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/DGRC.2018.8712030

Boyer, S. L., Edmondson, D. R., Artis, A. B., & Fleming, D. (2014). Self-directed learning: A tool for lifelong learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 36 (1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475313494010

Boyle, E. A., Hainey, T., Connolly, T. M., Gray, G., Earp, J., Ott, M., Lim, T., Ninaus, M., Ribeiro, C., & Pereira, J. (2016). An update to the systematic literature review of empirical evidence of the impacts and outcomes of computer games and serious games. Computers & Education, 94 , 178–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.003

Calvo-Morata, A., Alonso-Fernández, C., Freire, M., Martínez-Ortiz, I., & Fernández-Manjón, B. (2020). Serious games to prevent and detect bullying and cyberbullying: A systematic serious games and literature review. Computers & Education, 157 , 103958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103958

Campbell, L. (2020). Teaching in an inspiring learning space: An investigation of the extent to which one school’s innovative learning environment has impacted on teachers’ pedagogy and practice. Research Papers in Education, 35 (2), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1568526

Cardinot, A., & Fairfield, J. A. (2019). Game-based learning to engage students with physics and astronomy using a board game. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 9 (1), 42–57. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJGBL.2019010104

Chandel, P., Dutta, D., Tekta, P., Dutta, K., & Gupta, V. (2015). Digital game-based learning in computer science education. CPUH-Research Journal, 1 (2), 33–37.

Chang, C. S., Chung, C. H., & Chang, J. A. (2020). Influence of problem-based learning games on effective computer programming learning in higher education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68 , 2615–2634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09784-3

Chang, C. K., & Tsai, Y. T. (2018). Pair-programming curriculum development of motion-based game for enhancing computational thinking skills. In  2018 7th International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI)  (pp. 284–287). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2018.00061

Chen, P. Y., Hwang, G. J., Yeh, S. Y., Chen, Y. T., Chen, T. W., & Chien, C. H. (2021). Three decades of game-based learning in science and mathematics education: An integrated bibliometric analysis and systematic review. Journal of Computers in Education, 9 (3), 455–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-021-00210-y

Chen, P., Yang, D., Metwally, A. H. S., Lavonen, J., & Wang, X. (2023). Fostering computational thinking through unplugged activities: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 10 (1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00434-7

Cheng, Y. P., Lai, C. F., Chen, Y. T., Wang, W. S., Huang, Y. M., & Wu, T. T. (2023). Enhancing student’s computational thinking skills with student-generated questions strategy in a game-based learning platform. Computers & Education, 200 , 104794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104794

Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Killingsworth, S. S. (2016). Digital games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86 , 79–122. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582065

Clegg, B. S., Rojas, J. M., & Fraser, G. (2017). Teaching software testing concepts using a mutation testing game. In 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training Track (ICSE-SEET) (pp. 33–36). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEET.2017.1

Corda, F., Onnis, M., Pes, M., Spano, L. D., & Scateni, R. (2019). BashDungeon: Learning UNIX with a video-game. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 78 (10), 13731–13746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-019-7230-3

Daungcharone, K., Panjaburee, P., & Thongkoo, K. (2017). Using digital game as compiler to motivate C programming language learning in higher education. In 2017 6th IIAI International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI) (pp. 533–538). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2017.77

De Carvalho, C. V., Cerar, Š, Rugelj, J., Tsalapatas, H., & Heidmann, O. (2020). Addressing the gender gap in computer programming through the design and development of serious games. IEEE Revista Iberoamericana De Tecnologias Del Aprendizaje, 15 (3), 242–251. https://doi.org/10.1109/RITA.2020.3008127

De Kereki, I. F., & Adorjan, A. (2018). Serious games: Using abstract strategy games in computer science 2: An experience report and lessons learned. In 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 169–174). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363224

De Troyer, O., Lindberg, R., Maushagen, J., & Sajjadi, P. (2019). Development and evaluation of an educational game to practice the truth tables of logic. In 2019 IEEE 19th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) (pp. 92–96). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2019.00032

Denner, J., Werner, L., & Ortiz, E. (2012). Computer games created by middle school girls: Can they be used to measure understanding of computer science concepts? Computers & Education, 58 (1), 240–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.006

Díaz, J., López, J. A., Sepúlveda, S., Ramírez Villegas, G. M., Ahumada, D., & Moreira, F. (2021). Evaluating aspects of usability in video game-based programming learning platforms. Procedia Computer Science, 181 , 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.01.141

Dočkalová Burská, K., Rusňák, V., & Ošlejšek, R. (2022). Data-driven insight into the puzzle-based cybersecurity training. Computers & Graphics, 102 , 441–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2021.09.011

Dos Santos, A. L., Souza, M. R. D. A., Dayrell, M., & Figueiredo, E. (2018). Exploring game elements in learning programming: An empirical evaluation. In 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1–9). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2018.8658505

Dos Santos, A. L., Souza, M. R. D. A., Dayrell, M., & Figueiredo, E. (2019). A systematic mapping study on game elements and serious games for learning programming. In B. M. McLaren, R. Reilly, S. Zvacek, & J. Uhomoibhi (Eds.), Computer supported education (Vol. 1022, pp. 328–356). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21151-6_17

Duch, P., & Jaworski, T. (2018). Enriching computer science programming classes with Arduino game development. In 2018 11th International Conference on Human System Interaction (HIS) (pp. 148–154). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HSI.2018.8430994

Eleftheriadis, S., & Xinogalos, S. (2020). Office Madness: Design and pilot evaluation of a serious game for learning the C++ programming language. In I. Marfisi-Schottman, F. Bellotti, L. Hamon, & R. Klemke (Eds.), Games and learning alliance (pp. 389–394). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63464-3_36

Elmunsyah, H., Kusumo, G. R., Pujianto, U., & Prasetya, D. D. (2018). Development of mobile based educational game as a learning media for basic programming in VHS. In 2018 5th International Conference on Electrical Engineering, Computer Science and Informatics (EECSI) (pp. 416–420). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EECSI.2018.8752658

Elmunsyah, H., Herwanto, H. W., Smaragdina, A. A., Anggraini, N. S., & Utomo, W. M. (2021). DEGRAF educational game as a supplement for basic graphic design subjects for vocational high school students. In 2021 7th International Conference on Electrical, Electronics and Information Engineering (ICEEIE) (pp. 128–132). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEEIE52663.2021.9616829

Emembolu, I., Strachan, R., Davenport, C., Dele-Ajayi, O., & Shimwell, J. (2019). Encouraging diversity in computer science among young people: Using a games design intervention based on an integrated pedagogical framework. In 2019 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE43999.2019.9028436

Evripidou, S., Amanatiadis, A., Christodoulou, K., & Chatzichristofis, S. A. (2021). Introducing algorithmic thinking and sequencing using tangible robots. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 14 (1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2021.3058060

Fagerlund, J., Häkkinen, P., Vesisenaho, M., & Viiri, J. (2021). Computational thinking in programming with Scratch in primary schools: A systematic review. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29 (1), 12–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22255

Fraser, G., Gambi, A., & Rojas, J. M. (2020). Teaching software testing with the Code Defenders testing game: Experiences and improvements. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW) (pp. 461–464). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSTW50294.2020.00082

Funke, A., Geldreich, K., & Hubwieser, P. (2017). Analysis of Scratch projects of an introductory programming course for primary school students. In 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1229–1236). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2017.7943005

Gabaruk, J., Logofatu, D., Groskreutz, D., & Andersson, C. (2019). On teaching Java and object oriented programming by using children board games. In 2019 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 601–606). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2019.8725264

Garcia-Ruiz, M. A., Alvarez-Cardenas, O., & Iniguez-Carrillo, A. L. (2021). Experiences in developing and testing BBC Micro: Bit games in a K-12 Coding Club during the COVID-19 Pandemic. In 2021 IEEE/ACIS 20th International Fall Conference on Computer and Information Science (ICIS Fall) (pp. 161–164). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICISFall51598.2021.9627364

Gardeli, A., & Vosinakis, S. (2019). ARQuest: A tangible augmented reality approach to developing computational thinking skills. In 2019 11th International Conference on Virtual Worlds and Games for Serious Applications (VS-Games) (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/VS-Games.2019.8864603

Ghergulescu, I., & Muntean, C. H., et al. (2012). Measurement and analysis of learner’s motivation in game-based e-learning. In D. Ifenthaler (Ed.), Assessment in game-based learning: Foundations, innovations, and perspectives (pp. 355–378). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3546-4_18

Giang, C., Chevalier, M., Negrini, L., Peleg, R., Bonnet, E., Piatti, A., & Mondada, F. (2020). Exploring Escape games as a teaching tool in educational robotics. In M. Moro, D. Alimisis, & L. Iocchi (Eds.), Educational robotics in the context of the maker movement (pp. 95–106). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18141-3_8

Gossen, F., Kuhn, D., Margaria, T., & Lamprecht, A. (2018). Computational thinking: Learning by doing with the Cinco adventure game tool. In 2018 IEEE 42nd Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC) (pp. 990–999). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC.2018.00175

Groza, A., Baltatescu, M. M., & Pomarlan, M. (2020). MineFOL: A game for learning first order logic. In 2020 IEEE 16th International Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing (ICCP) (pp. 153–160). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCP51029.2020.9266174

Gui, Y., Cai, Z., Yang, Y., Kong, L., Fan, X., & Tai, R. H. (2023). Effectiveness of digital educational game and game design in STEM learning: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of STEM Education, 10 (1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00424-9

Gulec, U., Yilmaz, M., Yalcin, A. D., O’Connor, R. V., & Clarke, P. M. (2019). CENGO: A web-based serious game to increase the programming knowledge levels of computer engineering students. In A. Walker, R. V. O’Connor, & R. Messnarz (Eds.), Systems, software and services process improvement (pp. 237–248). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28005-5_18

Hafeez, M. (2022). Effects of game-based learning in comparison to traditional learning to provide an effective learning environment: A comparative review. Contemporary Educational Researches Journal, 12 (2), 89–105. https://doi.org/10.18844/cerj.v12i2.6374

Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54 , 170–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045

Hananto, A. A. F., & Panjaburee, P. (2019). Proposing an online peer-feedback approach in digital game from a semi-puzzle game-based learning perspective. In 2019 8th International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI) (pp. 254–259). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2019.00058

Harteveld, C., Smith, G., Carmichael, G., Gee, E., & Stewart-Gardiner, C. (2014). A design-focused analysis of games teaching computer science. Proceedings of Games+ Learning_ Society, 10 , 1–8.

Hartt, M., Hosseini, H., & Mostafapour, M. (2020). Game on: Exploring the effectiveness of game-based learning. Planning Practice & Research, 35 (5), 589–604. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2020.1778859

Hazzan, O., Ragonis, N., & Lapidot, T. (2020). Teaching methods in computer science education. In O. Hazzan, N. Ragonis, & T. Lapidot (Eds.), Guide to teaching computer science: An activity-based approach (pp. 181–220). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39360-1_10

Hirsh-Pasek, K., Hadani, H. S., Blinkoff, E., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2020). A new path to education reform: playful learning promotes 21st century skills in school and beyond.  Policy Brief . https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Big-Ideas_Hirsh-Pasek_PlayfulLearning.pdf

Holanda, M., Araujo, A. P. F., & Walter, M. E. (2020). Meninas.comp project: Programming for girls in high school in Brazil. In 2020 Research on Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT) (pp. 1–2). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT49803.2020.9272419

Holenko Dlab, M., & Hoic-Bozic, N. (2021). Effectiveness of game development-based learning for acquiring programming skills in lower secondary education in Croatia. Education and Information Technologies, 26 (4), 4433–4456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10471-w

Hong, T. Y., & Chu, H. C. (2017). Effects of a situated 3D computational problem-solving and programming game-based learning model on students’ learning perception and cognitive loads. In 2017 6th IIAI International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI) (pp. 596–600). IEEE https://doi.org/10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2017.96

Hooshyar, D., Pedaste, M., Yang, Y., Malva, L., Hwang, G.-J., Wang, M., Lim, H., & Delev, D. (2021). From gaming to computational thinking: An adaptive educational computer game-based learning approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59 (3), 383–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120965919

Horst, R., Naraghi-Taghi-Off, R., Diez, S., Uhmann, T., Müller, A., & Dörner, R. (2019). FunPlogs – a serious puzzle mini-game for learning fundamental programming principles using visual scripting. In G. Bebis, R. Boyle, B. Parvin, D. Koracin, D. Ushizima, S. Chai, S. Sueda, X. Lin, A. Lu, D. Thalmann, C. Wang, & P. Xu (Eds.), Advances in Visual Computing (pp. 494–504). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33720-9_38

Huang, L. W., Chen, L. W., & Cheng, P. H. (2019). Board game design for Python programming education. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Education (TALE) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE48000.2019.9225988

Huang, L. W., Cheng, P. H., & Chen, L. W. (2021). Web-based board game for learning Python. In 2021 IEEE World Conference on Engineering Education (EDUNINE) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUNINE51952.2021.9429144

Huizenga, J., Admiraal, W., Akkerman, S., & Dam, G. T. (2009). Mobile game-based learning in secondary education: Engagement motivation and learning in a mobile city game. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning., 25 (4), 332–344. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00316.x

Hussein, M. H., Ow, S. H., Cheong, L. S., & Thong, M.-K. (2019). A digital game-based learning method to improve students’ critical thinking skills in elementary science. IEEE Access, 7 , 96309–96318. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2929089

Hwang, G. J., Hung, C. M., & Chen, N. S. (2014). Improving learning achievements, motivations and problem-solving skills through a peer assessment-based game development approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62 (2), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9320-7

Jagust, T., Krzic, A. S., Gledec, G., Grgic, M., & Bojic, I. (2018). Exploring different unplugged game-like activities for teaching computational thinking. In 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1–5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2018.8659077

Joshi, D. R., Adhikari, K. P., Khanal, B., Khadka, J., & Belbase, S. (2022). Behavioral, cognitive, emotional and social engagement in mathematics learning during COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE, 17 (11), e0278052. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278052

Jovanov, M., Ilijoski, B., Stankov, E., & Armenski, G. (2017). Creation of educational games—project based learning in e-learning systems course. In 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1274–1281). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2017.7943012

Kaldarova, B., Omarov, B., Zhaidakbayeva, L., Tursynbayev, A., Beissenova, G., Kurmanbayev, B., & Anarbayev, A. (2023). Applying game-based learning to a primary school class in computer science terminology learning. Frontiers in Education . https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1100275

Kanellopoulou, I., Garaizar, P., & Guenaga, M. (2021). First steps towards automatically defining the difficulty of maze-based programming challenges. IEEE Access, 9 , 64211–64223. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3075027

Kannappan, V. T., Fernando, O. N. N., Chattopadhyay, A., Tan, X., Hong, J. Y. J., Seah, H. S., & Lye, H. E. (2019). La Petite Fee Cosmo: Learning data structures through game-based learning. In 2019 International Conference on Cyberworlds (CW) (pp. 207–210). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CW.2019.00041

Kantharaju, P., Alderfer, K., Zhu, J., Char, B., Smith, B., & Ontanon, S. (2020). Modeling player knowledge in a parallel programming educational game. IEEE Transactions on Games, 14 (1), 64–75. https://doi.org/10.1109/TG.2020.3037505

Karagiannis, S., Papaioannou, T., Magkos, E., & Tsohou, A. (2020). Game-based information security/privacy education and awareness: Theory and practice. In M. Themistocleous, M. Papadaki, & M. M. Kamal (Eds.), Information Systems (Vol. 402, pp. 509–525). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63396-7_34

Karram, O. (2021). The role of computer games in teaching object-oriented programming in high schools—Code Combat as a game approach. WSEAS Transactions on Advances in Engineering Education, 18 , 37–46. https://doi.org/10.37394/232010.2021.18.4

Kazimoglu, C. (2020). Enhancing confidence in using computational thinking skills via playing a serious game: A case study to increase motivation in learning computer programming. IEEE Access, 8 , 221831–221851. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3043278

Kintsakis, D., & Rangoussi, M. (2017). An early introduction to STEM education: Teaching computer programming principles to 5 th graders through an e-learning platform: A game-based approach. In 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 17–23). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2017.7942816

Klimová, N., Šajben, J., & Lovászová, G. (2021). Online game-based learning through Minecraft: Education edition programming contest. In 2021 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1660–1668). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON46332.2021.9453953

Kucera, E., Haffner, O., & Leskovsky, R. (2020). Multimedia application for object-oriented programming education developed by Unity engine. In 2020 Cybernetics & Informatics (K&I) (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/KI48306.2020.9039853

Kurniawati, A., Akbar, N. H., & Prasetyo, D. (2018). Visual learning on mobile phone for introduction basic programming in vocational high school. In 2018 International Conference on Computer Engineering, Network and Intelligent Multimedia (CENIM) (pp. 186–191). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CENIM.2018.8710873

Kusuma, G. P., Putera Suryapranata, L. K., Wigati, E. K., & Utomo, Y. (2021). Enhancing historical learning using role-playing game on mobile platform. Procedia Computer Science, 179 , 886–893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.01.078

Lapek, J. (2018). Promoting 21st century skills in problem-based learning environments. CTETE-Research Monograph Series, 1 (1), 66–85. https://doi.org/10.21061/ctete-rms.v1.c.4

Laporte, L., & Zaman, B. (2018). A comparative analysis of programming games, looking through the lens of an instructional design model and a game attributes taxonomy. Entertainment Computing, 25 , 48–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2017.12.005

Lee, S. M. (2019). Her Story or their own stories? Digital game-based learning, student creativity, and creative writing. ReCALL, 31 (3), 238–254. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344019000028

Li, F. Y., Hwang, G. J., Chen, P. Y., & Lin, Y. J. (2021). Effects of a concept mapping-based two-tier test strategy on students’ digital game-based learning performances and behavioral patterns. Computers & Education, 173 , 104293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104293

Lim, J. S., Choe, M. J., Zhang, J., & Noh, G. Y. (2020). The role of wishful identification, emotional engagement, and parasocial relationships in repeated viewing of live-streaming games: A social cognitive theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 108 , 106327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106327

Lindberg, R. S., Laine, T. H., & Haaranen, L. (2019). Gamifying programming education in K-12: A review of programming curricula in seven countries and programming games. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50 (4), 1979–1995. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12685

Liu, Z. Y., Shaikh, Z., & Gazizova, F. (2020). Using the concept of game-based learning in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15 (14), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i14.14675

Lopez-Fernandez, D., Gordillo, A., Alarcon, P. P., & Tovar, E. (2021a). Comparing traditional teaching and game-based learning using teacher-authored games on computer science education. IEEE Transactions on Education, 64 (4), 367–373. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2021.3057849

Lopez-Fernandez, D., Gordillo, A., Ortega, F., Yague, A., & Tovar, E. (2021b). LEGO® serious play in software engineering education. IEEE Access, 9 , 103120–103131. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3095552

López-Pernas, S., Gordillo, A., Barra, E., & Quemada, J. (2019). Analyzing learning effectiveness and students’ perceptions of an educational Escape room in a programming course in higher education. IEEE Access, 7 , 184221–184234. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2960312

López-Pernas, S., Gordillo, A., Barra, E., & Quemada, J. (2021). Comparing face-to-face and remote educational Escape rooms for learning programming. IEEE Access, 9 , 59270–59285. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3073601

Lotfi, E., Othman, B. Y., & Mohammed, B. (2019). Towards a mobile serious game for learning object oriented programming paradigms. In M. BenAhmed, A. A. Boudhir, & A. Younes (Eds.), Innovations in smart cities applications Edition 2 (pp. 450–462). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11196-0_38

Lymbery, J. (2012). The potential of a game-based learning approach to improve learner outcomes. Computers in New Zealand Schools, 24 (1), 21–39.

Malizia, A., Fogli, D., Danesi, F., Turchi, T., & Bell, D. (2017). TAPASPlay: A game-based learning approach to foster computation thinking skills. In 2017 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC) (pp. 345–346). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/VLHCC.2017.8103502

Malliarakis, C., Satratzemi, M., & Xinogalos, S. (2014). Educational games for teaching computer programming. Research on e-Learning and ICT in Education Technological, Pedagogical and Instructional Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6501-0_7

Manning, C., Surdeanu, M., Bauer, J., Finkel, J., Bethard, S., & McClosky, D. (2014). The Stanford CoreNLP natural language processing toolkit. In Proceedings of 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations (pp. 55–60). https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/P14-5010

Martins, E. R., Geraldes, W. B., Afonseca, U. R., & Gouveia, L. M. B. (2019). Using Kahoot as a learning tool. In I. Ramos, R. Quaresma, P. Silva, & T. Oliveira (Eds.), Information systems for industry 4.0 (Vol. 31, pp. 161–169). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14850-8_11

Mathew, R., Malik, S. I., & Tawafak, R. M. (2019). Teaching problem solving skills using an educational game in a computer programming course. Informatics in Education, 18 (2), 359–373. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2019.17

Meftah, C., Retbi, A., Bennani, S., & Idrissi, M. K. (2019). Evaluation of user experience in the context of mobile serious game. In 2019 International Conference on Intelligent Systems and Advanced Computing Sciences (ISACS) (pp. 1–5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISACS48493.2019.9068872

Mezentseva, L. V., Kolganov, S. V., Dvoryankin, O. A., & Tuganova, S. V. (2021). Game-driven learning in the digital age: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT)., 12 (10), 2244–2253. https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i10.4747

Miljanovic, M. A., & Bradbury, J. S. (2020). GidgetML: An adaptive serious game for enhancing first year programming labs. In 2020 IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training (ICSE-SEET) (pp. 184–192). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1145/3377814.3381716

Min, W., Mott, B., Park, K., Taylor, S., Akram, B., Wiebe, E., Boyer, K. E., & Lester, J. (2020). Promoting computer science learning with block-based programming and narrative-centered gameplay. In 2020 IEEE Conference on Games (CoG) (pp. 654–657). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CoG47356.2020.9231881

Montes, H., Hijon-Neira, R., Perez-Marin, D., & Montes, S. (2021). Using an online serious game to teach basic programming concepts and facilitate gameful experiences for high school students. IEEE Access, 9 , 12567–12578. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3049690

Mosquera, C. K., Steinmaurer, A., Eckhardt, C., & Guetl, C. (2020). Immersively learning object oriented programming concepts with sCool. In 2020 6th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (ILRN) (pp. 124–131). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.23919/iLRN47897.2020.9155144

Mozelius, P., & Humble, N. (2023). Design factors for an educational game where girls and boys play together to learn fundamental programming. In  International Conference on ArtsIT, Interactivity and Game Creation  (pp. 134–148). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28993-4_10

Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18 (1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

Nche, O. M., Welter, J., Che, M., Kraemer, E. T., Sitaraman, M., & Zordan, V. B. (2019). CodeTracesure—combining gaming, CS concepts, and pedagogy. In 2019 Research on Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT) (pp. 1–2). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT46404.2019.8985865

Nche, O. M., Boulware, R., Che, S. M., Kraemer, E. T., Sitaraman, M., & Zordan, V. B. (2020). Basic code understanding challenges for elementary school children. In 2020 Research on Equity and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT) (pp. 1–2). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/RESPECT49803.2020.9272421

Noroozi, O., Dehghanzadeh, H., & Talaee, E. (2020). A systematic review on the impacts of game-based learning on argumentation skills. Entertainment Computing, 35 , 100369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2020.100369

Noval, B. A., Safrodin, M., & Hakkun, R. Y. (2019). Battlebot: Logic learning based on visual programming implementation in multiplayer game online. In 2019 International Electronics Symposium (IES) (pp. 138–142). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ELECSYM.2019.8901628

Paiva, J. C., Leal, J. P., & Queirós, R. (2020). Authoring game-based programming challenges to improve students’ motivation. In M. E. Auer & T. Tsiatsos (Eds.), The challenges of the digital transformation in education (Vol. 916, pp. 602–613). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11932-4_57

Park, K., Mott, B., Min, W., Wiebe, E., Boyer, K. E., & Lester, J. (2020). Generating game levels to develop computer science competencies in game-based learning environments. In I. I. Bittencourt, M. Cukurova, K. Muldner, R. Luckin, & E. Millán (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence in Education (Vol. 12164, pp. 240–245). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52240-7_44

Partovi, T., & Razavi, M. R. (2019). The effect of game-based learning on academic achievement motivation of elementary school students. Learning and Motivation, 68 , 101592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2019.101592

Pellas, N., & Mystakidis, S. (2020). A systematic review of research about game-based learning in virtual worlds. JUCS - Journal of Universal Computer Science, 26 (8), 1017–1042. https://doi.org/10.3897/jucs.2020.054

Peters, M. D. J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C. M., & Khalil, H. (2020). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 18 (10), 2119–2126. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167

Pila, S., Aladé, F., Sheehan, K. J., Lauricella, A. R., & Wartella, E. A. (2019). Learning to code via tablet applications: An evaluation of Daisy the Dinosaur and Kodable as learning tools for young children. Computers & Education, 128 , 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.006

Popovic, J., Korolija, N., Markovic, Z., & Bojic, D. (2017). Developing algorithmic skills of pupils in Serbian schools using code.org materials. In 2017 25th Telecommunication Forum (TELFOR) (pp. 1–4). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/TELFOR.2017.8249483

Prabawa, H. W., Junaeti, E., & Permana, Y. (2017, October). Using capture the flag in classroom: Game-based implementation in network security learning. In  2017 3rd International Conference on Science in Information Technology (ICSITech)  (pp. 690–695). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/icsitech.2017.8257201

Priyaadharshini, M., Dakshina, R., & Sandhya, S. (2020). Learning analytics: Game-based learning for programming course in higher education. Procedia Computer Science, 172 , 468–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.143

Qian, M., & Clark, K. R. (2016). Game-based Learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior, 63 , 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023

Rajeev, S., & Sharma, S. (2018). Educational game-theme based instructional module for teaching introductory programming. In IECON 2018 - 44th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (pp. 3039–3044). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IECON.2018.8592835

Riera, B., Philippot, A., & Annebicque, D. (2019). Teaching the first and only logic control course with HOME I/O and Scratch 2.0. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 52 (9), 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2019.08.133

Roodt, S., & Ryklief, Y. (2022). Using digital game-based learning to improve the academic efficiency of vocational education students. In Research Anthology on Vocational Education and Preparing Future Workers (pp. 643–671). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-5696-5.ch037

Roussou, E., & Rangoussi, M. (2020). On the use of robotics for the development of computational thinking in kindergarten: Educational intervention and evaluation. In M. Merdan, W. Lepuschitz, G. Koppensteiner, R. Balogh, & D. Obdržálek (Eds.), Robotics in Education (pp. 31–44). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26945-6_3

Rozali, N. F., & Zaid, N. M. (2017). Code puzzle: ActionScript 2.0 learning application based on problem-based learning approach. In 2017 6th ICT International Student Project Conference (ICT-ISPC) (pp. 1–4). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICT-ISPC.2017.8075329

Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S., & Przybylski, A. (2006). The motivational pull of video games: A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion, 30 , 344–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8

Sáiz Manzanares, M. C., Rodríguez Arribas, S., Pardo Aguilar, C., & Queiruga Dios, M. A. (2020). Effectiveness of self-regulation and serious games for learning STEM knowledge in primary education. Psicothema, 32 (4), 516–524. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2020.30

Sánchez Mena, A., & Martí Parreño, J. (2017). Teachers´ acceptance of educational video games: A comprehensive literature review. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 13 (2), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1319

Schatten, M., & Schatten, M. (2020). A comparative study of gamification in progamming education in a Croatian high school. In 2020 43rd International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology (MIPRO) (pp. 700–704). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.23919/MIPRO48935.2020.9245237

Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Viveros, B. S. (2020). A meta-analysis of teaching and learning computer programming: Effective instructional approaches and conditions. Computers in Human Behavior, 109 , 106349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106349

Seebauer, S., Jahn, S., & Mottok, J. (2020). Learning from Escape rooms? A study design concept measuring the effect of a cryptography educational Escape room. In 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1684–1685). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON45650.2020.9125333

Seralidou, E., & Douligeris, C. (2020). Creating and using digital games for learning in elementary and secondary education. In 2020 5th South-East Europe Design Automation, Computer Engineering, Computer Networks and Social Media Conference (SEEDA-CECNSM) (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SEEDA-CECNSM49515.2020.9221799

Serrano, K. (2019). The effect of digital game-based learning on student learning: A literature review. Graduate Research Papers , 943. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/grp/943

Shabalina, O., Malliarakis, C., Tomos, F., & Mozelius, P. (2017). Game-based learning for learning to program: from learning through play to learning through game development. In  11th European Conference on Games Based Learning 2017, Graz, Austria, 5–6 October 2017  (Vol. 11, pp. 571–576). Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited.

Shahid, M., Wajid, A., Haq, K. U., Saleem, I., & Shujja, A. H. (2019). A Review of gamification for learning programming fundamental. In 2019 International Conference on Innovative Computing (ICIC) (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIC48496.2019.8966685

Sharaf, N., Ahmed, G., & Ihab, S. (2020). Virtual/mixed reality control of a game through Scratch. In 2020 24th International Conference Information Visualisation (IV) (pp. 689–693). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IV51561.2020.00119

Sharma, K., Papavlasopoulou, S., & Giannakos, M. (2019). Coding games and robots to enhance computational thinking: How collaboration and engagement moderate children’s attitudes? International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 21 , 65–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.04.004

Sharma, K., Torrado, J. C., Gómez, J., & Jaccheri, L. (2021). Improving girls’ perception of computer science as a viable career option through game playing and design: Lessons from a systematic literature review. Entertainment Computing, 36 , 100387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2020.100387

Shim, J., Kwon, D., & Lee, W. (2017). The effects of a robot game environment on computer programming education for elementary school students. IEEE Transactions on Education, 60 (2), 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2016.2622227

Siakavaras, I., Papastergiou, M., & Comoutos, N. (2018). Mobile games in computer science education: Current state and proposal of a mobile game design that incorporates physical activity. In T. A. Mikropoulos (Ed.), Research on e-Learning and ICT in Education (pp. 243–255). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95059-4_15

Silva, J. P., Silveira, I. F., Kamimura, L., & Barboza, A. T. (2020). Turing project: An open educational game to teach and learn programming logic. In 2020 15th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.23919/CISTI49556.2020.9141122

Simões Gomes, T. C., Pontual Falcão, T., de Azevedo, C., & Restelli Tedesco, P. (2018). Exploring an approach based on digital games for teaching programming concepts to young children. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 16 , 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2017.12.005

Sookhanaphibarn, K., & Choensawat, W. (2020). Educational games for cybersecurity awareness. In 2020 IEEE 9th Global Conference on Consumer Electronics (GCCE) (pp. 424–428). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/GCCE50665.2020.9291723

Stigall, J., & Sharma, S. (2017). Virtual reality instructional modules for introductory programming courses. In 2017 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC) (pp. 34–42). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISECon.2017.7910245

Sung, H. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education, 63 , 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.019

Tabuti, L. M., de Azevedo da Rocha, R. L., & Nakamura, R. (2020). Proposal of method for converting a physical card game to digital for logical reasoning competencies on the data structure subject. In 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1–9). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9274001

Tacouri, H., & Nagowah, L. (2021). Code Saga – A mobile serious game for learning programming. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Internet of Things and Intelligence Systems (IoTaIS) (pp. 190–195). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IoTaIS53735.2021.9628484

Tang, T., Vezzani, V., & Eriksson, V. (2020). Developing critical thinking, collective creativity skills and problem solving through playful design jams. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37 , 100696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100696

Taylor, S., Min, W., Mott, B., Emerson, A., Smith, A., Wiebe, E., & Lester, J. (2019). Position: IntelliBlox: A toolkit for integrating block-based programming into game-based learning environments. In 2019 IEEE Blocks and Beyond Workshop (B&B) (pp. 55–58). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/BB48857.2019.8941222

Tioh, J. N., Mina, M., & Jacobson, D. W. (2017). Cyber security training a survey of serious games in cyber security. In 2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1–5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2017.8190712

Toh, W., & Kirschner, D. (2020). Self-directed learning in video games, affordances and pedagogical implications for teaching and learning. Computers & Education, 154 , 103912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103912

Towler, A., Aranda, D., Ramyaa, R., & Kuo, R. (2020). Using educational game for engaging students in learning foundational concepts of propositional logic. In 2020 IEEE 20th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) (pp. 208–209). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT49669.2020.00067

Tretinjak, M. F. (2019). Methodology for using games as an educational tool. In 2019 42nd International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO) (pp. 547–551). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.23919/MIPRO.2019.8757046

Tsur, M., & Rusk, N. (2018). Scratch microworlds: designing project-based introductions to coding. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 894–899). https://doi.org/10.1145/3159450.3159559

Turan, Z., Avinc, Z., Kara, K., & Goktas, Y. (2016). Gamification and education: Achievements, cognitive loads, and views of students. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 11 (07), 64. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v11i07.5455

Unger, S., & Meiran, W. R. (2020). Student attitudes towards online education during the COVID-19 viral outbreak of 2020: Distance learning in a time of social distance. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 4 (4), 256–266. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.107

Vahldick, A., Farah, P. R., Marcelino, M. J., & Mendes, A. J. (2020). A blocks-based serious game to support introductory computer programming in undergraduate education. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 2 , 100037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2020.100037

Valle, P. H. D., Toda, A. M., Barbosa, E. F., & Maldonado, J. C. (2017). Educational games: A contribution to software testing education. In  2017 IEEE Frontiers in education Conference (FIE)  (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2017.8190470

Vankúš, P. (2021). Influence of game-based learning in mathematics education on students’ affective domain: A systematic review. Mathematics, 9 (9), 986. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9090986

Venkatesh, P., Das, S., & Das, A. K. (2021). Design and development of low-cost unplugged activities for teaching computational thinking at K-5 level. In  Design for Tomorrow—Volume 3  (pp. 523–534). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0084-5_42

Ventura, J., Qualls, J., Ventura, M., McGinnis, R., Baker, C., & Nikaido, B. (2017). Development of a video game design program in the college of engineering. In SoutheastCon 2017 (pp. 1–7). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SECON.2017.7925397

Videnovik, M., Kionig, L., Vold, T., & Trajkovik, V. (2018). Testing framework for investigating learning outcome from quiz game: A Study from Macedonia and Norway. In 2018 17th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET) (pp. 1–5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITHET.2018.8424777

Videnovik, M., Trajkovik, V., Kiønig, L. V., & Vold, T. (2020). Increasing quality of learning experience using augmented reality educational games. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 79 (33–34), 23861–23885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09046-7

Videnovik, M., Vold, T., Dimova, G., Kiønig, L. V., & Trajkovik, V. (2022). Migration of an Escape room–style educational game to an online environment: Design Thinking methodology. JMIR Serious Games, 10 (3), e32095. https://doi.org/10.2196/32095

Visoottiviseth, V., Phungphat, A., Puttawong, N., Chantaraumporn, P., & Haga, J. (2018). Lord of Secure: The virtual reality game for educating network security. In 2018 Seventh ICT International Student Project Conference (ICT-ISPC) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICT-ISPC.2018.8523947

Vlahu-Gjorgievska, E., Videnovik, M., & Trajkovik, V. (2018). Computational thinking and coding subject in primary schools: Methodological approach based on alternative cooperative and individual learning cycles. In  2018 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE)  (pp. 77–83). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/tale.2018.8615334

Vostinar, P. (2021). MakeCode Arcade: Interesting environment for programming 2D games. In 2021 IEEE World Conference on Engineering Education (EDUNINE) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUNINE51952.2021.9429132

Vourletsis, I., & Politis, P. (2022). Exploring the effect of remixing stories and games on the development of students’ computational thinking. Computers and Education Open, 3 , 100069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100069

Vu, P., & Feinstein, S. (2017). An exploratory multiple case study about using game-based Learning in STEM classrooms. International Journal of Research in Education and Science . https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.328087

Wang, L. H., Chen, B., Hwang, G. J., Guan, J. Q., & Wang, Y. Q. (2022). Effects of digital game-based STEM education on students’ learning achievement: A meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 9 (1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00344-0

Webster, J. J., & Kit, C. (1992). Tokenization as the initial phase in NLP. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Computational Linguistics , (Vol. 4, pp. 1106–1110). https://doi.org/10.3115/992424.992434

Wong, Y. S., Hayati, I. M., Yatim, M., & Hoe, T. W. (2017). A propriety game-based learning mobile game to learn object-oriented programming—Odyssey of Phoenix. In 2017 IEEE 6th International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE) (pp. 426–431). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE.2017.8252373

Wong, G. K. W., & Jiang, S. (2018). Computational thinking education for children: Algorithmic thinking and debugging. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE) (pp. 328–334). https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE.2018.8615232

Wong, Y. S., & Yatim, M. H. M. (2018). A propriety multiplatform game-based learning game to learn object-oriented programming. In 2018 7th International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI) (pp. 278–283). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2018.00060

Workman, M. D., Luevanos, J. A., & Mai, B. (2021). A study of cybersecurity education using a Present-Test-Practice-Assess model. IEEE Transactions on Education, 65 (1), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2021.3086025

Xian, T. (2021). Exploring the effectiveness of Sandbox game-based learning environment for game design course in higher education. In T. Ahram, R. Taiar, & F. Groff (Eds.), Human interaction, emerging technologies and future applications IV (pp. 262–272). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74009-2_33

Yallihep, M., & Kutlu, B. (2020). Mobile serious games: Effects on students’ understanding of programming concepts and attitudes towards information technology. Education and Information Technologies, 25 (2), 1237–1254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10008-2

Yassine, A., Berrada, M., Tahiri, A., & Chenouni, D. (2018). A cross-platform mobile application for learning programming basics. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (IJIM), 12 (7), 139. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v12i7.9442

Yokoyama, H., Fukui, M., Matsumoto, T., Mori, Y., & Takami, T. (2020). Use gameplay RPA as programming materials. In 2020 Nicograph International (NicoInt) (pp. 92–92). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/NicoInt50878.2020.00028

Yongqiang, C., Xiaojun, W., & Chengbin, Q. (2018). Computer programming education for primary school students. In 2018 13th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE) (pp. 1–5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCSE.2018.8468824

Yu, Z. (2019). A meta-analysis of use of serious games in education over a decade. International Journal of Computer Games Technology, 2019 , 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4797032

Yücel, Y., & Rızvanoğlu, K. (2019). Battling gender stereotypes: A user study of a code-learning game, “Code Combat” with middle school children. Computers in Human Behavior, 99 , 352–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.05.029

Zapata-Caceres, M., & Martin-Barroso, E. (2021). Applying game learning analytics to a voluntary video game: Intrinsic motivation, persistence, and rewards in learning to program at an early ge. IEEE Access, 9 , 123588–123602. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3110475

Zapušek, M., & Rugelj, J. (2013). Learning programming with serious games. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Game-Based Learning, 1 (1), e6. https://doi.org/10.4108/trans.gbl.01-06.2013.e6

Zaw, H. H., & Hlaing, S. Z. (2020). Verifying the gaming strategy of self-learning game by using PRISM-games. In P. Vasant, I. Zelinka, & G.-W. Weber (Eds.), Intelligent computing and optimization (pp. 148–159). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33585-4_15

Zdravevski, E., Lameski, P., Trajkovik, V., Chorbev, I., Goleva, R., Pombo, N., & Garcia, N. M. (2019). Automation in systematic, scoping and rapid reviews by an NLP toolkit: A case study in enhanced living environments. In I. Ganchev, N. M. Garcia, C. Dobre, C. X. Mavromoustakis, & R. Goleva (Eds.), Enhanced living environments (Vol. 11369, pp. 1–18). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10752-9_1

Zeevaarders, A., & Aivaloglou, E. (2021). Exploring the programming concepts practiced by Scratch users: An analysis of project repositories. In 2021 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1287–1295). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON46332.2021.9453973

Zhang, F., Kaufman, D., & Fraser, S. (2014). Using video games in computer science education. European Scientific Journal, 10 (22), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2014.v10n22p%25p

Zhao, D., Muntean, C. H., Chis, A. E., & Muntean, G.-M. (2021). Learner attitude, educational background, and gender influence on knowledge gain in a serious games-enhanced programming course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 64 (3), 308–316. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2020.3044174

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Center for Innovations and Digital Education Dig-Ed, Solunska glava br.3, 1000, Skopje, North Macedonia

Maja Videnovik

Department of Business Administration and Organizational Studies, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Holsetgata 31, 2318, Hamar, Norway

Tone Vold & Linda Kiønig

Faculty of Computer Science and Engineering, Ss Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje, Rugjer Boshkovikj 16, 1000, Skopje, North Macedonia

Ana Madevska Bogdanova & Vladimir Trajkovik

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

VT and AMB had the idea for the article. TV defined the methodological steps. MV and AMB performed the literature search and data analyses. Data analyses were supported by VT and LK. MV drafted the article, while TV critically revised the work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tone Vold .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Videnovik, M., Vold, T., Kiønig, L. et al. Game-based learning in computer science education: a scoping literature review. IJ STEM Ed 10 , 54 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00447-2

Download citation

Received : 27 March 2023

Accepted : 18 August 2023

Published : 06 September 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00447-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Scoping review
• Game-based learning
• Educational games
• Computer science
• Computer science education

Augmented Reality Games for Learning: A Literature Review

• Conference paper
• First Online: 18 May 2017
• Cite this conference paper

• Jingya Li 17 ,
• Erik D. van der Spek 17 ,
• Loe Feijs 17 ,
• Feng Wang 18 &
• Jun Hu 17 , 18  

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 10291))

Included in the following conference series:

• International Conference on Distributed, Ambient, and Pervasive Interactions

5852 Accesses

27 Citations

This study presents a literature review of previous studies of Augmented Reality (AR) games for learning. We classified learner groups, learning subjects, and learning environments mentioned in the literature. From this we conclude that AR games for learning generally have positive effects. We found that the most reported effects for AR learning games were the enhancement of learning performance and the learning experience in terms of fun, interest, and enjoyment. The most commonly used measurements for learning achievements were pre-test and post-test regarding knowledge content, while observations, questionnaires, and interviews were all frequently used to determine motivation. We also found that social interactions were encouraged by AR learning games, especially collaboration among students. The most commonly used game elements included quizzes and goal-setting. Extra instructional materials, 3D models, and face-to-face interactions were most frequently used for AR features. In addition, we came up with five suggestions for the design of AR learning games based on reviewed studies. In conclusion, six interesting findings were discussed in detail in the review, and suggestions for future study were offered to fill the research gaps.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download conference paper PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Educational Augmented Reality Games

Systematic review and meta-analysis of augmented reality in educational settings

Co-Design of Augmented Reality Games for Learning with Teachers: A Methodological Approach

• Augmented Reality
• Serious games

1 Introduction

Augmented Reality (AR) is the technology that overlaps virtual objects onto the real world objects [ 1 ]. It has three main features: the combination of the real world and the virtual world, real-time interaction, and 3D registration [ 3 ]. The past few years have witnessed a growing popularity in the research interest for AR since mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets have offered much easier and cheaper access to AR for users than before [ 1 ]. Positive effects of AR technology on students’ learning were identified in previous studies in the development of skills and knowledge, enhancement of learning experiences, and improvement of collaborative learning [ 35 ]. The use of AR in education could improve the learning efficiency and provide a more fun experience for students [ 21 ].

Serious games can be defined as computer games with educational purposes and see entertainment as an added value. Serious games are gaining increasing importance in education [ 27 ], providing an enhanced experience in learning [ 26 ]. They were found to be effective with respect to learning and retention [ 34 ]. Other frequently reported outcomes included knowledge acquisition and motivational outcomes [ 9 ].

AR games refer to the digital games that are played in a real world environment with a virtual layer on top of it [ 32 ]. It is possible for players to interact with both the objects in the virtual world and people in the real world, avoiding the social isolation [ 29 ]. With the advantages and positive outcomes of AR technology and serious games in the educational field, a growing number of studies focusing on AR games for learning have emerged in the past few years (e.g. studies of EcoMOBILE [ 11 ] and study of Mad City Mystery [ 32 ]).

1.1 Relevant Literature

The features of AR lead to a variety of positive effects on learning. The interactive 3D models in AR can enhance students’ learning experience and collaborative skills; the combination of the real world and the virtual world in AR can support the study of the invisible concept and content; and the rich instructional materials (e.g., text, video, audio, etc.) can attract and immerse students into the learning [ 35 ]. In addition to that, some literatures drew attention to the social impacts of AR on students. For instance, the use of AR technology provided more opportunities for students to communicate and collaborate in the real world [ 20 ]. The social interactions between students and teachers, students and their parents were also encouraged [ 33 ].

Structured literature reviews were found on AR for educational purposes. For example, one systematic review of AR for education investigated 68 AR studies in education and concluded a number of advantages and challenges [ 1 ]. In this review, the advantages of AR in educational settings were classified into learner outcomes, pedagogical contributions, interaction, and others. In another review, the definitions, taxonomies, and technologies of AR technology were introduced, and the AR features and their affordances, as well as the solutions for AR challenges, were discovered [ 35 ]. Different affordances of location-based AR and image-based AR for science learning were also studied [ 11 ]. The review on AR trends in education found the educational field and purposes, target group, advantages, data collection methods, and discussed the trends for AR for educational settings [ 4 ].

These literature reviews mainly focused on the advantages and affordances of AR. Moreover, the purposes of using AR were different, such as a practice for lab experiments or an introduction to certain topics [ 4 ]. However, the game elements and social factors contained in the AR applications were not addressed enough.

1.2 Purpose of the Study

As can be seen above, numerous studies have been done on the use of AR technology or games in education for students. However, the efficacy of AR learning games as an integrated concept is less well known, let alone what would be successful design strategies for AR learning games. Therefore, the aims of this study is to present a systematic literature review on AR learning games, considering the current state of AR learning games, their effects on students regarding learning outcomes and social interactions, their evaluation techniques, as well as their design principles. To achieve this aim, this study identified and analyzed 26 research articles with the educational use of AR games, published from 2006 to 2016. The research questions are formed as:

What learner groups, subjects, and environments are commonly focused on for AR learning games according to the reviewed studies?

What are the effects of AR learning games on students in terms of learning achievement and motivation and what are the measurements according to the reviewed studies?

What are the effects of social interaction in AR learning games on students according to the reviewed studies?

What kinds of elements or features are commonly used in AR learning games according to the reviewed studies?

What are the suggestions for the design of AR learning games according to the reviewed studies?

2.1 Selection Process

In this study, we first searched via Google Scholar. The search terms we used were “augmented reality” combined with “serious games”, “learning and games”, and “education and games”. Additionally, we investigated the references of previous reviews on AR technology in educational field to find relevant studies. We found 63 studies first. Then we examined the selected studies using a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria (see Table  1 ) and determined whether they were related to the purpose of this study. After the examination, 26 articles were found to be highly relevant to the purpose of this study.

2.2 The Data Coding and Analysis Process

The first research question addresses the learner groups, subjects, and environments of AR learning games. The learner groups were divided into kindergarten, primary school students, middle school students, high school students, college students, and not specified in the article. In some studies, more than one learner group was used, then more than one category was applied for the learner group. The subjects of AR learning games were divided by looking for subject-related words in the article. One study might also apply to more than one code for subjects. The environments of using AR learning games were divided into five categories, which were: outdoors, classroom, home, others, and no limits.

The effects and their measurements of AR learning games (RQ2) were coded by reading through the data collection, method, findings, results, discussions, and conclusion sections from the 26 articles. We looked for coding words to identify the effects and measurements. For effects, we used two main categories, learning achievement and motivation. Learning achievement was related to the learning performance, learning effectiveness, and the cognitive load of the knowledge content, while motivation related to a broad view including engagement, interests, fun, satisfaction, and positive attitudes. It should be noted that in some studies, more than one effect could be found, so more than one code might be applied.

As for the effects of social interaction in AR learning games (RQ3), we looked up the coding words: social, collaboration, competition, guide, discussion, communication, reflection, and share from the 26 articles.

To code the elements/features used in AR learning games (RQ4), we read through the design, implementation, and procedure sections from the 26 articles, searching for keywords from the description of the AR games. Sub-categories were classified into two main categories, AR features and game elements.

3 Results and Discussion

3.1 rq1: what learner groups, subjects, and environments are commonly focused on for ar learning games according to the reviewed studies.

Regarding the “learner group”, we found that in the past decade, most of the AR learning games focused on primary school students (31%) and middle school students (29%). High school students (20%) followed primary school students and middle school students in popularity (see Fig.  1 ). Two studies focused on college students (8%). Two studies designed the AR games for college students in the majors of Design [ 2 ] and Physics [ 23 ]. One potential explanation for this could be that AR learning games can have a positive influence on younger students because they are more evocative and align better to the kind of games they are playing at home [ 33 ].

Learner groups

Regarding to the learning “subjects”, Science and Biology (38%) were highly focused subjects in the reviewed AR learning games. This might be because the AR technology can provide advantages in reflecting the concept of knowledge in the real world environment, allowing students to observe the objects in real-time. The study of Physics (12%), History (12%), and Art & Design (12%) were second preferred subjects. The real-time feature of AR enables students to receive feedback or see results immediately, which is favorable for subjects like Art & Design (see Table  2 ).

We noticed a gap in the subjects of AR learning games. First of all, studies for Literacy (8%), Chemistry (8%) and Mathematics (8%) studying were underrepresented. The uneven situation of subjects should be broken down, which means more attention should be paid to a wider range of subjects [ 15 ].

What’s more, the existing studies for History learning often made a new game story for students to explore the history of a certain area (e.g. Alien Contact! [ 11 ]). The location-based feature of AR technology enhances students’ learning experience by allowing them to stand on the historical spots. Other subjects (12%) included culture study [ 13 ], 21 st century skills [ 30 ], and library instruction study [ 8 ]. However, we found little focus on the textbook-related content and knowledge, which is also valuable and should be paid attention to.

Regarding to the “environments” to use AR learning games, we saw significant preference from the reviewed studies in using AR learning games outdoors (42%) and in the classrooms (35%). See Table  3 . Playing outside is one of the advantages of AR learning games compared to other serious games, which may stimulate interest and excitement in students [ 6 ]. On the other hand, it could be difficult for the teacher to control the learning process, and the safety issues should be considered as well. Students might come into dangerous situation, such as car accidents, when they put too much attention to their mobile devices [ 31 ]. The AR learning games played in the classroom allowed students to play face-to-face and under the guidance of their teachers. Students could solve problems and collaborate with their classmates [ 11 ], and they could immediately get help and feedback from their teachers when they encountered problems or had questions (e.g. AR for preschoolers for Natural Science [ 7 ]).

We found four AR games (15%) with no limits for the environment, and only one AR learning game (4%) was designed specifically for playing at home with the help of parents [ 2 ]. Students, especially younger students, spend more time at home than in the classroom, and tend to spend a lot of time playing digital games [ 25 ]. Meanwhile, their parents are curious about their learning status. Therefore, it can be effective to design AR learning games that students can play at home. It may encourage them to study more spontaneously and in a more fun way. In addition to that, their safety and communication with parents could also be addressed.

3.2 RQ2: What Are the Effects of AR Learning Games on Students in Terms of Learning Achievement and Motivation and What Are the Measurements According to the Reviewed Studies?

Effects of AR learning games were classified into two main categories in this review, which were learning achievement and motivation (see Table  4 ).

Regarding to the “learning achievement”, half of the reviewed studies reported that AR learning games led to the effective outcomes in achieving learning gains in terms of learning content (e.g. AR for electromagnetism [ 19 ] and AR system for library instruction [ 8 ]). The positive effects also included the enhancement of learning efficiency (15%) and cognitive skills like problem-solving skills, critical thinking skills, multitasking skills and so on (12%). One study (4%) reported that the use of AR learning game could reduce the cognitive load of students [ 10 ], while on the contrary, another study showed that students felt frequently overloaded and confused due to the big amount of materials and tasks during the game play [ 11 ]. The rest of the reviewed studies (19%) either found AR games were ineffective in the learning achievement or didn’t focus on the learning achievement in their studies.

The motivation aspects involved engagement, satisfaction, fun, enjoyment, interest, attention, confidence and positive attitudes of students (e.g. SysteM [ 15 ] and AR-based educational game [ 18 ]). Previous studies frequently reported that students described the learning experience with AR games as joyful and playful as they had fun playing AR games to learn school knowledge [ 25 ]. We found similar result in our review that most of the students (62%) mentioned AR learning games as fun, interesting, or enjoyable (e.g. AR gaming in sustainable design education [ 2 ] and mathematical education game based on AR [ 21 ]). Nearly half of the studies (46%) also reported that AR learning games engaged them more than traditional learning methods (e.g. AR system for a visual art course [ 10 ]). In addition to these two effects, AR learning games were also evaluated to “enhance satisfaction” (19%), “enhance the willingness to learn” (19%), “enhance attention” (15%), “enhance confidence” (15%), and “enhance positive learning attitude” (15%).

Considerably less well studied were the retention effects. Nearly all studies tested the outcomes immediately after the use of the AR games. In addition, most of the students never used AR games before, so a potential novelty effect of a new technology might influence the research results. Therefore, more research should be done focusing on both short-term and long-term impacts on students after learning with AR games.

Different measurements were used to evaluate the effects caused by AR learning games. The review found that the most frequently (38%) used measurement of learning achievement was a pre-test and post-test knowledge test which examines the improvement of knowledge content learning of students before and after the use of AR learning games (e.g. AR technology in marine education [ 25 ]). Three studies (12%) used post-test in their experiments (e.g. AR for preschoolers for Natural Science [ 7 ]). From the result we can see that only 50% studies measured learning achievement in terms of the knowledge content, indicating the rest of studies didn’t use a proper test or didn’t focus on learning at all.

Regarding to the motivation aspect, most of the previous studies (65%) used observation as the main evaluation methods during students’ learning and playing process (e.g. AR for enhancing library instruction [ 8 ]). The questionnaire also held a high popularity (58%) in the measurement of motivation (e.g. using AR games to teach 21 st century skills [ 30 ]). Some studies introduced and explained the questionnaire questions in their studies and Keller’s ARCS Motivation Model was frequently adopted as the motivation questionnaire (e.g. AR system for a visual art course [ 10 ]), whereas other studies didn’t explain how they created and evaluated their questionnaire questions to measure the motivation accurately. Interviews as a way to collect qualitative data was also widely used (42%). Pre-survey and post-survey (15%) were used to investigate the changes of attitudes before and after the use of AR games. See Table  5 .

3.3 RQ3: What Are the Effects of Social Interaction in AR Learning Games on Students According to the Reviewed Studies?

Collaboration and interaction have emerged to be the main advantages of AR in education [ 4 ], since the technology allows users to work or study face-to-face in real life. Based on reviewed studies, we found three main types of social interactions, which were interactions among students, between teachers and students, and between students and parents. See Table  6 .

Most of the social interaction effects were found among students and the main effect was to encourage the collaboration (46%). In some AR games, students were required to work in groups to solve a certain task, while the competition (31%) among groups was also promoted. Evidence was also noted in the desire of sharing experiences with classmates (8%). Unlike the rich social interactions among students, the only social interaction between students & teacher (15%) and students & parents (8%) was guidance.

Frequently, little attention was paid to the study of how these social interactions affected the learning achievement or motivation in turn. The attitude from classmates, the feedback from teachers, and the help from parents may all have an impact on children’s learning outcomes. In addition, AR games should focus more on the interactions between student and teacher, student and parents.

3.4 RQ4: What Kinds of Elements or Features Are Commonly Used in AR Learning Games According to the Reviewed Studies?

AR learning games include AR features and game elements. Different features or elements may have different outcomes regarding to learning achievement and motivation mentioned above. Therefore, this review sought to identify the frequently used AR features and game elements in AR learning games.

Regarding to the “game elements”, we found that time limitation was one of the most commonly used elements (46%) in the reviewed studies, which means students have to finish the game in a certain period of time (e.g. AR science game [ 6 ]). One reason to explain this might be because the attention span of students is limited, especially for younger students. Teachers might also find the time limitation helpful for them to control the learning progress, or researchers to control for variables in the experiment. The game elements of quiz-based (50%), inquiry-based (35%), and puzzles (30%) were also preferred by the reviewed studies. Students needed to answer questions or finish tasks in the game to continue. Game story (42%) was also another frequently included element in AR learning game design. Students started the game with story or background information, and some of them might play a role (27%) during the game. Another frequently used game element was “collection” (30%). Players tried to look for different information and collect them in order to achieve the goals. The term “goals” was widely used in the reviewed literature, including the aims to get certain points, rewards, or finish a task (50%). Secret missions or hidden content were also included in some games (15%), the process of looking for the hidden mission might stimulate the interest of the students. The feedback element in the game design was mentioned three times (12%), and two board games (8%) were used. See Table  7 .

As for the AR features, 38% of reviewed studies used location-based AR, and the rest used image-based AR (62%). These two forms might have different advantages for learning [ 11 ]. Since the visualization of knowledge content can promote to the fun experience of AR learning games for students, more than two third of the studies (77%) included extra instructional materials such as text, video, and audio. The 3D models were also used frequently in AR learning games (54%). Apart from that, some AR learning games (30%) also used physical objects, allowing students to interact in the game by using physical models. Communication in the real world is the main advantage of AR learning games (as opposed to regular videogames), and half of the reviewed studies encouraged face-to-face interactions in their games. AR presentation avatar (15%) and gesture-based input (12%) were also mentioned in previous studies. See Table  8 .

Although we have found the most commonly used game elements and AR features from previous studies, there is still a lack of research on how different AR features and game elements influenced or supported the positive outcomes mentioned above specifically. Questions like which element or feature in the AR game motivated students most during the learning process and why, which element or feature in the AR game helped students learn better during the learning process and why, which element or feature encouraged students to communicate to each other more and why, needed to be answered.

3.5 RQ5: What Are the Suggestions for the Design of AR Learning Games According to the Reviewed Studies?

According to the reviewed studies, we can discern recommendations for the design of AR learning games that potentially lead to positive effects on students. Generally speaking, during the design process, five aspects should be considered, which are learner groups, learning objectives, AR features, game mechanics, and social interactions.

Involve learners in design process

From the reviewed studies, we found that AR learning games might affect different types of learners in different ways. Some students needed to read the text in the game with assistance, while students with higher level of literacy skills could read the text and play by themselves [ 27 ]. This study also showed that most of the students hated the idea of a cookie game because they thought it was for little kids to play. To make the students become more willing to play the game, one of the reviewed studies designed different learning contents and story themes for primary school students, middle school students, and high school students respectively [ 32 ]. One advantage of AR learning games compared to traditional learning is that it can provide different learning contents to different students [ 8 ]. In the study, results showed that different learning types (i.e. field-independent and field-dependent cognitive styles), students responded differently towards the learning material. In another study, students from a higher educational level benefited more from the use of AR learning game than students from a lower educational level [ 17 ]. Players in a game could be classified into multiple player types, such as achievers, explorers, socializers, and killers, thus, finding out the player types might be more effective to motivate students [ 13 ].

Therefore, when designing an AR learning game, the designers should always involve the target learner groups into the design process, asking for their preferences and feedback for the game concepts, and taking their player types, learning skills and knowledge level into consideration.

Clear learning objectives

We found a variety of effects of AR learning games, from both learning achievement and motivation aspects. It is hard to achieve all of these effects in one game. Therefore, it is important to have specific and clear learning objectives. Some games focused on the improvement of students’ knowledge performance (e.g. an innovative AR educational platform using games [ 13 ]), some might just want to make students feel more positive about studying (e.g. EcoMOBILE [ 20 ]), while some aimed at the development of cognitive skills, such as investigation and inquiry skills (e.g. ARIES [ 33 ]). The clear educational objectives are essential for the design of an effective AR learning game. Only when the educational objectives are clear, the proper game elements and AR features can be selected, and effective AR learning games can be designed.

Identify effects of AR features

AR technology makes AR learning games different from other learning games. A study claimed that the use of AR technology could reveal “hidden” objects to explore, which makes students feel special and excited, seeing “invisible” stuffs [ 5 ]. Additionally, AR superimposed materials like text, pictures, video, and audio into a real time environment [ 13 ], which could provide students a more comprehensive understanding of the subject, allowing them to “visualize the spatial structure of a complex model by virtually interacting with it” [ 13 ].

AR technology compasses various features, and basically divided into location-based AR and image-based AR. While other forms included the use of an AR avatar, physical objects, extra instructional materials (e.g. video, audio, text etc.), and so on. According to our investigation, most of AR learning applications involved more than one feature in their design, but the specific effects of different kinds of AR features were not well studied. For example, does the AR avatar help students engage in the study, or does it distract the students’ attention? Identifying the different outcomes and effects of each feature will make the design of AR technology better help students to achieve their goals.

Study the game mechanics

Like AR features, we also found more than ten types of game elements in previous AR learning games. Designers should study the game mechanics and understand how to use different game elements better to improve the learning achievements and motivation. We found some research already took game mechanics into consideration when they designed the AR learning games. For instance, the digital game-based learning theory was used in the design to enhance the effectiveness of marine education and to establish in children fundamental concepts for environmental conservation [ 8 ]. In another study we reviewed, design principles for games on science education were also addressed, such as: “ask students to inhabit roles”, “activity is organized around challenges”, and so on [ 32 ]. The use of flow theory was mentioned in another study, including “clear goals”, “equilibrium between challenge and personal skill”, “merging of action and awareness”, “focused attention”, “control”, “loss of self-consciousness”, “time distortion”, as well as “self-rewarding” [ 13 ]. What’s more, gaming mechanics was used to count the scores of the players based on their gaming status [ 18 ]. On the other hand, a big amount of studies ignored the game mechanics or didn’t mention it in their research. The study of game mechanics can improve the positive advantages of AR learning games.

Encourage social interactions

From this review we can see that the social interactions such as collaboration and competition in the real world were great advantages of AR learning games. AR also enhanced communication skills, encouraging interactions in the classroom between teacher and students, students and students, students and parents, parents and parents and teachers and teachers [ 7 ]. However, few previous AR learning games paid attention to the design of the face-to-face social strategy to encourage social interactions in the real world. We found one study included a chat room in the game in order to encourage social behavior [ 6 ]. This function allowed students to talk online with the potential to prevent students from talking to each other in the real world. Some other studies allowed users to share information, solve puzzles together, or exchange game items face-to-face in the real world. The designers should keep the social advantage of AR in the AR learning games, trying to design social functions that can lead to better social effects in real life.

4 Conclusion and Future Research

After the review of previous studies of AR learning games, we have six interesting findings. First of all, the subjects and learning content used in previous studies were too narrow. Studies for Science & Biology attracted most of the attention while there were fewer studies focused on the other subjects, such as Literacy and Mathematics. Secondly, most of the current AR learning games was played outdoors or in the classrooms. However, since students spend a lot of time at home and play digital games, it might be more effective to design AR learning games that can be played at home, which may encourage them to study spontaneously and in a more fun way. Thirdly, a notable gap was found in the retention effects. Nearly all studies tested the outcomes immediately after the use of the AR learning games, and more research should be done on both short-term and long-term effects. As for the measurements in previous studies, some commonly used instruments were addressed, while some studies didn’t mention how they created and evaluated their instruments. More attention should be paid to the proper measurements for the effects. Fifth, social interaction effects were found by playing AR learning games, especially among students. However, little research focused on how these social interactions affected the learning achievement or motivation in turn. Also, more social effects were found among students than between student and teacher, or student and parents. The AR games that focus more on the interactions between student and teacher, or student and parents may lead to beneficial results for both sides. Last but not least, we found various game elements and AR features were used in the design of the AR learning games. However, there is a lack of systematic research on how different AR features and game elements influenced or supported the effects specifically.

In addition, we came up with five recommendations for the design of AR learning games in order to maximum the positive effects, which are: (1) involve learners in the design process, (2) always have clear learning objectives, (3) design to encourage social interactions, (4) identify effects of AR features, and (5) study the game mechanics in order to select proper elements in the design.

In summary, though the positive effects of the use of AR learning games were widely recognized in the past decade, more research still needed to be done in the future.

Akçayır, M., Akçayır, G.: Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: a systematic review of the literature. Educ. Res. Rev. 20 , 1–11 (2017)

Article   Google Scholar  

Ayer, S.K., Messner, J.I., Anumba, C.J.: Augmented reality gaming in sustainable design education. J. Architectural Eng. 22 (1), 04015012 (2016)

Azuma, R.: A survey of augmented reality. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 6 (4), 355–385 (1997)

Bacca, J., Baldiris, S., Fabregat, R., Graf, S.: Augmented reality trends in education: a systematic review of research and applications. Educ. Technol. Soc. 17 (4), 133–149 (2014)

Google Scholar  

Boletsis, C., McCallum, S.: The table mystery: an augmented reality collaborative game for chemistry education. In: Ma, M., Oliveira, M.F., Petersen, S., Hauge, J.B. (eds.) SGDA 2013. LNCS, vol. 8101, pp. 86–95. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-40790-1_9

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bressler, D.M., Bodzin, A.M.: A mixed methods assessment of students’ flow experiences during a mobile augmented reality science game. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 29 (6), 505–517 (2013)

Cascales, A., Laguna, I., Pérez López, D., Perona, P., Contero, M.: Augmented reality for preschoolers: an experience around natural sciences educational contents, pp. 103–112 (2012)

Chen, C.M., Tsai, Y.N.: Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. Comput. Educ. 59 (2), 638–652 (2012)

Connolly, T.M., Boyle, E.A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., Boyle, J.M.: A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Comput. Educ. 59 (2), 661–686 (2012)

Di Serio, Á., Ibáñez, M.B., Kloos, C.D.: Impact of an augmented reality system on students’ motivation for a visual art course. Comput. Educ. 68 , 585–596 (2013)

Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., Mitchell, R.: Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 18 (1), 7–22 (2009)

El Sayed, N.A.M., Zayed, H.H., Sharawy, M.I.: ARSC: augmented reality student card an augmented reality solution for the education field. Comput. Educ. 56 (4), 1045–1061 (2011)

Eleftheria, C.A., Charikleia, P., Iason, C.G., Athanasios, T., Dimitrios, T.: An innovative augmented reality educational platform using gamification to enhance lifelong learning and cultural education. In: 2013 Fourth International Conference on Information, Intelligence, Systems and Applications (IISA 2013), pp. 70–74 (2013)

Enyedy, N., Danish, J.A., Delacruz, G., Kumar, M.: Learning physics through play in an augmented reality environment. Int. J. Comput. Support. Collaborative Learn. 7 , 347–378 (2012)

Freitas, R., Campos, P.: SMART: a SysteM of Augmented Reality for Teaching 2nd grade students. In: Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction, vol. 2, pp. 27–30, April 2008

Hsiao, K.-F., Chen, N.-S., Huang, S.-Y.: Learning while exercising for science education in augmented reality among adolescents. Interact. Learn. Environ. 20 , 331–349 (2012)

Huizenga, J., Admiraal, W., Akkerman, S., Ten Dam, G.: Mobile game-based learning in secondary education: engagement, motivation and learning in a mobile city game: original article. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 25 (4), 332–344 (2009)

Hwang, G.-J., Wu, P.-H., Chen, C.-C., Tu, N.-T.: Effects of an augmented reality-based educational game on students’ learning achievements and attitudes in real-world observations. Interact. Learn. Environ. 24 , 1–12 (2015). ISSN: 1049-4820

Ibáñez, M.B., Di Serio, Á., Villarán, D., Delgado Kloos, C.: Experimenting with electromagnetism using augmented reality: Impact on flow student experience and educational effectiveness. Comput. Educ. 71 , 1–13 (2014)

Kamarainen, A.M., Metcalf, S., Grotzer, T., Browne, A., Mazzuca, D., Tutwiler, M.S., Dede, C.: EcoMOBILE: Integrating augmented reality and probeware with environmental education field trips. Comput. Educ. 68 , 545–556 (2013)

Lee, H.S., Lee, J.W.: Mathematical education game based on augmented reality. In: Pan, Z., Zhang, X., Rhalibi, A., Woo, W., Li, Y. (eds.) Edutainment 2008. LNCS, vol. 5093, pp. 442–450. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-69736-7_48

Lin, H.K., Hsieh, M., Wang, C., Sie, Z., Chang, S.: Establishment and usability evaluation of an interactive AR learning system on conservation of fish. Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol. 10 (4), 181–188 (2011)

Lin, T.J., Duh, H.B.L., Li, N., Wang, H.Y., Tsai, C.C.: An investigation of learners’ collaborative knowledge construction performances and behavior patterns in an augmented reality simulation system. Comput. Educ. 68 , 314–321 (2013)

Liu, W., Cheok, A.D., Lim, C.M.L., Theng, Y.L.: Mixed reality classroom: learning from entertainment. In: DIMEA 2007 Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts, pp. 65–72 (2007)

Lu, S.-J., Liu, Y.-C.: Integrating augmented reality technology to enhance children’s learning in marine education. Environ. Educ. Res. 21 , 1–17 (2014). ISSN: 1350-4622

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Carvalho, M.B., Bellotti, F., Berta, R., De Gloria, A., Sedano, C.I., Hauge, J.B., Hu, J., Rauterberg, M.: An activity theory-based model for serious games analysis and conceptual design. Comput. Educ. 87 , 166–181 (2015)

Carvalho, M.B., Bellotti, F., Berta, R., De Gloria, A., Gazzarata, G., Hu, J., Kickmeier-Rust, M.: A case study on service-oriented architecture for serious games. Entertain. Comput. 6 (1), 1–10 (2015)

Perry, J., Klopfer, E., Norton, M., Ave, M.: AR gone wild: two approaches to using augmented reality learning games in Zoos. In: Management, pp. 322–329 (2008)

Offermans, S., Hu, J.: Augmented home. In: Anacleto, J.C., Clua, E.W.G., Silva, F.S.C., Fels, S., Yang, H.S. (eds.) ICEC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8215, pp. 30–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-41106-9_4

Schrier, K.: Using augmented reality games to teach 21st century skills. In: International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Educators Program (2006)

Specht, M., Ternier, S., Greller, W.: Dimensions of mobile augmented reality for learning: a first inventory (2011)

Squire, K.D., Jan, M.: Mad city mystery: developing scientific argumentation skills with a place-based augmented reality game on handheld computers. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 16 (1), 5–29 (2007)

Wojciechowski, R., Cellary, W.: Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Comput. Educ. 68 , 570–585 (2013)

Wouters, P., van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., van der Spek, E.D.: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. J. Educ. Psychol. 105 (2), 249–265 (2013)

Wu, H.K., Lee, S.W.Y., Chang, H.Y., Liang, J.C.: Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Comput. Educ. 62 , 41–49 (2013)

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to express special thanks to the China Scholarship Council for supporting this PhD study, thank you for the help from Wenting Du and School of Digital Media, Jiangnan University, and thank you for the help from colleagues at Department of Industrial Design, Eindhoven University of Technology.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Industrial Design, Eindhoven University of Technology, Den Dolech 2, 5612 AZ, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

Jingya Li, Erik D. van der Spek, Loe Feijs & Jun Hu

School of Digital Media, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China

Feng Wang & Jun Hu

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jingya Li .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Smart Future Initiative, Frankfurt, Germany

Norbert Streitz

Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

Panos Markopoulos

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Li, J., van der Spek, E.D., Feijs, L., Wang, F., Hu, J. (2017). Augmented Reality Games for Learning: A Literature Review. In: Streitz, N., Markopoulos, P. (eds) Distributed, Ambient and Pervasive Interactions. DAPI 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10291. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58697-7_46

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58697-7_46

Published : 18 May 2017

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-58696-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-58697-7

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

A Literature Review on the Impact of Games on Learning English Vocabulary to Children

Digital games play a significant role in the life of the new generation. Although there are many criticisms, many studies focus on the importance of digital games in improving learner’s vocabulary in the target language. Researchers have begun conductingseveral researches on how using games in the class can foster vocabulary learning. The aim of this paper is to investigate the impacts of digital games on children’s vocabulary learning depending on a literature review. Many studies focus on the impacts of digital games on different aspects of education. This conceptual paper aims to shed light on some games' benefits, and challenges which educators and children face in the use of digital games. The findings of this paper show that Games are used not only for making children successful in EFL classes but more importantly, for motivating them and increasing the cooperation among children. In addition,the findings state that there are advantages as well as disadvantages in using games for learning English vocabulary.

• Related Documents

A Conceptual Proposition

This conceptual paper proposes social capital as a possible moderator of the relationship between commonly identified knowledge sharing enablers in the literature and knowledge sharing (KS). A literature review was carried out to determine the contextual influence of the level of social capital within communities of practice (CoPs). Propositions were developed based on a review of past studies addressing KS enablers and KS. The literature review revealed that prior studies built on resource-based theory (RBT) and knowledge-based view of the firm (KBV) focused on organizational enablers of KS without any concern for the contextual influence such as the level of social capital of CoPs. Further analysis indicated that social capital could possibly moderate the impact of commonly identified KS enablers. These insights are presented as propositions in this conceptual paper. This paper addresses a gap in the area of KS. It questions the results of past studies and proposes the needs to consider the level of social capital when identifying appropriate KS enablers.

Sponsees: the silent side of sponsorship research

PurposeTo date the vast majority of sponsorship research has focused on the perspective of sponsors. The purpose of this paper is to use this research to identify factors that sponsored institutions and organizations (sponsees) should be cognizant of before entering into a sponsorship arrangement, and to propose a research agenda based on these factors.Design/methodology/approachThe authors leverage sponsorship research that has been published in business journals with an impact factor above 0.5 (Reuters, 2015).FindingsThis paper argues that sponsees should be aware of the benefits that sponsorship brings to sponsors so that they can better appeal to potential sponsors. A sponsee also needs to be aware of the impact a sponsorship partnership may have on its own brand, image, and equity.Research limitations/implicationsThis is a conceptual paper grounded in the literature that aims to stimulate further research in the domain of sponsorship and provide deeper understanding for sponsees. Empirical research addressing the research questions posed is required.Practical implicationsIn a holistic manner, this literature review offers insights into factors that sponsees should consider before entering a sponsorship relationship.Originality/valuePrevious research in the sponsorship domain has focused primarily on dyadic sponsors. This paper considers sponsorship from the sponsee’s perspective.

The Impact of Native Language Use on Second Language Vocabulary Learning by Saudi EFL Students

<p>This paper strives to explore the impact of Native Language use on Foreign Language vocabulary learning on the basis of empirical and available data. The study is carried out with special reference to the English Language Programme students in Buraydah Community College, Qassim University, Saudi Arabia. The Native Language of these students is Arabic and their Second Language is English. The participants in this research study are the post-secondary students of Buraydah Community College in Intensive Course Programme. The instrument used in this study was in the form of two tests. It is well known that in language assessment tests play a pivotal role in evaluating the EFL learners’ language proficiency. The use of native language as a semantic tool for assessing second language learners’ understanding shouldn’t be rejected altogether especially for the undergrad Saudi EFL (English as a Foreign Language) students. The outcomes of the study show that in learning the vocabulary of target language is significantly helped by the use of translation method of native language (Arabic) in understanding the meaning of novel words and expressions of foreign language (English). This method is widely welcomed by majority of the students of Buraydah Community College. It’s recommended to use this method in order to take the students directly to the core meaning of the word or expression. It also, sometimes, gives a sense of accuracy of the meaning of native language equivalents.</p>

The Effects of Educational Games on EFL Vocabulary Learning of Early Childhood Students with Learning Disabilities: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Educational games play an essential role in the life of the new generation. Although there are many criticisms, many studies focus on the importance of educational games in improving EFL vocabulary learning of early childhood students with learning disabilities in the target language. Researchers have begun to research how games are used in class to enhance vocabulary learning. This paper investigates the effects of educational games on EFL vocabulary learning of early childhood students with learning disabilities based on a literature review. Many studies focus on educational games' effect on various aspects of education. This concept paper aims to shed light on some of the benefits of games and the challenges teachers and early childhood children face in using educational games. This paper's results show that games are used not only for the success of early childhood students with learning disabilities in EFL classes but, more importantly, to motivate them and increase cooperation between children. Additionally, the results indicate that there are advantages and disadvantages of using games to learn English vocabulary.

How to Use L2 Movies Effectively to Learn New Vocabulary: A New Theoretical Perspective

This paper explores the impact of first language (L1) and second language (L2) subtitles in films. From a new perspective, the paper looks at the role of repetition as a separate entity that influences vocabulary learning despite subtitle types. To maximise vocabulary acquisition, the paper recommends that learners should be exposed to repeated input. The repetition should be comprehensible and to reach a comprehensible input, subtitles could be then considered. Overall, L1 subtitles are preferred for low proficiency learners whilst L2 subtitles could be geared towards high proficiency learners since the aim behind watching movies in the target language is to have a comprehensible input. Nonetheless, different subtitles should be used to facilitate the meaning and not as a final tool of acquiring new vocabulary as this acquisition will take place with repetition. Thus, the current paper could form a starting point in an approach that lays emphasis on repetition in movies watching rather than using a particular type of subtitle

Retrofitting Javanese Traditional Games as Indonesia Culture Identity: Providing English Vocabulary

  A traditional Javanese game was one of the cultures inherited of hereditary society which has great value to society, specifically to educate the children. Unfortunately, the impact a lot of modern games in modern era from other countries has demolished the position of local games. It seem gave negative impact for children today. They tend to focus on new game (download new game continuously) in Googleplay store without understanding educative value of it’s game. Consequently the children abandon traditional Javanese game and leave educative game. The researcher aimed to retrofit traditional Javanese games to provide English vocabulary for children in order to motivate them in Learning English. To solve the problem the researcher adapted Kemp and Yalden model of instructional program design to retrofitting Javanese traditional game. The result showed that Javanese traditional games: Learning alphabet was the result retrofitted from Sobyong game, Learning days was the result retrofitted from Engklek game, Learning Colors was the result retrofitted from “Jamuran” game, and Learning part of body was the result retrofitted from "Oyak- Oyakan". These modification games could be enjoyedinEnglish vocabulary learning process.   Key words: Retrofitting Javanese Traditional Games, Sobyong, Jamuran, Engklek, Oyak – oyakan, English Vocabulary,

Impact of Social Networking Sites on Students’ Learning English Language at Tertiary Level in Bangladesh

With the advancement in technology, Social Networking Sites (SNS) are being used by millions of students in Bangladesh for various purposes. People use SNS for communication, interaction' sharing posts, photos, videos; creating blogs, sending messages, and for real time conversations (Zaidieh, 2012). Students can learn their target language through SNSs as these platforms engage students more and inspire them. Moreover, the usage of SNSs minimises learners’ fear and nervousness and authority of the instructor (Gilbert, Fiske, & Lindzey, 1998; Beauvois, 1998, cited in Millis, 2011). Moreover, an opportunity of interaction for both teachers and students is ensured through authentic tasks and materials which promote constructivist learning through meaningful communication (Woo, Herrington, Agostinho, & Reeves, 2007). This study has explored the impact of SNS in learning English at tertiary level. So, it focuses on the effects of Social Networking Sites in language learning platform, developing reading, writing, listening and speaking skills and creating ease to teachers and learners in English has been examined in this study. To investigate this, I implemented quantitative research method with 120 students studying Honour’s in English Language and Literature at Public, National and Private Universities. Forty students were selected randomly from each of the university category. All the students were surveyed by using close-ended questionnaire and later descriptive statistical method was used to analyse the data. Despite having hesitation of communicating with each other, it is clearly evident that students use SNS mainly Facebook to improve their language skills.

From liberation to control: understanding the selfie experience

Purpose This paper aims to serve as an integrative literature review that organizes the burgeoning literature and findings related to possible impacts of the selfie phenomenon on consumers. Design/methodology/approach This is a conceptual paper. Findings The current empirical scholarly work supports two conflicting perspectives on the impact of selfies: the selfie experience as a source of empowerment and the selfie as embodiment of societal control and expression of existing power-relations. While the two perspectives are seemingly discordant, in fact, they pertain to different levels of analysis – individual and social, respectively. Originality/value While the empowerment aspect of the selfie experience has been well-documented in existing literature, the mechanisms of control and disempowerment have remained underconceptualized. This research paper offers a framework which addresses this omission and theorizes ways in which the selfie phenomenon perpetuates societal control and maintains power-relations.

Potential Changes in Saudi Students’ Motivations and Attitudes towards Learning English as a Foreign Language after Immersion in an L2 Learning Environment

This study traces potential changes in the motivation of Saudi students studying English as a second language (L2) in the UK. It investigates whether the beliefs and motivations of these students have changed during their learning experience, and identifies the pedagogical implications of such change for English teaching, not only to Saudi students in the UK but also to Saudi students enrolled in Saudi higher education institutions. It aims to identify the reasons behind changes in motivation as well as the impact these may have on students’ attitudes towards learning English as a foreign language (EFL). Data from questionnaires, interviews, and observations are used through three phases of the English academic programme. The study subjects are newly arrived Saudi students (three PhD students and 29 Master’s students) studying in four different universities in the UK under the fields of Linguistics, Applied Linguistics, and Translation. The conceptual framework is based on Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System Theory and Dörnyei & Ushioda’s motivation and L2 self-framework. Changes in motivation are usually accompanied by changes in students’ classroom involvement, attitudes towards the target language, and positive or negative impacts on the students’ outcomes and language competencies. Similar to other types of learning, L2 learning cannot take place in a vacuum. The present study has various contributions to the field of SLA. First, it validates earlier studies about the issue of motivation in linguistics, attitudes towards language, and changes in one’s self-identity as an outcome of language development. Second, it serves as an addition to the body of knowledge pertaining to motivation and attitude of Saudi students towards English as L2 and the important role of culture in this process. Further, it serves as an important contribution to how Saudi students’ L2 acquisition is understood using Dörnyei's L2 Motivational Self System.

Die Erkenntnisverheißung im Buch Exodus

The impact of the Exodus tradition on ancient Judaism has been subject of various investigations, leading to further questions about the formative and normative force (J. Assmann) of the Exodus narrative. Rather than focus on the effect of this force, this article employs a speech-act analysis of the biblical text in order to shed light on the causation of it. Following the doctrine of infelicities (J. Austin, R. Grimes), this study examines why the promise of knowledge of Yahweh by Pharaoh apparently did not succeed. Five possible points of a “happy” fulfilment of the promise can be determined. At each of these points a particular form of infelicity can be detected. 1. The guilt confessions of Pharaoh (hitch), 2. his release of the people of Israel (flaw) and even 3. the outcry of his drowning army (non-play) do not show convincing signs of knowledge. In the end, it is not 4. the people of Egypt (contagion), but 5. the Midianite Jethro (substitution), who is described as getting to know Yahweh substitutionally. It is the tenth of ten recognition formulas concerning non-Israelites that seems to provide a fitting answer to the promise of knowledge in the book of Exodus. This has consequences for the structure of the narrative as well as for the intended effect on the reader of each new generation.

Export Citation Format

Share document.