By Dr Jamie Murray

Dr Jamie Murray is an expert in the field of human episodic memory and uses his knowledge to enhance learning in educational settings. Jamie obtained his Ph.D. in cognitive neuroscience from the University of Stirling within the Psychological Imaging Laboratory and subsequently completed two postdoctoral positions focused on understanding how memory precision changes as we age. During this time, Jamie was also a visiting researcher at Humboldt University in Berlin and the Max Planck Institute for Human Development. Jamie later became a full-time lecturer at the University of Stirling for three years before moving to the University of Glasgow in August 2021. In addition to lecturing, Jamie leads the School of Psychology and Neuroscience Employability Network, where he works with colleagues to support students’ professional skills development, and he also serves as the international coordinator. Jamie’s research focuses on how to effectively design online learning environments to reduce cognitive load and increase learning performance, with a particular emphasis on English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) students. He is passionate about teaching, enhancing the student experience, and creating opportunities to boost student employability. In his personal life, Jamie enjoys spending time with his young family, is a horror movie enthusiast, and is a fan of the works of Stephen King and Ursula Le Guin. You can connect with Jamie on LinkedIn.


Technology is increasingly transforming the way students engage with learning materials. One prominent use of technology in education is gamification, where game-like elements are applied to non-game environments to enhance engagement and motivation. Leaderboards, challenges, and competitions are commonly used in this approach, offering the potential to make learning both fun and rewarding. Despite the growing enthusiasm around gamification, questions remain about how to best implement these technologies to truly benefit learners. One key question is whether gamified technology can foster deeper engagement and intrinsic motivation, or if it risks being merely a distraction.

This question is at the heart of a recent experimental study by Loukia David and Netta Weinstein from the University of Reading (1). Their research, grounded in Self-Determination Theory (SDT) (2), explores how Student Response Systems (SRS) (3) – a type of classroom gamification technology – can be used to optimize motivation, increase satisfaction of psychological needs, and improve overall academic well-being among students.

Self-Determination Theory emphasizes three core psychological needs that must be met to foster intrinsic motivation: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Autonomy refers to a sense of control or choice over one’s actions; competence involves feeling effective and capable of achieving goals; and relatedness reflects the sense of connection and belonging with others. When these needs are satisfied, students are more likely to be motivated from within, driven to engage in activities because they find them inherently satisfying rather than being motivated by external rewards (4).

David and Weinstein hypothesized that using gamified technology like SRS, when paired with specific motivational strategies, could enhance these psychological needs. For example, giving students voluntary, self-directed challenges would increase their sense of autonomy, while badges, leaderboards, and performance feedback could boost competence by allowing learners to track their progress. Likewise, leaderboards, multiplayer games, and team-based challenges should foster relatedness by encouraging students to feel part of a group. However, prior to this study, the evidence for how game elements satisfy these core psychological needs was limited, making this investigation crucial for understanding the potential of gamification as a driver of intrinsic motivation and academic well-being.

Study Overview

The researchers conducted a pilot study followed by a main experiment. In the pilot study, 30 students were randomly assigned to either a technology-based learning condition using SRS or a traditional learning condition. The goal was to examine whether the use of SRS – by providing immediate feedback and leaderboards – could enhance students’ academic well-being, specifically their interest and effort in learning.

The main study expanded on this by introducing different motivational framing strategies in the SRS-based learning condition. A total of 120 students, aged 6 to 16, were assigned to one of four experimental conditions:

1. Teamwork: Students worked in teams to answer questions.

2. Friendly Competition: Students competed individually, with scores displayed on a leaderboard.

3. Choice: Students had the option to participate or not.

4. Anonymity: Students participated anonymously, with no names shown on the leaderboard.

These conditions were compared to a traditional learning condition requiring students to answer the same set of questions on paper rather than using technology. Self-reported measures were used to assess how each condition influenced satisfaction of the psychological needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness) and academic well-being (interest and effort).

Results

The pilot study showed that students in the SRS-based learning condition reported significantly higher levels of interest and effort, suggesting that gamified technology can positively impact students’ engagement and motivation.

In the main study, the results were more nuanced. The Teamwork and Choice conditions had the greatest positive impact on students’ autonomy, competence, and relatedness, as well as their overall interest and engagement. Friendly competition was found to enhance competence by providing clear performance feedback but was less effective at promoting autonomy and relatedness compared to teamwork and choice. The Anonymity condition, while protecting students from social comparison, was the least effective in satisfying psychological needs and fostering academic well-being, with students reporting feeling less connected to their peers and less engaged overall.

Limitations and Future Directions

Despite the positive outcomes, several limitations need to be addressed in future work.

• First, the study was conducted with a specific sample of privately educated, foreign language students in Greece, who were technologically literate and from advantaged socioeconomic backgrounds. It is unclear whether students from more disadvantaged backgrounds (5) or with lower technological familiarity (6) would experience similar benefits.

• Additionally, the study’s duration was relatively short – two months for the pilot and five lessons for the main study – which raises questions about the long-term effects of gamified learning. Would the initial boost in intrinsic motivation fade as the novelty of the technology wears off? Future studies should explore these effects over extended periods.

• The timing of the research is another consideration. Conducted shortly after schools reopened following COVID-19 lockdowns, students may have been particularly enthusiastic about returning to the classroom, potentially inflating the positive effects of the gamified technology. Future research should control for such external factors to ensure the findings are not context dependent. 

Conclusion

The key take-away from this study is that gamified technologies can significantly enhance students’ intrinsic motivation and academic well-being, but their effectiveness depends on how activities are framed. Gamified technologies should therefore be carefully combined with motivational strategies that support students’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness – such as providing choice, promoting teamwork, and encouraging friendly competition. When designed thoughtfully, these tools can transform learning environments, making them more engaging and enjoyable for students.

(Cover image by fauxels on Pexels)

References:

1. David, L., & Weinstein, N. (2024). Using technology to make learning fun: technology use is best made fun and challenging to optimize intrinsic motivation and engagement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 39(2), 1441-1463.

2. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in personality. New York: Plenum.

3. Liu, C., Sands-Meyer, S., & Audran, J. (2019). The effectiveness of the student response system (SRS) in English grammar learning in a flipped English as a foreign language (EFL) class. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1178–1191.

 4. Guay, F. (2022). Applying self-determination theory to education: Regulations types, psychological needs, and autonomy supporting behaviors. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 37(1), 75-92.

5. Shin, H. W., & So, Y. (2018). The moderating role of socioeconomic status on motivation of adolescents’ foreign language learning strategy use. System, 73, 71-79.

6. Pan, X. (2020). Technology acceptance, technological self-efficacy, and attitude toward technology-based self-directed learning: learning motivation as a mediator. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 564294.