THE ROLE OF INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC REWARDS IN GAMIFIED LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS

​ABSTRACT

Gamification in higher education has become more popular as a strategy to improve student engagement and motivation by incorporating game-like aspects into learning environments. This study examines the effects of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards on student motivation, satisfaction, and sustained learning. A survey was administered to evaluate students' impressions of different incentive types in gamified learning activities. Research demonstrates that whereas extrinsic rewards offer temporary motivation increases, intrinsic benefits, including personal accomplishment and goals, are essential for enduring engagement. The findings indicate that a balanced strategy integrating both incentive kinds can enhance learning outcomes in higher education environments.

Keywords: gamification, intrinsic rewards, extrinsic rewards, engagement, student motivation.

Introduction

Gamification, defined as the integration of game design elements into non-game contexts, has emerged as a potent tool in higher education, aiming to enhance student engagement and academic outcomes [7]. The core idea of gamification is its ability to motivate students through various types of rewards. This study investigates two primary types of rewards: intrinsic and extrinsic, and their effects on student motivation, satisfaction, and enduring learning in higher education environments.

The incorporation of gamification in education is not a novel occurrence. Preliminary research suggested that the incorporation of gamified elements could markedly influence students' motivation and engagement [4]. Recent study underscores the complex interplay between various incentive types and student motivation, indicating that whereas extrinsic rewards offer instant satisfaction, intrinsic rewards tend to foster profound learning and sustained engagement [3].

Despite the expanding literature on gamification, a gap persists in comprehending the interaction between intrinsic and extrinsic rewards and their specific impact on student motivation in higher education. Prior research has frequently concentrated on a singular type of reward, overlooking the possible synergy or conflicts between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations [6]. This study aims to address this gap by analyzing student views of both reward categories within the framework of gamified learning experiences.

Research Questions and Hypothesis

This paper investigates the following research questions:

1. Which type of rewards (intrinsic or extrinsic) do students perceive as more motivating in a gamified learning environment?
2. How do students’ perceptions of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards influence their engagement and satisfaction with learning activities?
3. Does gamified learning environment by itself motivate students?
4. Does animation, sound and UI/UX design play the most significant role in a gamified learning environment?

This research hypothesis asserts that although extrinsic rewards may initially incentivize students, intrinsic rewards will ultimately foster greater satisfaction and a sustained willingness to participate in learning activities over time. This study aims to investigate student perceptions of rewards in gamification and their implications for improving motivation in higher education environments.

Literature Review

Gamification in educational contexts is receiving increasing interest, especially concerning the impact of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards on student motivation and engagement. Fundamental theories like Self-Determination Theory (SDT) contend that intrinsic motivation, fueled by autonomy, competence, and relatedness, promotes enduring engagement, whereas extrinsic rewards may elicit temporary interest [3]. Research using SDT in gamified education indicates that extrinsic incentives, such badges and points, might enhance initial engagement but may diminish intrinsic motivation if excessively highlighted [4]. This supports hypothesis that extrinsic rewards may facilitate immediate engagement but are inadequate for sustained satisfaction and learning.

Expectancy Theory contributes to gamification research by positing that motivation is influenced by the perceived worth of outcomes and the conviction that effort will yield rewards [8]. Landers et al. discovered that although extrinsic rewards in gamified settings can promote engagement, intrinsic motivators such as personal mastery are essential for maintaining interest [6]. This indicates that an equilibrium of both motivators is optimal in educational settings, reinforcing our research inquiries into the influence of rewards on student engagement and satisfaction.

Empirical studies further investigate these theories in the practical implementation of gamified learning. Seaborn and Fels discovered that extrinsic rewards momentarily elevated participation rates but diminished intrinsic interest over time, highlighting the necessity for intrinsic motivators [9]. A study conducted by Dichev and Dicheva on university students found that whereas extrinsic rewards improved attendance and initial engagement, they failed to foster authentic interest in course material unless autonomy and self-choice were also incorporated [2].

Methodologically, research on gamification in education utilizes several methodologies, including trials, surveys, and meta-analyses. Hamari et al. performed a meta-analysis indicating that extrinsic motivators initially enhance engagement but frequently result in rapid disengagement in the absence of intrinsic factors [4]. Surveys conducted to evaluate students' inclinations towards gamified components, revealed a pronounced preference for tasks that promote personal achievement rather than solely extrinsic rewards [5]. This literature underscores the significance of equilibrating internal and extrinsic motivators in gamified educational settings.

Research Methods

The questionnaire made with Google Forms*(At the request of Roskomnadzor, we inform you that the foreign entity that owns Google information resources is a violator of the legislation of the Russian Federation – editor’s note.) was designed to gather quantitative and qualitative data from students in higher education institutions. The questionnaire included open-ended questions for convenience and more accurate data. The questions asked about the age of participants, their experience with games, whether they were motivated, satisfied with gamification features and long-term effects on learning and motivation. The questions facilitate a comprehensive understanding of gamification’s impact in higher education and address the study’s research questions.

Results

Seventeen participants offered perspectives on their experiences and opinions regarding rewards in educational gamification. The majority of participants (88.2%) were aged 18–25, with 11.8% between 26–35 years. Most participants had some experience with games (58.8%), while 29.4% reported extensive experience and 11.8% had minimal experience.

When asked if extrinsic rewards, such as badges and leaderboards, provide a short-term motivational boost, 82.3% agreed or strongly agreed, with only 5.9% disagreeing. This suggests a widespread perception that extrinsic rewards are effective at initiating engagement in learning tasks. Similarly, 82.3% of respondents felt that extrinsic rewards such as points and badges kept them consistently motivated to engage in learning activities, with only 5.9% expressing disagreement. Extrinsic rewards also appeared effective in encouraging students to complete otherwise unengaging tasks, as all respondents either agreed (47.1%) or strongly agreed (52.9%).

Participants reported feeling satisfied when achieving extrinsic rewards, such as points or leaderboard advancement. A total of 52.9% strongly agreed, and 47.1% agreed, indicating that such rewards may contribute positively to immediate satisfaction. When asked why they would feel motivated to return to the learning activity, 70.6% chose “all of the above,” including interest in knowledge, sense of accomplishment, and engaging design elements like pleasant sound and UI/UX. Smaller groups indicated specific satisfaction from knowledge (17.6%) or accomplishment and design elements (5.9% each).

A majority of respondents (58.8%) disagreed with the idea that points, badges, and leaderboards could contribute significantly to their long-term goals and personal or professional growth. Additionally, 17.6% strongly disagreed, suggesting that extrinsic rewards might not support sustained engagement or development. Most participants (94.1%) saw gamified interfaces as an added bonus to a well-structured learning environment rather than the primary motivator.

Discussion

The survey results offer significant insights into the impact of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards on motivation, engagement, and satisfaction within a gamified learning context. The findings correspond with prior studies suggesting that extrinsic rewards provide a fleeting enhancement in motivation but may not substantially affect long-term learning commitment or personal development.

Extrinsic rewards, such points, badges, and leaderboards, evidently contribute to short-term motivation. The majority of participants indicated that these prizes motivated them to participate in learning exercises, corroborating previous research that demonstrates extrinsic rewards can initially stimulate behavioral change. Nonetheless, whereas extrinsic rewards can enhance short-term engagement, they may not cultivate intrinsic motivation in learning activities in the long run [1].

Participants' contentment with extrinsic rewards (e.g., points, leaderboards) and their motivations for reengaging in gamified learning activities reinforce the idea that gamification features yield enjoyment and a sense of achievement. Significantly, 70.6% of participants asserted that a confluence of components, encompassing knowledge, achievement, and captivating design elements, was essential for enduring engagement. This corresponds with SDT, which posits that satisfying intrinsic needs—namely autonomy, competence, and relatedness—augments motivation beyond the capacity of extrinsic incentives alone.

Although extrinsic rewards enhanced short-term motivation, the majority of participants did not perceive these prizes as beneficial for long-term learning or personal growth. This finding confirms the study's hypothesis, suggesting that although extrinsic rewards may prompt engagement, intrinsic elements (such as a sincere interest in learning) exert a greater influence on sustaining long-term motivation. Furthermore, nearly all participants regarded gamified interfaces as an auxiliary resource rather than a substitute for a meticulously crafted learning environment. This indicates that gamification is most effective when strategically included into educational design rather than employed as the exclusive incentive.

Conclusion

The results indicate that whereas extrinsic rewards can enhance short-term motivation in a gamified learning context, they may lack the intrinsic fulfillment necessary for sustained engagement or personal development. Students typically regard gamification components as ancillary features that enrich their learning experience, rather than as principal motivators. Students necessitate more than just rewards for enduring motivation; they desire meaningful interaction that satisfies inherent psychological demands, including autonomy and competence.

These findings have significant implications for educational institutions seeking to adopt gamified learning technologies. Although incorporating points, badges, and leaderboards is advantageous, prioritizing activities that promote mastery and personal development may yield greater long-term incentive.

In conclusion, the incorporation of gamified features must account for both inner and extrinsic factors to establish a balanced and successful learning environment. Future research may examine a broader, more heterogeneous sample and analyze particular intrinsic motivators that could be further incorporated into gamified learning to promote lifelong learning and autonomous educational development.

Appendix

Img 1. Question 1

Img 2. Question 2

Img 3. Question 3

Img 4. Question 4

Img 5. Question 5

Img 6. Question 6

Img 7. Question 7

Img 8. Question 8

References:

1. А. Christopoulos and S. Mystakidis, “Gamification in Education”, Encyclopedia, vol. 3, pp. 1223-1243, Oct. 2023. DOI: 10.3390/encyclopedia3040089
2. D. Dicheva, C. Dichev, G. Agre and G. Angelova, “Gamification in Education: A Systematic Mapping Study”, Educational Technology & Society, vol. 18, pp. 75-88, 2015. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270273830_Gamification_in_Education_A_Systematic_Mapping_Study
3. E. L. Deci and R. M. Ryan, “The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior”, Psychological Inquiry, vol. 11(4), pp. 227-268, 2000.
4. J. Hamari, J. Koivisto and H. Sarsa, “Does gamification work?–a literature review of empirical studies on gamification”, 47th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, pp. 3025-3034, Jan. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377
5. K. Seaborn, and D. S. Fels, “Gamification in theory and action: A survey”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol 74, pp 14-31, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.006
6. R. N. Landers, “Developing a theory of gamified learning: Linking serious games and gamification of learning”, Simulation & Gaming, vol. 45, pp. 752-768. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878114563660
7. S. Deterding, D. Dixon, R. Khaled and L. Nacke, “From game design elements to gamefulness: defining "gamification." In Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments, pp. 9-15, Sep. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040
8. S. Ouazizi, A. Karimov, M. Saarela, “Gamification and motivation in education: A systematic literature review”, eLearn World Conference on EdTech, pp. 616-624, Oct. 2024.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385241829_Gamification_and_motivation_in_education_A_systematic_literature_review
9. Y. Lei, “Unlocking the secrets of STEM success: Exploring the interplay of motivation to learn science, self-regulation, and emotional intelligence from a perspective of self-determination theory”, Learning and Motivation, vol. 87, Aug. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2024.102012