The Impacts of Gamified Online Learning on Cognitive Load and Attention
Abstract
Now many online learning platforms add game-like features to their systems. Common examples include points, leaderboards, badges, progress bars, competitive modes and task challenges. Platform designers build these features mainly to get students more involved and make learning feel easier and more fun. However, people only have limited attention space and working memory capacity. Any extra information will take up cognitive resources. Gamified learning tools may either help learners study better or disturb their learning process. Compared with offline classroom study, online learning asks learners to control themselves and keep focused for longer periods. This paper puts forward a key idea: gamified online learning cannot cut learning burdens by itself. Reward and competition rules from game designs may catch learners' attention randomly and bring more external cognitive load. Only well-designed gamified elements can guide learners' attention and give useful feedback to reduce study pressure. This paper mainly discusses two core research questions. First, which online gamified features grab people's attention unexpectedly and raise external cognitive load? Second, which gamified elements help learners keep attention on learning goals and lower their study burden?
References
- Kahn, A. (2020).Behavioral and neural correlates of graph learning. University of Pennsylvania, ProQuest Information and Learning Co. (Doctoral dissertation).
- Management Association, I. R. (2018).Applications of neuroscience: Breakthroughs in research and practice(1st ed.). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5478-3
- Smirni, D., Garufo, E., Di Falco, L., & Lavanco, G. (2021). The playing brain. The impact of video games on cognition and behavior in pediatric age at the time of lockdown: A systematic review.Pediatric Reports, 13(3), 401–415. https://doi.org/10.3390/pediatric13030047
- Sweller, J. (2023). The development of cognitive load theory: Replication crises and incorporation of other theories can lead to theory expansion.Educational Psychology Review, 35(4), Article 95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09817-2
- Pignatiello, G. A., Martin, R. J., & Hickman, R. L. (2020). Decision fatigue: A conceptual analysis.Journal of Health Psychology, 25(1), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105318763510
- Cohen, R. A. (1993).The neuropsychology of attention. Plenum Press.
- Cohen, R. A. (2011). Attention. In J. S. Kreutzer, J. DeLuca, & B. Caplan (Eds.),Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology. Springer.
- Zhang, X. L., & Fang, F. (2017). Bottom-up attention and its neural mechanisms.Acta Psychologica Sinica, 23(2), 99–109.
- Corbetta, M., & Shulman, G. L. (2002). Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain.Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3(3), 201–215.
- Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
- Jeong, J., & Frye, D. A. (2025). Approximating the ZPD? Young children's judgements of appropriate task level for learning.British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 43(1), 37–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12519