The Effect of Serious Games on Medical Students’ Motivation, Flow and Learning

Abstract

Background and aim Serious games are interactive games with a purpose for education, developed generally under software technology, serious games also include tabletop games (board games and card games), and many of them are used in medical settings like hospital training. Previous work indicates that serious games can enhance students' motivation, interaction, and engagement. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a serious game on medical students' learning outcomes and determine its effect on students' flow and motivation and examine the relationship between the flow and motivation. Methods This was a prospective study performed for two years (2018-2019 and 2019-2020 academic years). A total of 108 third-year medical students participated in this study. Students were asked to play a serious game on a computer for twenty minutes. A set of questionnaires containing evaluation grids to measure the flow and the motivation were given to students. The effectiveness of the game was assessed using pre-and post-tests. Results Complete datasets were available for 97 students. Flow and motivation dimensions experienced by the students were generally high (mean = 54,5). Significant and positive relationships between the sub-scale of flow experience and intrinsic motivation to know, intrinsic motivation to experience simulation, and the three types of extrinsic motivation were found. There was a negative correlation between the flow dimension and intrinsic motivation toward accomplishments and amotivation. There was a significant difference between the mean scores of pre-tests and post-tests ( p < .01). Conclusion The serious game is regarded as a particularly active and problem-solving form of learning that promote medical students' motivation, flow and learning achievements.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 25 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.