MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390974364 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.11.018

The impact of storytelling and narrative variables on skill acquisition in gamified learning

2024· article· en· W4390974364 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hani Yousef Jarrah, Doha Adel Bilal, Mona Halim, Mamdouh Mosaad Helali, Rommel AlAli, Ali Atwa Ali Alfandi, Mohamad Ahmad Saleem Khasawneh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing Faisal UniversityKing Khalid University
KeywordsNarrativeStorytellingDescriptive statisticsPsychologyNarrative inquirySample (material)Mathematics educationDreyfus model of skill acquisitionPedagogyPolitical scienceStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research attempts to better understand how students in Saudi Arabia benefit from narrative and story aspects in gamified learning environments. Data from a sample of 500 persons with varying levels of education are analyzed using quantitative methods such as descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and multiple regression analysis. The findings point to strong positive correlations between the use of gamification in education, the influence of storytelling, narrative variables, and the acquisition of new skills. There has been a significant shift toward the use of narrative variables as measures of mastery in gamified classrooms. This study's results show that using gamified learning with story elements may increase students' interest, motivation, and knowledge retention. Efforts are now being made by Saudi Arabia to update its educational system and provide its youth with the tools they'll need to succeed in the country's emerging knowledge-based economy. The use of game-based learning and narrative-rich experiences has promising results in this setting.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.368 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207