Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn)

Vol. 18, No. 1, February 2024, pp. 173~184

ISSN: 2089-9823 DOI: 10.11591/edulearn.v18i1.20823  173

The role of gamification implementation in improving quality

and intention in software engineering learning

Tri Wahyuningsih, Eko Sediyono, Kristoko Dwi Hartomo, Irwan Sembiring

Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Information Technology, Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana, Salatiga, Indonesia

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: Gamification can make learning more fun and engaging for students. Software
engineering can utilize gamification to help students learn and improve their
Received Jan 16, 2023 skills from the complexity of software engineering. This study used
Revised Apr 3, 2023 quantitative research to examines perceived ease of use, student satisfaction,
Accepted Apr 13, 2023 and perceived usefulness to measure gamification quality, which can have an
impact on software engineering intention, namely intention, loyalty, and
participation in following and understanding software engineering materials.
Keywords: The data was collected based on an online questionnaire survey, 90 data were
collected and then measured and analyzed using SmartPLS 3. The results
Gamification showed that perceived ease of use, student satisfaction, and perceived
SmartPLS usefulness have a significant influence on gamification quality, which also
Software engineering leads to a positive impact on software engineering intention. This research
Student intention guides teachers and educational institutions that gamification is very
Student satisfaction successful as a learning medium to simplify complex information to be more
interactive.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Tri Wahyuningsih
Department of Computer Science, Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana
Salatiga, Indonesia
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
One of the major challenges in improving software engineering as a profession is ensuring that future
software engineers are adequately trained and prepared. To achieve this goal, efforts have been focused on two
areas: defining and establishing software engineering curricula that cover the knowledge and skills needed in
professional practice, and improving the methods and techniques used to teach software engineering [1]–[3].
Examples of initiatives aimed at defining software engineering curricula include undergraduate and graduate
education standards, competency models, and expert opinions on what should be included in software
engineering education. In addition to these efforts, the software engineering education community has also
been working to find more effective ways to teach software engineering, including traditional methods such as
tombstone projects, and newer approaches such as project-based learning, case-based teaching, and research-
based teaching. Other innovative pedagogical strategies that have been discussed within the community include
swapped classrooms and the use of game-related approaches based on serious play or gamification [4], [5].
Gamification, which involves incorporating elements of game design into non-game contexts, has
become a popular teaching technology in education in recent years [6], [7]. This approach aims to create
experiences that engage and motivate learners in the same way that a game does, but for educational purposes.
While gamification has been around since 2008, it has gained widespread adoption in the education sector since
2010. However, research on the effectiveness of gamification in education is still limited, and there are

Journal homepage: http://edulearn.intelektual.org

174  ISSN: 2089-9823

concerns about the potential risks of this approach. Several studies [3]–[6] have found that up to 80% of
gamification applications may not meet their intended goals, often due to poor implementation.
The idea that gamification can enhance academic learning by motivating and engaging students has
gained traction in the education field [8]–[10]. However, implementing gamification in education can be
challenging for educators due to the time and effort required. Additionally, there is a lack of standardization in
the approaches used to gamify learning activities, which has led to mixed results in gamification experiments.
Several studies [4]–[8] have even reported negative impacts on learning processes and outcomes due to
ineffective gamification methods [11].
This research aims to investigate the use of gamification in software engineering education as a way
to revitalize the learning experience for students. Many software engineering students may find traditional
teaching methods to be monotonous or demotivating, and this study seeks to understand how gamification can
be implemented in a way that can help to motivate and engage these students. Through a comprehensive review
of the existing literature on gamification in software engineering education, this research aims to identify the
challenges and opportunities presented by this approach to learning. The ultimate goal is to improve the
learning processes and outcomes for software engineering students through the use of gamification.
The purpose of this research was to systematically map the use of gamification in software engineering
education, following the guidelines and recommendations of Petersen et al. [12]. The research questions were
designed to provide insight into the current state of gamification in software engineering education, including
its potential benefits, trends, and challenges. This information will be useful for software engineering
academics as they seek to understand the field and identify areas for further research and development.
Additionally, the research aims to help educators analyze current trends and identify any gaps in the use of
gamification in software engineering education.
RQ1. In which software engineering education contexts has gamification been applied?
RQ2. How has gamification been implemented in software engineering education courses?
RQ3. What is the evidence of the impact of gamification on software engineering education?
The main goal of the first research question (RQ1) was to understand the context in which
gamification has been applied in software engineering education. Specifically, the study examined the types of
software engineering classes or courses that have been gamified, the educational activities that have been
gamified, and the most commonly adapted software engineering processes. The second research question
(RQ2) aimed to investigate how gamification is being implemented in practice in software engineering
education. This question looked at the different approaches and methodologies used to gamify software
engineering education, the game elements that have been incorporated into these courses, and the tools, if any,
that are being used to apply gamification. This information is valuable for software engineering courses that
are considering using gamification, as it can help them decide whether to use existing methods or design new
approaches based on the strengths and weaknesses of current solutions. Additionally, understanding the
technical support (tools) needed for gamification can provide important data on the cost of gamification and
which gamification components from the literature have been utilized. Finally, the third research question
(RQ3) focused on the existing evidence on the impact of gamification on software engineering education,
specifically which software engineering education goals have been gamified and what evidence exists on the
results. This information can help to determine whether gamification in software engineering education has
positive or negative effects on software engineering learning processes and outcomes.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Gamification in education
Gamification is a way to make an activity more fun by adding game elements to the activity. In
education, gamification can be applied to help increase student motivation and improve their learning outcomes
[13]–[15]. The application of gamification in education can be done by giving rewards to students who
successfully achieve learning goals or complete certain tasks. These rewards can be in the form of points, levels
or badges that can increase students' motivation to continue learning and improve their learning outcomes [16].
In addition, gamification can also help improve student creativity and collaboration. By adding game
elements such as missions and adventures in learning, students will be more interested and engaged in learning
activities. They will also learn faster by helping each other to complete tasks or achieve learning goals.
Gamification can also help reduce students' boredom and saturation in learning [17]. With fun game elements,
students will be more interested in learning and will more easily understand the subject matter. Gamification
can also help improve students' concentration during learning, so their learning outcomes will be better [4],
[7]. In general, incorporating gamification into education can be an efficient method to enhance students'
motivation and augment their academic achievements. By integrating game-like features into educational

J Edu & Learn, Vol. 18, No. 1, February 2024: 173-184

J Edu & Learn ISSN: 2089-9823  175

practices, learners are likely to become more invested and involved in the learning process, resulting in more
favorable learning outcomes.

2.2. Gamification adoption in education

Gamification adoption in education refers to the integration of game elements into the learning process
to enhance student engagement and motivation. This trend has gained significant traction in recent years as
educators have recognized the value of game-based learning in promoting active participation and achieving
better learning outcomes. The use of gamification techniques in education can range from simple rewards
systems for completing assignments to more complex, immersive simulations that replicate real-world
experiences.
One of the key benefits of gamification in education is that it can help to create a more dynamic and
engaging learning environment. By incorporating game elements such as points, badges, and leaderboards,
educators can provide students with immediate feedback and a sense of achievement, which can help to
increase their motivation and enthusiasm for learning. Additionally, gamification can help to foster a sense
of community and collaboration among students, as they work together to achieve common goals and
objectives.
Another advantage of gamification in education is that it can help to personalize the learning
experience for individual students. By incorporating game mechanics that adapt to the unique needs and
interests of each student, educators can create a more tailored and effective learning experience. For example,
gamification can be used to create personalized learning paths that allow students to progress at their own pace
and receive targeted feedback based on their performance.
However, it is important to note that gamification in education is not without its challenges. Educators
must carefully consider the appropriateness and effectiveness of game elements in different contexts, and
ensure that they are aligned with learning objectives. Moreover, the use of gamification should not be seen as
a replacement for traditional teaching methods, but rather as a complementary approach that can be used to
enhance the learning experience. Overall, the adoption of gamification in education represents an exciting
development in the field of learning and pedagogy. By leveraging the power of game-based learning, educators
can create more engaging and effective learning experiences that help to improve student outcomes and prepare
them for success in the 21st century.
Based on several studies, gamification is a process that incorporates game elements into non-game
systems such as education [9], [10]. This theory emerged as one of the methods to increase motivation and
improve one's learning. In its implementation in education, gamification can be used to increase students'
interest in the subject matter. By adding game elements such as scores, rewards, and increasing difficulty levels,
students will be more challenged and excited to complete the assigned tasks [18]–[20].
In addition, gamification can also improve collaboration between students. For example, by using
shared games, students can learn together and support each other in completing the challenges. This will help
students to learn in a more fun and less boring way. Not only that, gamification can also improve students'
critical problem-solving skills. By solving challenges in the game, students will be trained to think critically
and find the right solution. This will help students in solving problems in everyday life [12]. Overall,
gamification is an effective method in improving student motivation and learning. By adding game elements,
the learning process becomes more fun and less boring so that students are more challenged and excited about
learning.

2.3. Gamification of software engineering

Gamification is a learning method that utilizes game elements in the learning process. By using
gamification, the learning process becomes more fun and challenging, helping to increase learning motivation
and improve learning outcomes. In the field of software engineering, gamification can play a very important
role in the learning process. By using gamification, students can learn about the basics of programming in a
fun and challenging way that helps them understand the basic concepts of programming better [21].
In addition, gamification can also help improve students' skills in creative and innovative problem
solving. By using game elements in learning, students will be tested with various challenges that require
creative and innovative problem solving [22]. This will help students develop these skills so that they can better
solve problems that arise in the software development process. In addition, gamification can also help improve
students' collaboration skills. In software engineering, teamwork and collaboration are very important. By
using gamification, students can learn about the importance of working together with others to solve a challenge
or problem. This will help students develop the collaboration skills needed in software engineering. Table 1
explain the constructs and the definision of construct.

The role of gamification implementation in improving quality and intention … (Tri wahyuningsih)
176  ISSN: 2089-9823

Table 1. Definition of concepts

Construct Definition Source
Perceived ease of use Perceived ease of use is the level of ease felt by users when using a product or system. [3], [23]
(PEU)
Student satisfaction (SSG) Student satisfaction is the level of student satisfaction with the services, facilities, and [3], [23],
teaching provided by a school or educational institution. [24]
Perceived usefulness Perceived usefulness is a person's level of trust in the usefulness of a product or system [3], [20],
(PUG) that is believed to provide benefits to its users. [23]
Gamification quality (GQ) Gamification quality is the quality of the process of using game elements in a system or [25],
activity to increase motivation and engagement. [26]
Technology anxiety (TA) Technology anxiety is the fear or anxiety that comes with technological change and how [3], [23],
it affects one's life. [24]
Software engineering Software engineering intention is a process of planning and developing software systems [1], [2],
intention (SEI) that pay attention to technical aspects, quality, and efficiency to produce quality software [27]
products and in accordance with user needs.

3. HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT
Gamification is a technique that incorporates game elements in a system or activity to increase user
motivation and participation. One of the factors that influence the quality of gamification is perceived of use.
Perceived of use is a person's assessment or response to the ease of use of a system or activity. In the context
of gamification, perceived of use refers to how easily users understand and follow the games offered by the
system [5].
If perceived of use is high, the quality of gamification will be better. Users will find it easier to
understand and follow the game offered, so user motivation and participation will increase. This will result in
a more enjoyable and effective game experience in achieving the gamification goals. Thus, the role of perceived
of use is very important in improving the quality of gamification. System developers should pay attention to
perceived of use in designing the game to be offered, so that the game is easy for users to understand and
perform. Thus, gamification can be more effective in increasing user motivation and participation.
- H1: Perceived ease of use has a significant role on gamification quality.
Gamification is one of the techniques used in the learning process to increase students' motivation and
participation in learning activities. By using game elements such as points, levels and rewards, gamification
can make learning more fun and interactive. Based on the results of a survey conducted on a number of students,
it turns out that the majority of students feel very satisfied with the quality of gamification implemented in the
learning process. They feel more challenged and encouraged to study harder by the gamification system. In
addition, they also feel happier and less bored in following the learning process [6], [10].
However, there are also many students who are dissatisfied with the quality of gamification. They feel
that the gamification system is too complicated and confusing, which does not help in the learning process.
Therefore, it is necessary to improve and evaluate the gamification system so that it can be more effective and
make a significant contribution to the learning process.
- H2: Student satisfaction has a significant role in gamification quality.
Perceived usefulness is one of the factors that influence the quality of gamification. Gamification is a
technique that uses game elements to increase motivation and engagement in an activity. First, perceived
usefulness is a factor that affects the success rate of gamification. Gamification that is perceived as useful will
be more easily accepted by users and provide more optimal results. This is because users will be more involved
and have higher motivation to complete the given activity [3].
Second, perceived usefulness also affects the level of user interest in gamification. Gamification that
is perceived as useful will be more interesting and fun for users, so they will be more interested in trying and
using it. This will increase user engagement and make them more involved in the given activity.
- H3: Perceived usefulness has a significant role on gamification quality.
Gamification is one of the strategies often used in improving the quality and intensity of use of a
system or service. By inserting game elements into the system, someone will feel more interested and actively
involved in using it [3]. One example that can be mentioned is gamification in fitness apps. By adding a feature
that counts the number of steps taken throughout the day, and rewards people with badges or virtual awards
when they reach certain targets, people will feel more motivated to continue exercising and using the app
regularly.
However, keep in mind that gamification is not always effective in increasing intention of use. For
this reason, it is necessary to have the right combination of game features that are inserted, as well as designs
and user interfaces that are attractive and easy to understand by users. Thus, gamification can be an effective
strategy in increasing the intention of use of a system or service.
- H4: Gamification quality has a significant role on software engineering intention.

J Edu & Learn, Vol. 18, No. 1, February 2024: 173-184

J Edu & Learn ISSN: 2089-9823  177

Gamification is the process of adding game elements into everyday activities to increase motivation
and engagement. Technology is an integral part of modern life and has increased efficiency and productivity
in various fields [3]. However, there are concerns about the negative impact of using too much technology,
known as technology anxiety. Gamification can reduce technology anxiety by providing clear structure and
goals to technology users. This helps them to focus on the desired goal and improves concentration. In addition,
game elements can provide rewards and recognition that increase user motivation and satisfaction.
- H5: Gamification quality has a significant role on technology anxiety.
Technology anxiety is a phenomenon that often occurs today. Many people feel anxious and worried
about technology that is increasingly sophisticated and complex [3], [28]. This can affect their intention to use
the technology, including gamification. Gamification is a method that incorporates game elements in a non-
game activity, such as in business or learning. The goal is to increase user motivation and participation.
However, the technology used in gamification often makes people feel anxious and worried.
One of the main causes of technology anxiety towards gamification is anxiety about personal data
security. Many people are worried that their data will be misused by irresponsible parties. This may discourage
them from using gamification to increase motivation and participation.
- H6: Technology anxiety has a significant role on software engineering intention.

4. METHODOLOGY
For this research, an online survey using a self-assessment questionnaire was conducted from July to
October 2022 to gather information from students and teachers in Indonesia who have utilized gamification in
their learning process, specifically in the field of software engineering. The data collected was filtered to exclude
those who had no experience with gamification. Out of the 134 initial respondents, 90 were determined to have
utilized gamification in their learning. The demographic makeup of these respondents is shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Respondent demographics

Characteristics Item Frequency Percentage
Men 45 50%
Gender
Women 45 50%
16 - 20 32 35.6%
Age 21 - 25 40 44.4%
> 26 18 20%
High School 30 33.4%
Education Level S1 32 35.5%
S2 28 31.1%

The survey consisted of two sections: the first focused on gathering basic demographic data, while
the second aimed to test specific hypotheses. The questions included in the survey were designed based on
prior research and had already been proven to be reliable through validation procedures. In order to increase
the accuracy of the measurements taken, the survey utilized seven Likert scales. The overall validity of the
questionnaire was also confirmed before it was administered. Research framework used in this research are
proposed on Figure 1.

Figure 1. Research framework

The role of gamification implementation in improving quality and intention … (Tri wahyuningsih)
178  ISSN: 2089-9823

To assess multicollinearity between constructs, variance inflation factor (VIF) analysis was conducted
in Table 3. The analysis results show that the inner VIF value ranges from 1.000 to 2.580, indicating that there
is no potential multicollinearity between latent constructs. This is supported by the recommendation of Hair et
al. [28], which suggests that the VIF value should be less than 5.0 to ensure the relevance of the model.

Table 3. Inner VIF results

Construct VIF
PEU → GQ 4.344
SSG → GQ 3.768
PUG → GQ 4.269
GQ → SEI 2.898
GQ → TA 1.000
TA → SEI 2.898

5. DATA ANALYSIS
This study uses SmartPLS 3 to conduct measurement and partial least squares (PLS) analysis.
Table 4 describes the measurement items used in this study. Reliability and validity analyses were conducted
during the measurement stage, and the path coefficients and strength of the structural model were tested and
examined during the analysis stage. To confirm the reliability and validity of the constructs and to investigate
the interactions between them. This study focused on the causal relationships between PEU, SSG, PUG, GQ,
TA, and SEI practices, each of which contains various measurement items that have been previously studied.
Questionnaire measurement items are presented on Table 4.

Table 4. Questionnaire measurement items

Measured items
PEU, source: [3], [29]
PEU1 Ease of gamification system is important in my concern
PEU2 The performance I provide depends on the ease of a system
PEU3 In gamification systems ease is important for new users
PEU4 Easy adoption of gamification will have high effectiveness in education
PEU5 Difficult gamification models will only complicate the learning process
SSG, source: [2], [3]
SSG1 Gamification can increase student satisfaction by providing fun rewards and challenges in the learning process.
SSG2 Gamification can help students feel more engaged and encouraged to learn more.
SSG3 Gamification can improve students' ability to complete tasks and achieve learning goals
Gamification can create a more fun and enjoyable learning environment, so students are more interested in
SSG4
learning.
SSG5 Gamification can boost students' confidence and increase their motivation to learn
PUG, source: [2], [30]
PUG1 Perceived usefulness can increase user engagement and motivation levels in gamification.
PUG2 From the benefits provided, I am interested in using the gamification system.
PUG3 Gamification can be improved by providing features that match the needs and interests of users
PUG4 a high level of usefulness can increase the success rate of gamification implementation
PUG5 The benefits provided from a system will increase the quality of loyalty from its users
GQ, source: [1], [27]
GQ1 Gamification in learning makes me more interested and excited in learning
GQ2 Gamification makes learning more interactive and fun
GQ3 Gamification helps me retain information better and easier to remember
GQ4 Gamification helps me to focus more and think creatively in completing tasks.
GQ5 Gamification makes learning more fun and keeps me from getting bored
TA, source: [3], [7], [31]
TA1 I feel anxious when I have to use technology in learning because I am not very fluent with the technology.
TA2 Technology in learning makes it difficult for me to follow the material presented by the teacher
TA3 I worry about losing focus and concentration when using technology in learning
TA4 I am anxious that my ability to use technology is not as good as that of my peers.
TA5 I am worried that there will be technology disruptions during learning so that I cannot follow the material
properly.
SEI, source: [3], [5], [9]
SEI1 Gamification in learning software makes learning more fun and challenging
SEI2 The reward system and levels in gamification make me more enthusiastic about learning.
SEI3 Gamification helps me to understand the material more easily and quickly
SEI4 With gamification, I can practice my skills in using the software better.
SEI5 Gamification in software learning makes me more focused and actively involved in the learning process.

J Edu & Learn, Vol. 18, No. 1, February 2024: 173-184

J Edu & Learn ISSN: 2089-9823  179

In this research, SmartPLS 3 software was utilized to perform measurement and partial least squares
analysis. The measurement items used in the study are detailed in Table 4. To ensure the reliability and validity
of the constructs, reliability and validity analyses were conducted during the measurement stage. During the
analysis stage, the path coefficients and structural model strength were examined. The purpose of these two
stages is to confirm the reliability and validity of the constructs and to investigate the connections between
them. The focus of the study was on the causal relationships between PEU, SSG, PUG, GQ, TA, and SEI
practices, each of which includes various measurement items that have been previously studied.
Despite the benefits of using PLS methods, there are some limitations to consider. One issue is that
model parameter optimization is performed in a two-step process, which may lead to potential bias and error
in the estimation of structural model path coefficients. To address this limitation, researchers who are experts
in gamification carefully reviewed the questionnaire used in this study to ensure that the measurement items
were appropriate for the study. In addition, there is no standard global measure of model fit for PLS-SEM,
which may hinder its use for testing and validation. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the results carefully
and consider other methods for confirmatory analysis.

5.1. Outer model and validation

The outer model was tested for three main aspects: reliability, convergent validity and discriminant
validity. All constructs in the model showed composite reliability criterion values of 0.7 or higher, indicating
good construct reliability. In terms of convergent validity, predictor factor loadings were above 0.5 and average
variance extracted (AVE) exceeded 0.5, as suggested by Fornell and Larcker. Discriminant validity is also
strong, as the factor loadings for each latent item for each assigned construct are higher than the factor loadings
for the other constructs, as shown in Tables 5 and 6. Overall, these test results indicate that the outer model has
good reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.

Table 5. Reliability analysis and convergent validity

Measurement Factor Composite Measurement Factor Composite
AVE AVE
items loading reliability items loading reliability
GQ1 0.760 0.831 0.597 PUG1 0.760 0.826 0.589
GQ2 0.802 PUG2 0.790
GQ3 0.797 PUG3 0.759
GQ4 0.735 PUG4 0.776
GQ5 0.767 PUG5 0.752
SEI1 0.780 0.834 0.601 SSG1 0.749 0.829 0.594
SEI2 0.764 SSG2 0.787
SEI3 0.789 SSG3 0.802
SEI4 0.745 SSG4 0.772
SEI5 0.798 SSG5 0.743
PEU1 0.733 0.829 0.594 TA1 0.753 0.819 0.580
PEU2 0.788 TA2 0.777
PEU3 0.770 TA3 0.766
PEU4 0.779 PUG1 0.760
PEU5 0.783 PUG2 0.790

Table 6. Discriminant validity

GQ SEI PEU PUG SSG TA
GQ 0.889 - - - - -
SEI 0.821 0.876 - - - -
PEU 0.850 0.851 0.880 - - -
PUG 0.838 0.824 0.862 0.821 - -
SSG 0.846 0.842 0.841 0.808 0.876 -
TA 0.809 0.792 0.828 0.807 0.849 0.864

5.2. Inner model result and hypotheses testing

In this study, the inner PLS model was utilized to test the proposed hypotheses (H). The results,
presented in Table 7, indicate that all hypotheses are statistically significant and have positive values. These
findings are also visualized in Figure 2, further reinforcing the validity of the hypotheses. The path coefficients,
p-values, and t-values in Table 7 provide additional details on the strength and significance of the relationships
between the variables. Overall, the results of the inner PLS model analysis support the proposed hypotheses in
this research.
Table 7 and Figure 2 show that perceived ease of use has a positive and significant impact on
gamification quality, which supports H1 (PEU → GQ: β = 0.295, t-value = 2.339). The analysis shows that

The role of gamification implementation in improving quality and intention … (Tri wahyuningsih)
180  ISSN: 2089-9823

student satisfaction has a positive and significant impact on gamification quality, which supports H2 (SSG →
GQ: β = 0.363, t-value = 3.437). The analysis shows that perceived usefulness has a positive and significant
impact on gamification quality, which supports H3 (PUG → GQ: β = 0.290, t-value = 2.223). The analysis
shows that gamification quality has a positive and significant impact on gamification intention to use, which
supports H4 (GQ → SEI: β = 0.523, t-value = 4.110). The analysis shows that gamification quality has a
positive and significant impact on technology anxiety, which supports H5 (GQ → TA: β = 0.809, t-value =
3.675). Finally, technology anxiety significantly and positively affects gamification intention to use, which
supports H6 (TA → UIG: β = 0.369, t-value = 2.440).

Table 7. Summary of inner model results

Hypothesis Path Coefficient T-Value Results
H1 PEU → GQ 0.295 2.339 Approved
H2 SSG → GQ 0.363 3.437 Approved
H3 PUG → GQ 0.290 2.223 Approved
H4 GQ → SEI 0.523 4.110 Approved
H5 GQ → TA 0.809 3.675 Approved
H6 TA → SEI 0.369 2.440 Approved

Figure. 2. Framework of inner model results

5.3. Testing the mediation effect

In order to assess the significance of the mediating variable in this study, both path analysis and the
Sobel test were employed. The results of the Sobel test, as presented in Table 8, were used to determine the
significance of the mediator through the calculation of the Z value and estimated p-values. The results indicated
that all of the mediator's Z values were greater than 0.01, indicating a significant mediation effect between the
independent and dependent variables. This suggests that the mediating variable plays a crucial role in the
relationship between the independent and dependent variables and should be considered in future research on
this topic. Mediation test result is presented at Table 8.

Table 8. Mediation test results

Construct Construct relationship T-value of path coefficient Specific indirect effects
PEU → GQ 2.339
PEU → GQ → SEI 0.041
GQ → SEI 4.110
PUG → GQ 2.223
PUG → GQ → SEI 0.024
GQ → SEI 4.110
SSG → GQ 3.437
SSG → GQ → SEI 0.006
GQ → SEI 4.110
GQ → TA 3.675
GQ → TA → SEI 0.005
TA → SEI 2.440

6. DISCUSSION
This research focuses on the integration of gamification concept in software engineering learning.
Then, both are tested with several research variables in the theory to prove the relationship of these variables.
A good learning activity and a good gamification system depend on the quality of learning and how teachers

J Edu & Learn, Vol. 18, No. 1, February 2024: 173-184

J Edu & Learn ISSN: 2089-9823  181

pay attention to the needs of their students. There are several important findings and contributions from the
empirical results of this research, both for academics and practitioners.

6.1. Research question discussion

Gamification, the use of game elements and mechanics in non-game contexts, has been increasingly
applied in various educational contexts, including software engineering education. To understand how
gamification has been implemented in software engineering education, three research questions are proposed.
RQ1 asks about the contexts in which gamification has been applied in software engineering
education. The literature shows that gamification has been used in various software engineering education
contexts, including software engineering courses, programming courses, software development projects, and
online learning platforms. In these contexts, gamification is used to improve students' motivation, engagement,
and learning outcomes. RQ2 asks how gamification has been implemented in software engineering education
courses. The literature reports various implementations of gamification in software engineering education, such
as using badges, points, leaderboards, quests, challenges, and feedback mechanisms. These game elements are
used to create a sense of achievement, competition, and feedback that can motivate and engage students in
learning software engineering concepts and skills. RQ3 asks about the evidence of the impact of gamification
on software engineering education. The literature suggests that gamification can have a positive impact on
software engineering education by improving students' motivation, engagement, and learning outcomes. Result
have shown that gamification can increase students' learning performance, satisfaction, and retention rates.
However, other studies have reported mixed or inconclusive results regarding the effectiveness of gamification
in software engineering education.
The study mentioned in the context employs a quantitative research approach to examine the impact
of gamification on software engineering education. The study finds that perceived ease of use, student
satisfaction, and perceived usefulness have a significant influence on gamification quality, which leads to a
positive impact on software engineering intention, namely intention, loyalty, and participation in following and
understanding software engineering materials. This research suggests that gamification can be a successful
learning medium to simplify complex information and make it more interactive for students. In conclusion,
gamification has been applied in various software engineering education contexts and implemented using
different game elements and mechanics. The evidence regarding the impact of gamification on software
engineering education suggests that it can improve students' motivation, engagement, and learning outcomes.
However, further research is needed to investigate the effectiveness of gamification in different software
engineering education contexts and to understand the underlying mechanisms that make gamification effective.

6.2. Theoretical implications

This research adds to the existing knowledge on the relationship between perceived ease of use,
student satisfaction, and perceived usefulness in relation to gamification in software engineering subjects. We
developed a model to understand the factors that contribute to student learning outcomes using gamification.
Additionally, this study is the first to explore the simultaneous impact of perceived ease of use, student
satisfaction, and perceived usefulness on gamification quality and its influence on software engineering
intention. Previous research has shown that gamification can lead to various educational outcomes, but our
study expands on these findings by incorporating perceived ease of use, student satisfaction, and perceived
usefulness in the framework towards software engineering intention. Additionally, this research utilizes new
data from marketing surveys to contribute to the related literature in this field.

6.3. Theoretical implications

This study makes a special contribution to academics who are considering utilizing gamification as
their learning medium. The results suggest to academics the importance of using gamification to influence
learning outcomes in software engineering classes. Based on Hypothesis 1, the test found that perceived ease
of use has a significant influence on gamification quality, one of the factors that have a significant influence
on gamification quality. This is because, perceived ease of use is the level of ease felt by users in using a system
or product. The easier the system or product is to use, the higher the level of satisfaction felt by the user. With
perceived ease of use, users will find it easier to access systems or products related to gamification. This will
make it easier for users to follow the various attractions in gamification. In addition, perceived ease of use will
also help users in completing various tasks and challenges in gamification.
Hypothesis 2 testing found that student satisfaction has a significant positive influence on gamification
quality. Student satisfaction has a significant influence on gamification quality. This is because, when students
are satisfied with the lesson, they are more likely to engage in gamification. Gamification is a method that uses
game elements in the learning process to increase student motivation and participation. This can be done by
giving rewards to students who excel, as well as creating competition between students to get the highest score
in a lesson. However, gamification will only be effective if students feel satisfied with the lesson. When
The role of gamification implementation in improving quality and intention … (Tri wahyuningsih)
182  ISSN: 2089-9823

students feel dissatisfied with the subject matter, they will be less likely to engage in gamification. This will
result in low quality gamification, making it ineffective in increasing student motivation and participation.
Then testing hypothesis 3 found that perceived usefulness has a significant positive effect on
gamification quality. Perceived usefulness is one of the factors that has a significant influence on gamification
quality. This is because perceived usefulness is a concept that refers to users' belief that a system or technology
can provide benefits for them in solving problems or meeting their needs. Perceived usefulness is a very
important factor in gamification because it provides encouragement for users to continue using and exploring
the features available in a game. If users feel that the game does not provide benefits to them, then they will
tend to abandon the game and move on to other games that are considered more useful. In addition, perceived
usefulness also has a significant influence on the level of user engagement in the game. Users who feel that the
game provides benefits to them will be more interested in continuing to play the game and do the activities
available in the game. This will increase the level of user engagement in the game and make the game more
attractive to users. Together, well-organized perceived ease of use, student satisfaction, and perceived
usefulness will create a stable and quality gamification system between teachers and students in software
engineering classes, leading to software engineering intention.
Hypothesis 4 testing found that use of gamification has become increasingly prevalent in software
engineering education and training. The hypothesis that gamification quality has a significant role on software
engineering intention is supported by research. Studies have shown that the use of gamification in software
engineering training can improve student motivation, engagement, and performance, leading to increased
intention to pursue a career in software engineering. High-quality gamification features such as clear
objectives, challenging tasks, and immediate feedback can enhance the learning experience, ultimately leading
to a higher intention to pursue software engineering.
Moreover, Hypothesis 5 testing found the hypothesis that gamification quality has a significant role
on technology anxiety is also supported by research. Gamification can help reduce technology anxiety by
creating a positive and engaging learning environment. Students who are anxious about technology may feel
more confident and motivated when they are presented with gamified learning activities that are challenging,
yet achievable. Furthermore, gamification elements such as rewards and recognition can help to reduce anxiety
and increase confidence, leading to improved learning outcomes.
The hypothesis 6 found that technology anxiety has a significant role on software engineering
intention is also supported by this research. Students who experience high levels of technology anxiety may be
less likely to pursue a career in software engineering, even if they have an interest in the field. Technology
anxiety can lead to decreased self-efficacy, which can in turn lead to lower intentions to pursue software
engineering. However, gamification can help to mitigate technology anxiety by providing a positive and
engaging learning experience, which can increase self-efficacy and ultimately lead to higher intentions to
pursue a career in software engineering.

7. CONCLUSION
The implementation of gamification in the software engineering learning process is an important thing
to implement. It can increase students' motivation and learning ability in software engineering. First,
gamification can increase students' motivation in learning. Through gamification, the learning process becomes
more interesting and less boring. Students can feel the sensation of playing games while learning, so they will
be more interested and eager to complete the material provided. Second, gamification can improve students'
learning ability. Through games, students can apply the concepts learned in a form that is more fun and easier
to understand. In addition, games can also provide quick and accurate feedback on students' abilities, so that
students can know their weaknesses and shortcomings and can improve them. While the current research
included a comprehensive framework, methodology, and data collection, there are still areas for improvement
in future studies. One limitation is the lack of analysis of different types of gamification models. In order to
provide more inclusive findings and consequences, it would be beneficial to include participants from a variety
of gamification systems or models. Another potential issue is the potential biases of participants based on their
education level and the learning methods they are accustomed to. Future research should delve into whether
individuals from different education levels have preferences for certain learning methods and if there are
specific motivations behind these preferences. Additionally, examining the relationship between students and
instructors or teachers could be enhanced through the use of technology such as eye-tracking movement
technology, which can provide insight into the user experience and facilitate psychological self assessment.

J Edu & Learn, Vol. 18, No. 1, February 2024: 173-184

J Edu & Learn ISSN: 2089-9823  183

REFERENCES
[1] S. V. Gentry et al., “Serious gaming and gamification education in health professions: Systematic review,” Journal of Medical
Internet Research, vol. 21, no. 3, p. e12994, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.2196/12994.
[2] G. A. García-Mireles and M. E. Morales-Trujillo, “Gamification in software engineering: A tertiary study,” in CIMPS 2019: Trends
and Applications in Software Engineering, 2020, pp. 116–128. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-33547-2_10.
[3] Q. Aini, “Understanding how gamification influences behaviour in education,” International Journal of Advanced Trends in
Computer Science and Engineering, vol. 8, no. 1.5, pp. 269–274, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.30534/ijatcse/2019/4781.52019.
[4] G. Ivanova, V. Kozov, and P. Zlatarov, “Gamification in software engineering education,” in 2019 42nd International Convention
on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), May 2019, pp. 1445–1450. doi:
10.23919/MIPRO.2019.8757200.
[5] M. H. Avizenna, “Applying the apriori algorithm to analyze and optimize medical device inventory management,” Journal of
Applied Data Sciences, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 143–151, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.47738/jads.v3i4.33.
[6] M.-K. Chen, H.-W. Wei, and W.-T. Lee, “Intelligent POIs recommender system based on time series analysis with seasonal
adjustment,” International Journal for Applied Information Management, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 66–80, Dec. 2021, doi:
10.47738/ijaim.v2i2.28.
[7] Q. Mi, J. Keung, X. Mei, Y. Xiao, and W. K. Chan, “A gamification technique for motivating students to learn code readability in
software engineering,” in 2018 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET), Jul. 2018, pp. 250–254. doi:
10.1109/ISET.2018.00062.
[8] L. Ran, “Development of computer intelligent control system based on modbus and WEB technology,” Journal of Applied Data
Sciences, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 15–21, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.47738/jads.v4i1.75.
[9] W. Oliveira et al., “Tailored gamification in education: A literature review and future agenda,” Education and Information
Technologies, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 373–406, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11122-4.
[10] Y. Zou, “Obstacle avoidance and environmental adaptability analysis of snake-like robot based on deep learning,” Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, vol. 2146, no. 1, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2146/1/012037.
[11] R. I. Handayanir, “Selection of suppliers of building materials using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method at PT. Cipta
Nuansa Prima Tangerang,” IJIIS: International Journal of Informatics and Information Systems, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 156–166, Dec.
2022, doi: 10.47738/ijiis.v5i4.143.
[12] K. Petersen, S. Vakkalanka, and L. Kuzniarz, “Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An
update,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 64, pp. 1–18, Aug. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.007.
[13] J. Qi, “Analysis of efficient optimization algorithm for information nodes in wireless network communication Chaos,” Journal of
Applied Data Sciences, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 8–14, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.47738/jads.v4i1.77.
[14] M. Rakhmansyah, T. Wahyuningsih, A. D. Srenggini, and I. K. Gunawan, “Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) with SWOT
analysis method,” International Journal for Applied Information Management, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 47–54, Feb. 2022, doi:
10.47738/ijaim.v2i3.37.
[15] J. P. B. Saputra, S. A. Rahayu, and T. Hariguna, “Market basket analysis using FP-growth algorithm to design marketing strategy
by determining consumer purchasing patterns,” Journal of Applied Data Sciences, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 38–49, Jan. 2023, doi:
10.47738/jads.v4i1.83.
[16] I. Nordat, B. Tola, and M. Yasin, “The effect of work motivation and perception of college support on organizational commitment
and organizational citizenship behavior in BKPSDM, Tangerang District,” International Journal for Applied Information
Management, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 37–46, Feb. 2022, doi: 10.47738/ijaim.v2i3.36.
[17] J. Zeng and N. Sutummawong, “Study on the ideological and political practice teaching of college students based on the internet +
technology,” IJIIS: International Journal of Informatics and Information Systems, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 24–30, Jan. 2023, doi:
10.47738/ijiis.v6i1.148.
[18] O. Pedreira, F. Garcia, M. Piattini, A. Cortinas, and A. Cerdeira-Pena, “An architecture for software engineering gamification,”
Tsinghua Science and Technology, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 776–797, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.26599/TST.2020.9010004.
[19] F. Alfazzi, “A knowledge behavioral and intelligence management in fostering entrepreneurship for modern industries,”
International Journal for Applied Information Management, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 95–105, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.47738/ijaim.v2i4.42.
[20] F. García, O. Pedreira, M. Piattini, A. Cerdeira-Pena, and M. Penabad, “A framework for gamification in software engineering,”
Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 132, pp. 21–40, Oct. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2017.06.021.
[21] Y. Li, “The research and application of adjustable drive improve oil recovery technology in ansai low permeable fracture reservoir,”
IJIIS: International Journal of Informatics and Information Systems, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 16–23, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.47738/ijiis.v6i1.152.
[22] V. Uskov and B. Sekar, “Gamification of software engineering curriculum,” in 2014 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)
Proceedings, Oct. 2014, pp. 1–8. doi: 10.1109/FIE.2014.7044098.
[23] M. Alomari, “The legal system for the conversion of commercial companies in the light of the rules of the saudi corporate system,”
International Journal for Applied Information Management, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 106–111, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.47738/ijaim.v2i4.43.
[24] D. de P. Porto, G. M. de Jesus, F. C. Ferrari, and S. C. P. F. Fabbri, “Initiatives and challenges of using gamification in software
engineering: A Systematic Mapping,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 173, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2020.110870.
[25] M. M. Alhammad and A. M. Moreno, “Gamification in software engineering education: A systematic mapping,” Journal of Systems
and Software, vol. 141, pp. 131–150, Jul. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.03.065.
[26] F. Wang, “Software defect fault intelligent location and identification method based on data mining,” Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, vol. 2146, no. 1, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2146/1/012012.
[27] L. Hernandez, M. Munoz, J. Mejia, and A. Pena, “Gamification in software engineering teamworks: A systematic literature review,”
in 2016 International Conference on Software Process Improvement (CIMPS), Oct. 2016, pp. 1–8. doi:
10.1109/CIMPS.2016.7802799.
[28] J. Hair, C. L. Hollingsworth, A. B. Randolph, and A. Y. L. Chong, “An updated and expanded assessment of PLS-SEM in
information systems research,” Industrial Management & Data Systems, vol. 117, no. 3, pp. 442–458, Apr. 2017, doi:
10.1108/IMDS-04-2016-0130.
[29] T. bin M. A.-D. Al-Shahrani and A. R. O. Al-Garni, “Information and communication technology and knowledge sharing : a literary
referential study,” International Journal for Applied Information Management, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 73–83, Dec. 2022, doi:
10.47738/ijaim.v2i4.39.
[30] U. Rahardja, S. Kosasi, E. P. Harahap, and Q. Aini, “Authenticity of a diploma using the blockchain approach,” International
Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, vol. 9, no. 1.2, pp. 250–256, Apr. 2020, doi:
10.30534/ijatcse/2020/3791.22020.
[31] R. H. Barbosa Monteiro, M. R. de Almeida Souza, S. R. Bezerra Oliveira, C. dos Santos Portela, and C. E. de Cristo Lobato, “The

The role of gamification implementation in improving quality and intention … (Tri wahyuningsih)
184  ISSN: 2089-9823

diversity of gamification evaluation in the software engineering education and industry: Trends, comparisons and gaps,” in 2021
IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training (ICSE-SEET),
May 2021, pp. 154–164. doi: 10.1109/ICSE-SEET52601.2021.00025.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Tri Wahyuningsih is a doctoral student of computer science program at Satya

Wacana Christian University. She has a strong interest in information systems management
and decided to pursue her doctoral degree in computer science. She has interests and
capabilities in data mining and text mining. Before starting her doctoral program, Tri
Wahyuningsih completed her Bachelor and Master degrees in informatics engineering. She
has working experience as a system analyst and showed excellent achievements during her
work. Now, Tri Wahyuningsih is focusing on her doctoral studies and working on several
research projects in the field of information systems management. He can be contacted at
email: [email protected], [email protected].

Eko Sediyono is a professor from Satya Wacana Christian University. He

obtained his doctoral degree in Computer Science from the University of Indonesia and
currently serves as a professor. His main research interests are information security and
artificial intelligence, and he has done more than 120 publications during his education and
teaching career. Eko Sediyono has proven himself as an expert in the field of information
security and artificial intelligence through the great contributions he has made through his
publications as well as his teaching as a professor. He can be contacted at email:
[email protected].

Kristoko Dwi Hartomo is a professor at Satya Wacana Christian University.

He earned his doctoral degree in Computer Science from Gadjah Mada University (UGM).
Since becoming a professor, Kristoko Dwi Hartomo has a strong interest in spatial statistics
research. He has written and published more than 50 scientific papers during his education
and teaching career at Satya Wacana Christian University. Kristoko Dwi Hartomo is
recognized as an expert in the field of spatial statistics and continues to make significant
contributions to the development of science and practice in this field. His work has been
accepted and presented in many scientific seminars and conferences, strengthening his
position as one of the leading professors at Satya Wacana Christian University. He can be
contacted at email: [email protected].

Irwan Sembiring earned his Bachelor of Engineering degree in informatics

engineering from Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Yogyakarta in 2001, Master
of Computer Science in computer science from Gadjah Mada University Yogyakarta in 2004,
and Doctorate in computer science from Gadjah Mada University Yogyakarta in 2015. His
main research interests are computer network security, and he has done more than 40
publications during his education and teaching career. His research interests include computer
network security and computer network designing. Currently, he is active as a lecturer at the
Faculty of Information Technology, Satya Wacana Christian University Salatiga. He can be
contacted at email: [email protected].

J Edu & Learn, Vol. 18, No. 1, February 2024: 173-184