Abstract
Online platforms offer novel ways to influence children’s learning habits and potentially foster self-regulation. This research examined the influence of “MyReadscape,” a gamified online system featuring achievement goals (levels), a visual progress dashboard, badges, and leaderboards, on the reading behaviors and foundational self-regulatory practices of Taiwanese elementary students (Grades 2-3, N = 30). Adopting an 8-week design-based research methodology in an experimental school, we analyzed system logs, questionnaire data (including the Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire, SRQ-A), and interview transcripts (n = 19). The intervention correlated with significant increases in reading quantity (p = 0.006) and diversification of genres read (χ² = 35.14, p = 0.001), particularly a rise in science/technology reading. However, overall reading interest scores did not change significantly. Analysis of SRQ-A data revealed a significant increase in Identified Regulation (p = 0.004), while other motivational styles remained stable. Qualitative findings illuminated distinct mechanisms: students actively utilized the dashboard for effective self-monitoring, enhancing self-awareness regarding reading volume and types. Conversely, the leaderboard motivated increased reading effort through social comparison dynamics and the pursuit of social goals, often overshadowing the minimal impact of badges. Intrinsic interest remained a critical factor mediating reading choices. The findings demonstrate how specific features within a gamified system can influence reading outcomes while supporting foundational self-regulatory practices (self-monitoring, goal-directed effort) and fostering specific motivational orientations (identified regulation), operating within a complex motivational landscape shaped by social factors. Implications for designing systems that leverage visual feedback for monitoring and thoughtfully integrate social elements are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
The materials supporting the findings of this study are available as follows. The full versions of the Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-A) and the Reading Interest Questionnaire, along with detailed descriptions of the study procedures and variable definitions, are provided in the Supplementary Materials. In addition, the complete semi-structured interview protocol used across the four interview rounds is included as supplementary material to support methodological transparency. Due to ethical restrictions associated with research involving minor participants, the raw quantitative datasets derived from system logs and questionnaire responses, as well as full interview transcripts, are not publicly shared. All quantitative analyses reported in the manuscript were conducted using de-identified data. Representative excerpts from interview transcripts are included in the manuscript to support the qualitative findings. Additional de-identified qualitative excerpts may be made available to reviewers upon reasonable request for verification purposes, subject to ethical approval.
References
Abramovich S, Schunn C, Higashi RM (2013) Are badges useful in education?: It depends upon the type of badge and expertise of learner. Educ Technol Res Dev 61(2):217–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9289-2
Anderson T, Shattuck J (2012) Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educ Researcher 41(1):16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813
Azevedo R, Aleven V (Eds.) (2013) International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5546-3
Bodily R, Verbert K (2017) Trends and issues in student-facing learning analytics reporting systems research. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (pp. 369-377). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027385.3027407
Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol 3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brown AL (1992) Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. J Learn Sci 2(2):141–178. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
Bull S, Kay J (2016) SMILI☺: A framework for interfaces to learning data in open learner models, learning analytics, and related fields. Int J Artif Intell Educ 26(1):293–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0080-9
Deci EL, Koestner R, Ryan RM (1999) A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bull 125(6):627–668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627
Delgado P, Vargas C, Ackerman R, Salmerón L (2018) Don’t throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension. Educ Res Rev 25:23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.09.003
Deterding S, Dixon D, Khaled R, Nacke L (2011) From game design elements to gamefulness: defining “gamification”. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments (pp. 9–15). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040
Festinger L (1954) A theory of social comparison processes. Hum Relat 7(2):117–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202
Firth J, Torous J, Stubbs B, Firth JA, Steiner GZ, Smith L, Alvarez-Jimenez M, Gleeson J, Vancampfort D, Armitage CJ, Sarris J (2019) The “online brain”: how the Internet may be changing our cognition. World Psychiatry 18(2):119–129. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20617
Garcia SM, Tor A, Schiff TM (2013) The psychology of competition: A social comparison perspective. Perspect Psychological Sci 8(6):634–650. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613504114
Haidt J (2024) The anxious generation: How the great rewiring of childhood is causing an epidemic of mental illness. Penguin
Hamari J, Koivisto J, Sarsa H (2014) Does gamification work?–A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3025-3034). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377
Hanus MD, Fox J (2015) Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers Educ 80:152–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019
Hattie J, Timperley H (2007) The power of feedback. Rev Educ Res 77(1):81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hidi S, Renninger KA (2006) The four-phase model of interest development. Ed Psych 41(2):111–127. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
Kapp KM (2012) The gamification of learning and instruction: Game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley & Sons
Kardefelt-Winther D (2017) How does the time children spend using digital technology impact their mental well-being, social relationships and physical activity? An evidence-focused literature review. UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti. https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/Children-digital-technology-wellbeing.pdf
Koivisto J, Hamari J (2019) The rise of motivational information systems: A review of gamification research. Int J Inf Manag 45:191–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.013
Kröner J, Goussios C, Schaitz C, Streb J, Sosic-Vasic Z (2017) The construct validity of the German Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-A) within primary and secondary school children. Front Psychol 8:1032. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01032
Lauricella AR, Wartella E, Rideout VJ (2015) Young children’s screen time: The complex role of parent and child factors. J Appl Developmental Psychol 36:11–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2014.12.001
Leu DJ, Kinzer CK, Coiro J, Castek J, Henry LA (2013) New literacies: A dual level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In DE Alvermann, NJ Unrau, & RB Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (6th ed., pp. 1150–1181). International Reading Association
Livingstone S, Helsper EJ (2008) Parental mediation of children’s internet use. J Broadcasting Electron Media 52(4):581–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838150802437396
Locke EA, Latham GP (2002) Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. Am Psychologist 57(9):705–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705
McHarg G, Ribner AD, Devine RT, Hughes C (2020) Screen time and socio-emotional well-being in early childhood: A systematic review. Soc Sci Med 263: 113275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113275
Mekler ED, Brühlmann F, Tuch AN, Opwis K (2017) Towards understanding the effects of individual gamification elements on intrinsic motivation and performance. Computers Hum Behav 71:525–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.048
Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications
Paris SG, Newman RS (1990) Developmental aspects of self-regulated learning. Educ Psychologist 25(1):87–102. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_7
Perry NE, VandeKamp KO, Mercer LK, Nordby CJ (2002) Investigating teacher-student interactions that foster self-regulated learning. Educ Psychologist 37(1):5–15. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3701_2
Pintrich PR (2000) The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M Boekaerts, PR Pintrich, & M Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451–502). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3
Przybylski AK, Weinstein N (2017) A Large-Scale Test of the Goldilocks Hypothesis: Quantifying the Relations Between Digital-Screen Use and the Mental Well-Being of Adolescents. Psychological Sci 28(2):204–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616678438
Radesky JS, Kistin CJ, Zuckerman B, Nitzberg K, Gross J, Kaplan-Sanoff M, Augustyn M, Silverstein M (2014) Patterns of mobile device use by caregivers and children during meals in fast food restaurants. Pediatrics 133(4):e843–e849. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2013-3703
Rapp A, Hopfgartner F, Hamari J, Linehan C, Cena F (2019) Strengthening gamification studies: Current trends and future opportunities of gamification research. Int J Hum-Computer Stud 127:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.11.007
Reeves TC (2006) Design research from a technology perspective. In J Van den Akker, K Gravemeijer, S McKenney, & N Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 52–66). Routledge
Reich SM, Yau JC, Warschauer M (2016) The digital divergence: Comparing children’s print and touch screen reading experiences. J Early Child Lit 16(3):380–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798415580868
Ryan RM, Connell JP (1989) Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. J Pers Soc Psychol 57(5):749–761. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.749
Ryan RM, Deci EL (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychologist 55(1):68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Sailer M, Hense JU, Mayr SK, Mandl H (2017) How gamification motivates: An experimental study of the effects of specific game design elements on psychological need satisfaction. Computers Hum Behav 69:371–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.033
Schunk DH, Zimmerman BJ (Eds.) (1997) Self-regulated learning and performance. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers
Sezgin S, Bozkurt A, Yılmaz EA, Van Der Linden N (2020) Gamification, education and theoretical approaches: Motivation, engagement and sustainability in learning processes. In Recent Developments in Technology-Enhanced and Computer-Assisted Language Learning (pp. 131–156). IGI Global
Sun YJ, Sahakian BJ, Langley C, Yang A, Jiang Y, Kang J, Zhao X, Li C, Cheng W, Feng J (2024) Early-initiated childhood reading for pleasure: associations with better cognitive performance, mental well-being and brain structure in young adolescence. Psychological Med 54(2):359–373
The Design-Based Research Collective (2003) Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educ Researcher 32(1):5–8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x032001005
Twenge JM (2019) More Time on Technology, Less Happiness? Associations Between Digital-Media Use and Dispositional Happiness. Emotion 19(5):898–904. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000473
Vansteenkiste M, Simons J, Lens W, Soenens B, Matos L, Lacante M (2004) Less is sometimes more: Goal content matters. J Educ Psychol 96(4):755–764
Winne PH (2005) Key issues in modeling and applying research on self-regulated learning. Appl Psychol 54(2):232–238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00206.x
Zimmerman BJ (2000) Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M Boekaerts, PR Pintrich, & M Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7
Zimmerman BJ (2002) Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Pract 41(2):64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Acknowledgements
The author thank the National Science and Technology Council of the Republic of China, Taiwan, for financial support (NSTC 111-2410-H-008-067-MY3 & NSTC 114-2410-H-008-019-MY2). We also appreciate the valuable suggestions from the reviewers and editors, and the participation of the students and teachers involved in the study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Chang-Yen Liao: Contributed to the conception and design of the study, oversaw the development of the AI reading assistant, and provided guidance on integrating AI technologies into the educational context. Additionally, Chang-Yen Liao was responsible for critically drafting and revising the manuscript for important content.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The author declares no competing interests.
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Review Board, National Taiwan University, Taiwan, and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The research project received ethical approval from this board (IRB approval ID: 202311ES005), granted on January 10, 2024.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from the parents or legal guardians of all child participants included in the study. Assent was also obtained from all child participants. Prior to the commencement of any research activities (specifically, during the period of February 19, 2024 to February 29, 2024, before Week 1 of the 8-week intervention which commenced in early March 2024), parents or legal guardians were provided with a detailed information sheet. This sheet explained the study’s purpose (part of a project funded by a national funding body), the nature of their child’s participation in using the “MyReadscape” system, the types of data to be collected (system logs, questionnaire responses, interview data), procedures for ensuring confidentiality and anonymity, potential benefits, and their right to withdraw their child from the study at any time without penalty. Written informed consent was subsequently obtained from parents or legal guardians. Child participants (Grades 2-3) were provided with an age-appropriate verbal explanation of the study, what their participation would involve, and their right to stop participating if they wished. Their verbal assent was secured during the same period, February 19, 2024 to February 29, 2024. All participant data were anonymized throughout the research process to protect confidentiality.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Liao, CY. Self-monitoring and social goals: how a gamified online system shapes reading behavior and foundational self-regulation in elementary students. Humanit Soc Sci Commun (2026). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-06750-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-06750-x
