This is a sel -a chi ed e sion o an o iginal a icle. This e sion
may di e om he o iginal in pagina ion and ypog aphic de ails.
Au ho (s):
Ti le:
Yea :
Ve sion:
Copy igh :
Righ s:
Righ s u l:
Please ci e he o iginal e sion:
CC BY 4.0
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Explo ing Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
© 2022 Vahlo, Tuu i and Välisalo.
Published e sion
Vahlo, Jukka; Tuu i, Kai; Välisalo, Tanja
Vahlo, J., Tuu i, K., & Välisalo, T. (2022). Explo ing Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s.
F on ie s in Psychology, 13, A icle 825840. h ps://doi.o g/10.3389/ psyg.2022.825840
2022
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 1 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
published: 25 Feb ua y 2022
doi: 10.3389/ psyg.2022.825840
Edi ed by:
Ramón Chacón-Cube os,
Uni e si y o G anada, Spain
Re iewed by:
Noelia Pa ejo-Jiménez,
Uni e si y o G anada, Spain
Wooyoung (William) Jang,
Uni e si y o Wes Geo gia,
Uni edS a es
*Co espondence:
Jukka Vahlo
[email p o ec ed]
†These au ho s ha e con ibu ed
equally o his wo k and sha e i s
au ho ship
Special y sec ion:
This a icle was submi ed o
Educa ional Psychology,
a sec ion o he jou nal
F on ie s in Psychology
Recei ed: 30 No embe 2021
Accep ed: 24 Janua y 2022
Published: 25 Feb ua y 2022
Ci a ion:
Vahlo J, Tuu i K and Välisalo T (2022)
Explo ing Game ul Mo i a ion o
Au onomous Lea ne s.
F on . Psychol. 13:825840.
doi: 10.3389/ psyg.2022.825840
Explo ing Game ul Mo i a ion o
Au onomous Lea ne s
JukkaVahlo
1,2*†, KaiTuu i
1† and TanjaVälisalo
1
1 Depa men o Music, A and Cul u e S udies, Uni e si y o Jy äskylä, Jy äskylä, Finland, 2 School o Economics, Cen e o
Collabo a i e Resea ch, Uni e si y o Tu ku, Tu ku, Finland
In his explo a i e s udy, wein es iga ed mo i es o au onomous lea ne s o pa icipa e
in an online cou se, and how hese mo i es a e ela ed o gameplay mo i a ions,
engagemen in he cou se expe ience, and lea ning ou comes. The guiding p emise o
he s udy has been he idea ha lea ning and game playing ca y phenomenal simila i ies
ha could be e ealed by sc u inizing mo i es o pa icipa ing in a massi e open online
cou se ha does no in ol e any in en ionally game-like ea u es. The esea ch was
conduc ed by analyzing su ey da a (N = 705) collec ed om indi iduals who had olun a ily
pa icipa ed in an open online cou se abou a i icial in elligence and i s socie al impac .
The su ey included an explo a i e Mo i es o Au onomous Lea ning (MAL) in en o y.
Explo a o y ac o analysis sugges ed ha he MAL in en o y consis ed o six dimensions
ou o which ou we e consis en wi h ac o s ha ea lie esea ch has associa ed wi h
mo i es o engage wi h ideo games. O he iden i ied ac o s, he dimension ha mos
clea ly desc ibed au onomous and play ul p edisposi ions was ound o bea main
p eceden o bo h expe ienced game ulness o he lea ning expe ience and posi i e
lea ning ou comes. In all, he esul s o his s udy demons a ed ha play ulness and
au onomy we e bo h p ominen and signi ican ac o s ac oss he whole lea ning p ocess.
Keywo ds: play ulness, games, au onomous lea ne , online lea ning, mo i es, mo i a ion, engagemen ,
sel -de e mina ion
INTRODUCTION
People all a ound he wo ld spend an as onishing numbe o hou s playing ideo games each
day. Today, his is no only ue o young men bu a he o people ep esen ing all gende s
and ages as playe s’ mean age is al eady close o 40 yea s (Vahlo e  al., 2018; Kinnunen e  al.,
2020). Consequen ly, bo h esea che s and game indus y ep esen a i es a e keen o unde s and
wha mo i a es playe s o begin o play and wha keeps hem engaged wi h he same applica ion
o en o hund eds o hou s o e en mo e (e.g., Ryan e  al., 2006; She y e  al., 2006; Yee,
2006; P zybylski e  al., 2010; Yee e  al., 2012; Kahn e  al., 2015; De G o e e  al., 2017; Vahlo
and Hama i, 2019). Indeed, he li e a u e on playe mo i es is a apidly g owing a ea o
esea ch and many models ha e been published and empi ically alida ed du ing he pas wo
decades. In he ield o educa ion esea ch, he adi ion o s udying lea ne s’ mo i a ion
ex ends back e en u he in his o y. The s udies o lea ning mo i a ion e ol e a ound ques ions
e y simila o he ones in game mo i a ion esea ch, ha is, he gene al aim is o unde s and
wha igni es he in e es o lea ning and wha keeps lea ne s engaged wi h hei s udies (e.g.,
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 2 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
Skinne and Belmon , 1993; Apple on e  al., 2006; Zepke and
Leach, 2010; Ch is enson e  al., 2012; Sina a e  al., 2015).
The ela ionship be ween play and lea ning has been
acknowledged and also s udied ex ensi ely since he ea ly 20 h
cen u y (Cu is, 1915; Coleman, 1971; B une e  al., 1976;
Vygo sky, 2004). The eme gence o digi al gaming u he
inc eased esea che s’ in e es in games o lea ning (e.g., Gee,
2003; Squi e, 2003). As a consequence, se ious game (i.e.,
edu ainmen ) applica ions (e.g., Cha sky, 2010) and lea ning
applica ions wi h gami ied elemen s (e.g., Saile and Homne ,
2020; Zainuddin e  al., 2020) ha e es ablished hemsel es as
common p ac ices in hei espec i e ields. Ye , he e is much
ha is s ill no unde s ood abou he ela ionship be ween
lea ning mo i a ion and mo i a ion o play ideo games. This
a ea o in es iga ion has a po en ially high esea ch impac
and socie al implica ions, as being mo i a ed is known o
be associa ed wi h highe le els o engagemen wi h lea ning
ac i i ies and posi i e lea ning ou comes (e.g., Janosz, 2012).
While he e is a long adi ion in in es iga ing lea ning
mo i a ions and while li e a u e on game playing mo i a ions
is expanding apidly, he e exis s a su p isingly limi ed numbe
o s udies on how gameplay mo i a ion migh be in e wo en
wi h lea ning mo i es. The e is an e iden need o unde s anding
hese in e connec ions as many lea ning expe iences o oday
ake place in digi al en i onmen s ha could make use o
game-based solu ions in a p o ound and e sa ile ashion. And
he e is e en mo e p ominen jus i ica ion o se ing he ocus
speci ically on lea ning mo i es (e.g., di e en easons and
o he p edisposi ions o lea ning). The eason is ha mo i es
o lea ning a e no ha o en made explici ly isible in he
mo i a ion esea ch models used in he ield o educa ion,
apa om mo e in o mal lea ning pe spec i es conce ning
p o essional o highe educa ion (see, e.g., Bahn, 2007; Dise h
e al., 2010). Wi hin he con ex s o mo e adi ional o o mal
educa ion, he models u ilized o s udying lea ning mo i a ion
(see, e.g., Skinne and Pi ze , 2012; Vi anen e al., 2014) end
o unde line he eache s’ and school’s abili y o suppo
engagemen wi h lea ning ac i i ies, eache s and pee s a he
han indi idual p edisposi ions (i.e., mo i es) o olun a ily
choosing wha o lea n.
Engagemen wi h game ac i i ies is a cen al subjec o
game mo i a ion esea ch as well, and e en he concep o
play ulness (and play ul mo i a ion) is conside ed as an
expe ien ial p ope y ha ge s ( e)o ganized in engaging wi h
con ex ual ac i i ies (Masek and S en os, 2021). The iewpoin
o game esea ch, howe e , appea s o ha e a somewha di e en
basis in app oaching he olun a y na u e o he ac i i y.
Th oughou he exis ence o game esea ch as a ield o academic
inqui y, i has emphasized ha playe pa icipa ion in game
expe iences is cha ac e is ically olun a y and au onomous
(Huizinga, 1949; Go man, 1959; Go man, 1961; Sui s, 1978;
Caillois, 2001). The models o game mo i a ion esea ch ypically
build upon his p emise and o en emphasize he indi idual’s
mo i es o playing (e.g., She y e  al., 2006; Yee, 2006; Vahlo
and Hama i, 2019). In explo ing linkages be ween gameplay
and lea ning mo i es, we conside i necessa y o apply a
simila amewo k o au onomous and olun a y pa icipa ion
as a basis o ou inqui y. I is c ucial o no e ha much o
he lea ning mo i a ion esea ch assumes he exis ence o a
o mal ins i u ional con ex (e.g., a class oom se ing in a school)
and a gene alized achie emen s uc u e (e.g., cu iculum and
he ela ed deg ees) wi hin which he mo i a ions o lea ning
ac i i ies a e de eloped. Wi h espec o a g owing numbe
o oday’s online lea ning se ices and online cou ses, howe e ,
i is e iden ly no alid o assume such ci cums ances ha
con ibu e o he lea ne ’s mo i a ional disposi ion. Fu he mo e,
also in o mal ins i u ional con ex s, mo e conside a ion should
begi en o unde s anding how lea ne s’ mo i es o pa icipa e
may impac hei lea ning expe ience and also lea ning ou comes.
In his pape , we ha e chosen o emphasize he iewpoin o
an au onomous lea ne , which emb aces he ee will o a
lea ne o e lec on he easons o hei pa icipa ion and
e en choose whe he o no o pa icipa e in a cou se in he
i s place. This app oach pu s mo i es in o he spo ligh , and
i is especially ele an o he di e en o ms o adul educa ion
and massi e open online cou ses (MOOCs), whe e pa icipa ion
in lea ning ac i i ies is usually mo e o less olun a ily ini ia ed.
In his explo a i e s udy, we empi ically in es iga e he
mo i es o au onomous lea ne s o pa icipa e in an online
cou se and how hese mo i es a e ela ed o gaming mo i a ions,
cou se expe ience and engagemen , and lea ning ou comes.
This will bedone by analyzing su ey da a (N = 705) collec ed
om indi iduals who olun a ily pa icipa ed in an online
cou se, “Elemen s o AI,” abou a i icial in elligence and i s
socie al impac . By s udying cou se pa icipan s’ expe iences,
we explo e how play ulness should be unde s ood bo h om
he pe spec i es o an au onomous lea ne (i.e., play ul mo i es)
and he lea ning si ua ion (i.e., play ul engagemen wi h lea ning).
In gene al, ou aim is o un eil he play ulness inhe en in
lea ning expe iences, which do no include any in en ionally
game-like design solu ions, and how his play ulness associa es
wi h lea ning mo i a ion and lea ning ou comes.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Combining Educa ional and Gaming
Con ex s
U iliza ion o games as echnologies o lea ning and pedagogical
ools has a long his o y ha p ecedes he cu en e a o digi al
gaming (Coleman, 1971). Likewise, he s udy o play in educa ion
and human de elopmen has been es ablished decades ago
(e.g., G oos, 1908; Piage , 1952; B une e al., 1976; Vygo sky,
2004). Being play ul is associa ed wi h spon aneous lea ning
in seemingly aimless ac i i ies (Liebe man, 1977). I is widely
acknowledged, also wi hin he ield o game design (e.g.,
C aw o d, 1984), ha gameplay in i sel inco po a es lea ning
p ocesses, e en when games a e no delibe a ely mean o each
us any hing ou side o how o play he game i sel . Games
ha e also been c i icized o eaching he subjec ma e h ough
an inhe en ly mechanical and educ ionis simula ion (K a ,
1971), bu on he o he hand, he e y abili y o p o iding
p edic able simula ed eali ies, in which a lea ne can expe ience
agency while engaging wi h he playing, is conside ed o bean
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 3 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
in insic i ue o games in educa ion (Coleman, 1971). In
his pape , he main a ionale o combining educa ional and
gaming con ex s in s udying mo i a ion lies in wo p emises:
(1) mo i a ional ac o s o playing games po en ially o e lap
wi h he mo i a ional ac o s o engaging onesel olun a ily
and au onomously in lea ning, and (2) all lea ning expe iences
necessa ily include elemen s ha can beconside ed o begame ul
as hese elemen s a e necessa y o all game playing expe iences.
The mode n concep ualiza ion o digi al games ends o
sepa a e he domains o en e ainmen and se ious gaming.
The educa ional unc ions o digi al games a e hus o en seen
only in he ligh o he se ious and pu pose ul ac i i ies ha
aim o lea ning ou comes, in con as wi h “jus playing o
un.” Such a dis inc ion be ween “ un” and “se ious” games is
p oblema ic in many espec s, and i is no necessa ily jus i ied
when play ul lea ning p ocesses and game ul s uden engagemen
a e conce ned. F om he pe spec i es o e olu ion and human
de elopmen , play li e ally is a “se ious” p ac ice and an impo an
adap a ion me hod as well as a me hod o lea ning skills ha
a e ul ima ely essen ial o su i al. On he o he hand, gameplay
could be cha ac e ized as a sa e cons i u ion o “ eali y” (e.g.,
Piage , 1952; S en os, 2014) and as an ac i i y ha cap i a es
i s ac o s, induces passion, and acili a es social bonding (e.g.,
Whi on and Moseley, 2014). In all i s se iousness, gameplay
hus may be abso bing, engaging, and, in all, an en e aining
expe ience ega dless o whe he he game has been designed
wi h a pa icula lea ning pu pose in mind.
The mos p ominen jus i ica ion o game-based lea ning
(P ensky, 2001) o gami ica ion o lea ning (De e ding e  al.,
2011; Faiella and Riccia di, 2015) has been ha games a e
e ec i e in mo i a ing and engaging s uden s in lea ning
ac i i ies. This e ec has been ound o besimila ly impo an
o o he kinds o se ious games, such as games o heal h
(Kowe and Quand , 2016). By de ini ion, games include
condi ions ha playe s need o mee in o de o p og ess in
he game. These condi ions a e en i onmen al demands ha
impose challenges o he playe ’s pe o mance. An op imal
gameplay expe ience is o en depic ed as he playe ac ing in
a s a e o low, whe e he e is a balance be ween he challenges
o he game and he playe ’s abili ies. I has been shown ha ,
wi hin such app oaches, his ype o engagemen indeed has
a posi i e e ec on lea ning (Hama i e  al., 2016). Acco ding
o Maye ’s (2019) e iew, p e ious esea ch on game-based
lea ning has ocused on (1) he impo an ea u es in games
ha suppo lea ning, (2) he po en ial lea ning e ec s o
comme cial ideo games, and (3) he bene i s o lea ning
h ough games when compa ed o adi ional eaching me hods.
Al hough he e is inc easing knowledge on he educa ional
bene i s o compu e games (Maye , 2019), he game ul ea u es,
such as challenge and low (Hama i e  al., 2016), ha wo k
o lea ning, as well as ins uc ional echniques o se ious
games, such as con ex in eg a ion, na a ion-based echniques,
eedback, and adap i i y (Wou e s and Van Oos endo p, 2017),
i is s ill no well unde s ood in which si ua ions hese ea u es
wo k he bes , and o who, wha a e he unde lying mo i a ional
cogni i e, a ec i e and social mechanisms explaining hese
e ec s (Faiella and Riccia di, 2015; Maye , 2019).
Ins ead o ocusing on he ways games wo k as mo i a o s
o lea ning, ou ocus is on disco e ing how mo i es o
pa icipa e in an online cou se a e po en ially associa ed wi h
he pe cei ed play ulness/game ulness o a lea ning expe ience
which does no include a s andalone game and which has no
e en been pu pose ully gami ied. In addi ion, we a e also
in e es ed in unde s anding how bo h mo i es o pa icipa e
and game ul quali ies inhe en o he lea ning expe ience (as
a pa o he gi en mo i a ional clima e) a e associa ed wi h
lea ning ou comes.
Ou sc u iny aims o ea bo h con ex s on an equal basis:
play is iewed as a na u al pa o knowledge and skills c ea ion,
and play ulness as a gene al mo i a ional ounda ion in humans
(e.g., Masek and S en os, 2021). A he same ime, wep esume
ha lea ning ine i ably inco po a es aspec s o play and game-
like ac i i ies. The e o e, o game playe s and online lea ne s
alike, i makes sense o equally ask ques ions ela ed o hei
“game ul” and “lea n ul” mo i a ions. In he p esen s udy, ou
ocus is se on online lea ne s bu he in eg a i e s a egy wi h
espec o he wo mo i a ional con ex s emains he same.
Au onomy o a Playe and a Lea ne
Mo i a ion o play games is o en concei ed h ough in insic
mo i a ion, unde lining he spon aneous cu iosi y, in e es , and
ee will o a playe (Ryan and Deci, 2000; Sansone and
Ha ackiewicz, 2000; Rheinbe g and Engese , 2018). Unlike he
pu pose ul ac i i ies ha wedo in o de o p o ide sus enance
o ou sel es and ou communi y, play does no seem o ha e
any ob ious goal. The e o e i seems o epi omize humans’
desi e o ac on a pu ely olun a y basis—basically jus o
un. This is no o say, howe e , ha play would no ha e
any bene i s. Human play is associa ed wi h physical and
psychological wellbeing (P oye , 2013; Kowe and Quand ,
2016) and has a ious unc ions ha ela e o physical ac i i y,
explo a ion wi h objec s, and socially aluable p e ense beha io
(Su on-Smi h, 1983; Smi h, 2005). F om he de elopmen al
and e olu iona y pe spec i e, play and games ha e unc ioned
as pi o al ways o lea ning (e.g., B une e  al., 1976). Fo a
child, playing migh bejus a un ac i i y, bu implici ly child en
also de elop hei physical o social skills ha a e ele an
and use ul in hei u u e li e (Piage , 1952). I has e en been
a gued ha abili ies o play and imagine ha e been key
p econdi ions in he su i al and de elopmen o he human
species (Huizinga, 1949). F om his pe spec i e, i is in iguing
o conside play as a human need o ac ualizing one’s play ul
sel (i.e., homo ludens). P esumably such a need is s ongly
ied o au onomy—a “capaci y o and desi e o expe ience
sel - egula ion and in eg i y” (Deci and Ryan, 2012, p. 85).
Because o he close ela ionship o play and lea ning, i is
equally emp ing o conside ha he e could besome p o ound
simila i ies be ween an au onomous playe and an
au onomous lea ne .
Ne e heless, games, as a o m o o ganized play, can
be app oached om a seemingly con adic o y di ec ion, as he
ules and goals hey impose on a playe can also be desc ibed
as ex e nal con ol sys ems (A edon and Su on-Smi h, 1971,
p.7), which e ec i ely egula e he playe ’s mo i a ion and ac ion.
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 4 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
The p ocedu al con ol is main ained h ough ei he pe suasi e
o in usi e he o ics and con ibu ion o he playe ’s mo i a ional
sel - egula ion (Bogos , 2007). This kind o unde s anding o
playe pa icipa ion assumes ha a playe ’s desi e o play is gi en
and ha he playe is no a ully ee subjec who can make
decisions as she chooses (Aa se h, 2007). Ins ead o being a ee
subjec , he playe is subjec ed o he gameplay condi ion, ha
is, she is a playe only because she ag ees o ul ill he equi emen s
he game se s o hei in e ac ion (Leino, 2010). Howe e , in
he enac i e app oach o human cogni ion i is con e sely a gued
ha an en i onmen does no impose any dic a ing condi ion
o e an au onomous subjec (Webe and Va ela, 2002; Thompson,
2007). Ins ead, i is he indi idual, and in his con ex a playe ,
who olun a ily me a- egula es he ongoing play ul playe –game
in e ac ion (Vahlo, 2017). Games ep esen a ype o en i onmen ,
which may ob iously inco po a e pe suasi e design ea u es, such
as ewa ding possibili ies o ac ion (Hama i e  al., 2014), bu
ha does no mean ha a playe necessa ily expe iences any
ex e nal con ol as long as i is cohe en wi h he sel - egula i e
o ien a ion in engaging wi h he play-wo ld (see Tuu i e  al.,
2017). A pe son’s in en ion o play, he mo i es, and he play ul
disposi ions a e all essen ial cons i uen s o he game expe ience
(Su on-Smi h, 2009; Ka hulah i, 2015). In e ms o compa ing
he au onomies o a lea ne and a playe , lea ning ac i i ies oo
a e o en ex e nally (i.e., pedagogically) o ganized, in one o m
o ano he . In he p esen s udy, ou ocus is on an open online
cou se, which is olun a ily chosen by i s pa icipan s—jus as
games a e olun a ily chosen by hei playe s.
Ecological App oach o Mo i a ional
De elopmen : Taking Con ex ual
Engagemen In o Accoun
Ou unde s anding o mo i es and mo i a ions is based on
how he human mind is concep ualized in ecological and
enac i e app oaches o psychology. The basic p emise in hese
app oaches holds ha he human mind is no jus inside he
head bu ex ends o e e y hing ha he head and he body
a e inside o (Gibson, 1977; Mace, 1977; Noë, 2009). This
dema ca ion s a es ha he o ganiza ion o ou pe cep ion,
ac ion, and knowing—basically also he subs a e o mo i a ional
de elopmen — elies on embodied in e ac ions ha couple ou
cogni ion wi h he en i onmen (see also Va ela e  al., 1992).
Au onomy, and especially biological au onomy, has been desc ibed
as a co e ene o enac i e app oaches o cogni ion (Di Paolo
e al., 2010; F oese and S ewa , 2012). The concep o au onomy
is de ined as a co e o ganizing p inciple o all li ing sys ems,
and i is di ec ly associa ed wi h he iden i y and su i al o
an indi idual who is equi ed, hence mo i a ed, o in e ac
wi h he wo ld o main ain i s au onomy (Thompson and
S aple on, 2009; Di Paolo and Thompson, 2014).
O he b oade ield o esea ch on human mo i a ions, a
speci ic in e es o his s udy conce ns explici mo i es, which
deno e ce ain “p edisposi ions o app oach a pa icula class o
incen i es o o a oid a pa icula class o h ea s” (Th ash e al.,
2012, p.141). Di e en ly pu , explici mo i es a e easons indi iduals
hold o hei in ol emen in pa icula ac i i ies, and he e o e,
hese mo i es a e also sel -a ibu ed conscious exp essions o
indi iduals’ alues, goals, and sel -iden i ies. Explici mo i es ha e
a di ec i e unc ion in ou decision-making and easoning whe eas
unconscious implici mo i es se e as an ene gizing unc ion in
ou ac ions (McClelland e al., 1989; Th ash e al., 2012; B uns ein,
2018). The app oach o explici mo i es is widely u ilized in
sel - epo su eys and ques ionnai es in which esponden s
ope a e wi h e bally encoded explici mo i es (Th ash e  al.,
2012). In hese s udies, explici mo i es can be ea ed as e balized
esul s o a esponden ’s sel - e lec i e cogni i e app aisal o he
men ioned p edisposi ions o ac on he en i onmen .
Explici and implici mo i es a e use ul concep s in s udies
which aim o unde s and how indi iduals make sense o hei
own decision-making and how mo i es which hey conside
o be impo an p edic pa e ns o hei beha io as well as
ou comes o hei ac ions. Howe e , wi hin a b oade heo e ical
model, mo i es may appea as s a ic e lec ions o an essen ially
dynamic mo i a ional de elopmen . Behind mo i es, we can
ou line se e al di e en mo i a ional disposi ions ha a e
po en ially in ol ed and p ojec ed in he cons i u ion o a
mo i e. Such mo i a ion backg ound can consis o , o example,
pe sonal goal pu sui and he ela ed commi men (Gollwi ze
and Oe ingen, 2012), achie emen goal o ien a ion (Ellio and
Th ash, 2001), social sel - egula ion (Schunk and Ushe , 2012),
play ul a i ude/in en ions (Masek and S en os, 2021), cul u e
and pe sonali y (Higgins, 2008), o sel - egula ion in e ms o
basic need sa is ac ion and one’s au onomic “ ue sel ” (Deci
and Ryan, 1991). Explici mo i es o pa icipa e, o ins ance,
in an online cou se, po en ially inco po a e a con ex ual and
si ua ed ounda ion o di e en backg ound elemen s. While
he mo i a ional backg ound a guably con ibu es o he mo i e
gene a ion, in a simple e baliza ion o an explici mo i e, i
may emain only implied.
Explici mo i es a e p oduc s o making sense o a pe son’s
mo i a ional p edisposi ion o ac i i y. Bu hey should no
be aken me ely as p oposi ional easonings o planning ha
p ecedes ac ion. Acco ding o he amewo k o he embodied
and ecological mind, human mo i a ion and he app aisal o
explici mo i es a e necessa ily co-cons i u ed in engagemen
wi h a gi en en i onmen . Simila ly o Gibson’s (1977) concep
o ac ion a o dances, mo i a ional cogni ion is nei he a p ope y
o a li ing en i y no a p ope y o an en i onmen , bu a he
bo h o hem, being enac i ely s uc u ed (Va ela e al., 1992)
h ough in e ac ions wi h he en i onmen . The essence o
mo i es (as p edisposi ions o app oach o a oid) a e hus no
de ached om a pe son’s expe ien ial his o y o ac i i ies and
con ex s hey ela e o, including wha kind o ou come
expec a ions an indi idual has o pa icipa ing in hese con ex ual
ac i i ies (Schunk and Ushe , 2012).
All his is o say ha mo i es a e bes sc u inized in dynamic
connec ion wi h he con ex ual p ocesses o mo i a ional
de elopmen and engagemen . Simila ly o Skinne and Pi ze ’s
(2012) model o mo i a ional dynamics in lea ning, we see
con ex ual engagemen wi h (lea ning/gaming) ac i i ies pi o al
bo h in unde s anding he adap i e and sel - egula i e p ocesses
o mo i a ion, being ied in si ua ional engagemen , and
embedded in he mo i a ional clima e ha is a o ded o he

Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 5 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
ac o by he con ex (see Figu e 1). Mo i a ional clima e is
he e b oadly unde s ood as he o e all mo i a ional “en i onmen ”
ha con ibu es o he expe ien ial o ganiza ion o con ex ual
ac ion a o dances and incen i es, ins uc ional elemen s,
au onomy and con ol, communal suppo , and consequen ly
o he ways how engagemen wi h ac i i ies is s uc u ed. As
con ex ual engagemen and mo i a ion backg ound a e
in e connec ed, he clima e a guably also con ibu es o he
de elopmen o indi iduals’ mo i es and mo i a ional o ien a ions
(such as mas e y o pe o mance app oaches, see Ames, 1992,
p. 262). Unlike he model o Skinne and Pi ze , howe e , he
model o mo i a ional de elopmen cons uc ed o he use
o his s udy does no p esuppose any con ex o ac i i y, such
as class oom, school, o any o he ins i u ional es ablishmen .
Masek and S en os (2021) ha e ecen ly conduc ed a sys ema ic,
in eg a i e li e a u e e iew on he concep o play ulness ac oss
di e en scien i ic disciplines. Acco ding o he e iew, concep ual
usage o play ulness in he li e a u e is essen ially wo- old: i
is ei he aken as an indi idual’s desi e o willingness o play ul
engagemen in ela ion o con ex (s), o i is unde s ood in e ms
o play ul o ganiza ion o he con ex . This concep ual syn hesis
makes i clea e how we posi ion play ulness o game ulness
in o a model o mo i a ional dynamics. Co espondingly,
play ulness can po en ially beconside ed bo h as (1) backg ound
in en o (play ul and game ul) explici and implici mo i e
gene a ion, and (2) s uc u al o ganiza ion o (play ul and game ul)
expe ience o engaging wi h ac i i ies in he con ex . Con o ming
o his idea, ou model o mo i a ional de elopmen (see Figu e1)
inco po a es play ulness bo h in a pe son’s disposi ional mo i a ion
backg ound (i.e., play ulness implied in mo i es) and con ex ual
engagemen (i.e., expe ien ially play ul o ganiza ion o he con ex ).
Again, we assume ha bo h he indi idual’s play ul disposi ion
and he con ex ual engagemen o play ulness a e in e connec ed.
Fo example, i a pe son has a mo i e ha e lec s “a desi e
o play ul engagemen ” i should be likely ha he play ulness
will also beembodied in he expe ien ial o ganiza ion o he con ex .
Resea ch Ques ions and Hypo heses
Ou su ey a ge ed au onomous lea ne s who pa icipa ed in
an online cou se on a i icial in elligence and i s socie al impac s.
Con o ming o he model o mo i a ional de elopmen p esen ed
abo e, he esea ch ocuses on he ollowing h ee phases o
he lea ning p ocess: (1) mo i es o pa icipa e in he cou se,
(2) con ex ual engagemen du ing he cou se, and (3) lea ning
ou comes. In line wi h his dema ca ion, he esea ch ques ions
o his s udy a e: (1) How do play ul and game ul in en o
mo i e gene a ion and o s uc u al o ganiza ion o a lea ning
expe ience mani es hemsel es in sel - epo da a abou use s’
mo i es o pa icipa e in an online cou se; (2) how a e aspec s
o play ul and game ul in en in mo i e gene a ion ela ed o
play ul and game ul o ganiza ion o lea ning expe iences in
he engagemen wi h he cou se; and (3) how a e play ul/game ul
mo i es ( he i s i em) and play ul/game ul o ganiza ion o
expe iences ( he second i em) associa ed wi h lea ning ou comes?
Consequen ly, he hypo heses o his s udy a e as ollows.
Fi s o all, because o he po en ial o e lap be ween lea ning
in en s and a desi e o play ul engagemen , we expec ha
FIGURE1 | The model o mo i a ional de elopmen consis ing o h ee domains (mo i a ion backg ound, con ex ual engagemen , lea ning ou comes) and hei
in e ela ions.
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 6 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
his s udy will un eil s uc u es in he mo i es o au onomous
lea ne s ha esemble mo i es o playing games, as bo h o
hese modes o pa icipa ion a e p o oundly olun a y
and in e ac i e.
H1: Cou se pa icipan s’ explici mo i es o pa icipa e
in an online lea ning cou se e lec hei in en o
lea ning bu also esemble p e alen mo i es o play
digi al games.
Mo eo e , we expec o ind game ul quali ies in he
expe iences o si ua ional engagemen wi h lea ning ac i i ies.
This is because lea ning ac i i ies sha e phenomenal quali ies
wi h game ac i i ies as bo h impose in e ac i e asks, challenges,
goals, and pe o mance e alua ion (Lam e  al., 2007; Adams,
2014; Ka hulah i, 2015). Fu he mo e, game ul quali ies o a
si ua ion a e co-cons i u ed bo h by he en i onmen and he
indi idual’s ways o o ganize he si ua ion in a play ul manne .
H2: Game ul quali ies a e no exclusi e o games and
gami ied solu ions bu game ul quali ies a e also
mani es ed in hose lea ning si ua ions and ac i i ies
ha a e no s ic ly game-based o in en ionally gami ied.
Ou hi d hypo hesis conce ns he ela ionship be ween
mo i es and engagemen . As he e seems o be an ag eemen
in he ield o educa ional esea ch ha “mo i a ion is a basis
o subsequen engagemen ” (Ma in, 2012, p. 305), we can
expec a posi i e associa ion be ween he wo. Fu he mo e,
we expec ha he expe ienced game ul quali ies pa allel he
expe ience o engagemen wi h lea ning ac i i ies. This is because
game ul expe iences a guably p esuppose ac i e in ol emen
(i.e., engagemen ) by he lea ne (Högbe g e  al., 2019).
H3a: Iden i ied mo i e dimensions (H1) all p edic a
highe lea ne engagemen wi h he online
lea ning cou se.
H3b: Expe ienced game ul quali ies (H2) o a lea ning
si ua ion a e associa ed wi h lea ne engagemen .
Since he game ul quali ies o a si ua ion a e co-cons i u ed
by bo h he lea ning en i onmen and he indi idual’s in en
o o ganize he si ua ion in a play ul manne , we assume ha
lea ne s’ play ul mo i es con ibu e o he pe cep ion o
game ulness o lea ning. Indi iduals’ mo i es o pa icipa e a e
no o beunde s ood as isola ed om he ongoing expe ience,
bu a he as a me a- egula i e esou ce hey u ilize be o e,
h oughou , and a e hei pa icipa ion (see also discussion
on engagemen p ocess in Janosz, 2012, p. 699).
H4: Expe ienced game ul quali ies o he online cou se
a e no he same o all pa icipan s bu a e in luenced
by hei mo i a ion o o ganizing he lea ning si ua ion
play ully. The e o e, he explici mo i es ha pa icipan s
hold p edic how hey expe ience he game ulness o
he lea ning si ua ion.
Ou inal hypo hesis conside s he expe ienced lea ning
ou comes, and how hese associa e wi h mo i es and engagemen .
P e ious esea ch (see Janosz, 2012) poin s ou no only ha
mo i es a e de e minan s o lea ning engagemen , bu also
ha engagemen has an e ec on s uden lea ning success.
The e o e, we expec he ollowing:
H5a: Con ex ual engagemen is a p eceden o
lea ning ou comes.
H5b: Explici mo i es a e all associa ed wi h lea ning
ou comes ia con ex ual engagemen .
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The MAL In en o y De elopmen
Resea ch da a was ga he ed using a su ey a ge ed a s uden s
o Elemen s o AI, a MOOC de eloped by he Uni e si y
o Helsinki and he so wa e company Reak o . The cou se
includes lea ning ma e ials and assignmen s and is no
pu pose ully gami ied. Fo measu ing explici mo i es o
pa icipa ing in he cou se, he su ey included an explo a i e
Mo i es o Au onomous Lea ning (MAL) in en o y. Since
explici mo i es a e concep ualized o be ela i ely s able
disposi ions and “ easons people hold o ini ia ing and
pe o ming olun a y beha io ” (Reiss, 2004), hey a e
conside ed well-sui ed o su ey-based esea ch se ups
(Beckmann and Heckhausen, 2018; Sche e and Heckhausen,
2018; Schul heiss and Wi h, 2018). Mo i e ques ionnai es
assess he sel -a ibu ed explici schema a o indi iduals ha
di ec and selec hei beha io , usually ac oss si ua ions
(Th ash e  al., 2012, pp. 133–134).
In he scale de elopmen p ocess, we ollowed a i e-s ep
p ocedu e p esen ed by Phan e al. (2016). These s eps consis
o p elimina y i em pool gene a ion, expe e iew o he
i em pool, a ques ionnai e pilo s udy, p e e ably wo
explo a o y ac o analyses (EFAs), and a heo y-based
con i ma o y ac o analysis (CFA) including i s alidi y and
eliabili y es ing. Since he objec i e o his explo a i e s udy
was o examine he dimensionali y o he mo i es o he
au onomous lea ning in en o y and how hese mo i es a e
associa ed wi h lea ning expe iences and ou comes, ou scale
de elopmen did no include con i ma o y phases o he
MAL scale de elopmen . Psychome ic alida ion o a scale
necessi a es a leas wo EFAs and a CFA wi h di e en su ey
da a (Ma sunaga, 2010), and bo h o hese s eps ell beyond
he scope o he cu en s udy. As backg ound ma e ial o
designing a p elimina y i em pool o MAL, weused open-
ended da a o iginally collec ed by Reak o abou he s uden s’
easons o pa icipa ion. These esponses (n = 225) we e
i s coded in o po en ial mo i e ca ego ies based on ecu ing
hemes in he indi idual esponses and a o al o 34 mo i e
ca ego ies we e iden i ied. The 34 ca ego ies we e u he
classi ied in o nine main ca ego ies: compe ence, mood
managemen , achie emen , social, bo edom, au onomy, un/
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 7 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
en e ainmen , cu iosi y/in e es , and ea o missing ou .
Bo h he 34 ca ego ies and he nine main ca ego ies we e
e iewed by h ee esea che s and wo indus y ope a o s
as a pa o he expe e iew phase o he scale de elopmen .
Nex , he esea che s wen back o he da a and selec ed
hose mo i e desc ip ions ha cap u ed di e en aspec s o
he nine main ca ego ies and he 34 sub-ca ego ies. Howe e ,
no all nine p elimina y mo i e ca ego ies we e equally
ep esen ed in he open-ended da a. In o de o balance he
in en o y and o cons uc new su ey i ems o he mo i e
ca ego ies, we e iewed a se ies o mo i e in en o ies ha
assess easons o play digi al games (She y e  al., 2006; Yee,
2006; Deme o ics e  al., 2011; Yee e  al., 2012; Kahn e  al.,
2015; De G o e e  al., 2017; Vahlo and Hama i, 2019). As a
esul , wecons uc ed MAL in en o y i ems (Table 1) o each
o he p elimina y nine ca ego ies as ou objec i e was o
include he p elimina y MAL in en o y in a ques ionnai e
pilo s udy.
Be o e an EFA was made o he MAL in en o y o in es iga e
la en mo i e ca ego ies o he au onomous lea ne s, weassessed
he sampling adequacy o he 35-i em in en o y. The in en o y
passed he Kaise –Mye –Olkin (KMO) es wi h a alue o
0.88 and also he Ba le es o sphe ici y (chi-squa e = 9,673,
d  = 595, p = 0.000), bo h o which indica ed ha a ac o
analysis was app op ia e.
Measu ing Engagemen , Expe ience, and
Ou comes
GAMEFULQUEST is an ins umen o assessing he pe cei ed
game ulness o using any se ice o sys em (Högbe g e  al.,
2019). In he con ex o ou s udy, “ he se ice” e e s o use
expe ience when pa icipa ing in an online lea ning cou se.
Al hough GAMEFULQUEST has been psychome ically
alida ed, we decided o do an EFA based on he ac ha
he ins umen is new, and he h ee se ices used in he
alida ion s udy we e ei he s andalone ideogames (Zombies,
Run!) o pu pose ully gami ied sys ems (Duolingo and Nike+
Run Club). The alida ed 56-i em GAMEFULQUEST in en o y
consis s o se en dimensions: Accomplishmen , Challenge,
Compe i ion, Guided, Imme sion, Play ulness, and Social
Expe ience (Högbe g e al., 2019). Since ou s udy ocuses on
he iewpoin o an au onomous lea ne and he mo i es,
we decided o de elop a o al o eigh new i ems o
TABLE1 | The 35-MAL In en o y and i s desc ip i e s a is ics.
N = 705 Desc ip ion Mean SD
i em1 To ge he c edi s 3.01 1.99
i em2 Because o he ce i ica e 3.32 1.89
i em3 To build up my esume 3.61 1.92
i em4 To ca ch my d eam 3.01 1.66
i em5 Because i was ee 5.48 1.56
i em6 Because Icould s udy any ime and anywhe e 5.72 1.29
i em7 Because i opens up u u e possibili ies 4.49 1.66
i em8 Because Iwas bo ed 2.29 1.57
i em9 Because Ihad oo much ee ime 2.41 1.70
i em10 Because Ihad no hing else o do 2.35 1.59
i em11 To use i in my p o ession 4.02 1.93
i em12 To build up my skills 5.90 1.09
i em13 Because o he challenge 4.89 1.67
i em14 To lea n some hing new and use ul 5.93 1.02
i em15 To explo e new domains o knowledge 5.78 1.13
i em16 To con ibu e o my c ea i e hinking 5.11 1.55
i em17 Ou o cu iosi y abou wha he u u e migh b ing 5.96 1.08
i em18 Because Iamin e es ed in AI 5.97 1.10
i em19 To keep up wi h he imes 5.63 1.21
i em20 Because o he ea o missing ou 2.97 1.70
i em21 To s ay ahead o echnological dis up ions 5.60 1.26
i em22 To s ay cu en wi h inno a ions 5.70 1.18
i em23 Fo un 5.12 1.54
i em24 Because o en e ainmen 4.08 1.84
i em25 Because i made me eel good abou mysel 4.76 1.66
i em26 To o e come he ea o AI and obo s 1.99 1.45
i em27 To speak abou he subjec in elligen ly 4.53 1.66
i em28 Because i was ecommended o me 3.28 2.00
i em29 Because my iends o colleagues ook he cou se 2.47 1.76
i em30 Because e e yone needs o know abou his subjec 5.27 1.50
i em31 Because Iwas encou aged o ake he cou se 2.88 1.85
i em32 I was cu ious abou he subjec ma e 6.10 0.95
i em33 To use he unde s anding o he subjec in my s udies o in my job 3.67 1.99
i em34 To ad ance my ca ee 3.52 1.83
i em35 Because Iwan ed o e alua e he cou se quali y 2.97 1.83
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 8 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
GAMEFULQUEST o measu ing expe ienced au onomy as a
pa o a game ul expe ience. Simila ly, o ou app oach wi h
he MAL in en o y, we assessed sampling adequacy o
GAMEFULQUEST bo h in he alida ed o m and as
complemen ed by eigh i ems ha supposedly measu ed
expe ienced au onomy while s udying on he online cou se.
Bo h he alida ed GAMEFULQUEST (KMO= 0.975, he Ba le
es o sphe ici y: chi-squa e = 27,407, d  = 1,596, p = 0.000)
and he e sion complemen ed by eigh au onomy-based i ems
(KMO = 0.978, Ba le es o sphe ici y: chi-squa e = 31,083,
d  = 2016, p = 0.000) clea ly passed he es s.
Scales o measu ing s uden engagemen a e o en de eloped
o a school con ex hus necessi a ing modi ica ions o any
chosen ins umen when applied o online lea ning. Engagemen
wi h he online cou se was s udied using he S uden Engagemen
In en o y (Lam e al., 2014). The 33-i em scale explo es h ee
dimensions o engagemen : A ec i e Engagemen (nine i ems),
Beha io al Engagemen (12 i ems), and Cogni i e Engagemen
(12 i ems). A numbe o he i ems we e explici ly designed
o a school con ex , hus, o he pu poses o his s udy se e al
i ems we e excluded om ou analyses on how mo i es o
pa icipa e may p edic engagemen and whe he expe ienced
game ulness and expe ienced engagemen a e co ela ed. The
numbe o i ems was educed o ou i ems pe dimension,
and he esul ing 12-i em in en o y C onbach’s alphas (95%
con idence in e als o he alphas) and coe icien omegas
we e o each dimension: A ec i e Engagemen α = 0.872 (CI
0.93–0.95) and ω = 0.882, Beha io al Engagemen α = 0.693
(CI 0.65–0.73) and ω = 0.7326, and Cogni i e Engagemen
α = 0.8263 (CI 0.80–0.85) and ω = 0.8321.
Acco ding o Ames (1992, p.267–268), in s udying mo i a ional
clima es i is essen ial o look in o he lea ne ’s pe cep ions o
lea ning expe iences a he han me e lea ne beha io . To
measu e pa icipan s’ pe cep ions o how he online cou se
suppo s hei mo i a ion h ough di e en ins uc ional s a egies
we used he 18-i em e sion o he Mo i a ing Ins uc ional
Con ex s In en o y (MICI) alida ed (C onbach’s α = 0.94) by
Lam and Law (2007). The scale consis s o six 3-i em subscales:
Challenge, Real-Li e Signi icance, Cu iosi y, Au onomy,
Recogni ion, and E alua ion. As he scale was de eloped o
eache -led class oom lea ning con ex s, wo subscales (Recogni ion
and E alua ion) no sui ed o he online cou se s udied he e
we e excluded, and he emaining i ems we e ewo ded o apply
o a lea ning con ex whe e a eache is no p esen . Fu he mo e,
he ou subscales used in he co ela ion analyses o his s udy
we e enamed o Challenge Suppo , Applica ion Suppo , Cu iosi y
Suppo , and Au onomy Suppo o be e sui an online lea ning
con ex . C onbach’s α and McDonald’s ω we e calcula ed o
each subscale: Challenge Suppo ω = 0.69 (CI 0.65 o 0.73),
ω = 0.71, Cu iosi y Suppo α = 0.64 (CI 0.59 o 0.68) and ω = 0.64,
Applica ion Suppo α = 0.857 (CI 0.84 o 0.87) and ω = 0.861,
and Au onomy Suppo α = 0.70 (CI 0.66 o 0.74) and ω = 0.71.
Finally, we needed o measu e pa icipan s’ pe cep ions o
hei lea ning ou comes. Fo his pu pose we de eloped h ee
i ems o assessing pa icipan s’ pe cep ions o lea ning abou
he cou se con en (Lea ning he Topic, α = 0.762, CI 0.73 o
0.79, ω = 0.795), and h ee i ems o e alua e hei pe cep ions
o lea ning me hods o online lea ning (Lea ning Me hod,
α = 0.889, CI 0.87 o 0.90, ω = 0.892). Addi ionally, we used he
4-i em C i ical Re lec ion scale (Kembe e  al., 2000) o gauge
he lea ning ou comes o c i ical hinking skills (α = 0.836, CI
0.81 o 0.86, ω = 0.837). A sum a iable o each o hese measu es
was calcula ed o in es iga ing lea ning ou comes by means o
mul iple linea eg essions be ween he abo e-men ioned cons uc s.
Pa icipan s and Da a Collec ion
Da a collec ion was conduc ed in wo languages, English and
Finnish. The su ey was ansla ed om English o Finnish
using he commi ee app oach. Fi s , he su ey was ansla ed
by he esea che s, who a e all compe en in bo h languages.
Nex , a back- ansla ion om Finnish o English was done by
an ou side ansla o . Then he back- ansla ion was used o
assess he o iginal ansla ion as well as he wo ding in he
new ins umen s de eloped o his su ey.
Su ey pa icipan s we e ec ui ed h ough he Elemen s o
AI cou se email lis wi h he message a ge ed a s uden s
om Finland, Ge many, Sweden, and he Uni ed Kingdom.
To exclude esponden s who had only ecen ly egis e ed on
he cou se, he su ey was u he a ge ed a pa icipan s who
had egis e ed a leas 6 mon hs ago. The pa icipan s had he
oppo uni y o pa icipa e in a a le o a 200€ gi ca d. The
esul ing sample included 705 esponses, wi h 54% o he
esponden s epo ing hey we e emale, 44.5% male, and 0.3%
o he , while 1.1% did no wan o speci y. The mean age o
he sample was 47.8 (Min = 16, Max = 83). Th ee o he pa icipan s
we e mino s. The Finnish na ional boa d on esea ch in eg i y
s a es ha a pe son’s own consen o pa icipa ion is su icien
when he pa icipan is 15 o olde . As ou da a ga he ing
me hod was anonymous, wedid no ha e a chance o in o m
he pa en s o pa icipa ing mino s. All pa icipan s p o ided
hei w i en in o med consen o pa icipa e in his s udy.
Fo he p esen s udy, i is impo an o no e ha as many
as 82% o he esponden s answe ed ha hey pa icipa ed in
he cou se ou o hei own in e es . Only 10% o he esponden s
pa icipa ed in he cou se as a pa o wo kplace aining, and
8% as a pa o deg ee educa ion. This obse a ion is in line
wi h ou expec a ion ha pa icipa ion in MOOCs should
be olun a ily ini ia ed. And i indeed implies ha he g ea
majo i y o he su ey esponden s ep esen au onomous lea ne s.
RESULTS
MAL In en o y
Nex , an explo a o y ac o analysis o he MAL in en o y
was made. The pu pose o making an EFA was o analyze
whe he he MAL in en o y measu ed la en mo i e dimensions,
and o wha ex en hese possible la en mo i e dimensions
could beconside ed o becon ex -speci ic and o wha ex en ,
consequen ly, eoccu ing ac oss mul iple con ex s o
au onomous expe iencing.
We conduc ed a pa allel analysis (Henson and Robe s, 2006)
o iden i y how many ac o s should be ex ac ed o he
35-i em MAL in en o y (Table 1). Bo h he pa allel analysis
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 15 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
All six mo i e dimensions we e ound o beassocia ed wi h
a leas one dimension o GAMEFULQUEST. Expe ienced
Pu pose ul Play was s ongly p edic ed by he Au o elic mo i e
o pa icipa e, bu also by Capabili y, Achie emen , and Rewa d.
Howe e , he Bo edom mo i e p edic ed a lowe le el o
expe ienced Pu pose ul Play in a lea ning si ua ion. Social
Connec edness was p edic ed by Au o elic and Social mo i es,
bu also by Achie emen albei only weakly. Expe ienced Guided
was p edic ed by Achie emen , Au o elic, and Social. Simila ly,
Compe i ion was also p edic ed by Achie emen and Social, bu
also by Bo edom. Abso p ion was s ongly p edic ed by Au o elic,
and Capabili y and Social we e bo h p eceden s o
expe ienced E o .
The mo i e dimensions explained 48 pe cen o he a iance
o Pu pose Play and also o e 20 pe cen o all o he
GAMEFULQUEST ac o s. The mul iple eg essions (Table 7)
he e o e sugges ha game ul quali ies o a lea ning si ua ion
a e co-cons i u ed by bo h he cha ac e is ics o he lea ning
en i onmen and by he pa icipan s mo i es o pa icipa e
and o ganize he si ua ion play ully. This suppo s he ou h
hypo hesis o his s udy.
The inal hypo heses we in es iga e conside how explici
mo i es and expe ienced game ulness in luence lea ning
ou comes. Based on how p io esea ch has a gued ha mo i es
a e bo h de e minan s o engagemen and lea ning (Janosz,
2012) and ha game ul expe iences also ha e a posi i e e ec
on lea ning ou comes (Hama i e  al., 2016), we hypo hesized
ha : H5a: Game ul expe ience is a p eceden o lea ning ou comes
and ha H5b: Explici mo i es a e associa ed wi h lea ning
ou comes ia game ul expe ience.
The e ec s o MAL mo i e dimensions and GAMEFULQUEST
ca ego ies we e in es iga ed by u ilizing s uc u al equa ion
modelling (CB-SEM) and by cons uc ing he model p esen ed
in Figu e 1. The s a is ical analyses we e made by s a is ical
so wa e S a a 16.2 using he maximum likelihood me hod.
The a iables in he model a e all ac o sco e a iables wi h
he excep ion o he ou come a iables, all o which a e
sum a iables.
The model desc ibed in Figu e 2 and epo ed in
Table 8 explained 19 pe cen o he a iance in Lea ning
Me hod, 31 pe cen o he a iance in Lea ning he Topic, and
30 pe cen o he a iance in C i ical Re lec ion.
Expe ienced Pu pose ul Play had a s ong e ec on Lea ning
he Topic, and also he s onges e ec o he six
GAMEFULQUEST dimensions on Lea ning Me hod. The ac o
o Social Connec edness had he s onges e ec on
C i ical Re lec ion, ollowed by Pu pose ul Play. The only e ec s
ha Guided and Compe i ion had on he lea ning ou comes
we e nega i e. Finally, he MAL mo i e dimensions also had
s a is ically signi ican e ec s on all lea ning ou comes ia he
expe ienced game ulness o he lea ning si ua ion. Again, Au o elic
had he s onges e ec s o he mo i e dimensions, bu also
Capabili y and Social had posi i e impac s on lea ning. The
e ec o Achie emen on lea ning was e y weak, he Bo edom
mo i e had mos ly nega i e in luence on lea ning, al hough
hese e ec s we e also e y weak.
DISCUSSION
Ou guiding p inciple o his explo a i e s udy has been he
idea ha lea ning and playing, he ac i i ies ha a e s ill mo e
o less conside ed h ough di e en academic con ex s, ca y
phenomenal simila i ies ha could be e ealed by esea ching
au onomous lea ne s’ mo i es o pa icipa ing in a MOOC
ha does no in ol e any in en ionally game ul ea u es.
Weconduc ed he in es iga ion empi ically by collec ing su ey
esponses om s uden s o he ee Elemen s o an AI online
cou se. The collec ed sel - epo measu es conce ned hei
expe iences o (1) mo i es o pa icipa e in he cou se, (2)
con ex ual engagemen du ing he cou se, and (3) lea ning
ou comes. In ega d o hese domains o he lea ning p ocess,
we ca ied ou h ee espec i e esea ch asks in which
wein es iga ed: (1) how play ulness/game ulness was mani es ed
in pa icipan s’ mo i es o lea ning, (2) how engagemen wi h
he cou se exhibi ed play ul/game ul o ganiza ion o expe iences
and how he measu ed game ulness ela ed o bo h lea ning
mo i es and engagemen , and inally (3) how play ul/game ul
mo i es and engagemen associa ed wi h he lea ning ou comes.
The esul s o his s udy demons a ed ha play ulness and
au onomy we e bo h p ominen and signi ican ac o s ac oss
he lea ning p ocess. Play ulness was he e ope a ionalized in
a wo- old manne , con o ming o Masek and S en os’s (2021)
concep ualiza ion ha ocuses on bo h an indi idual’s play ul
disposi ions (i.e., play ul mo i es) and play ul o game ul
o ganiza ion o lea ning expe iences. Au o elic mo i es, in which
he lea ning expe ience was expec ed o be un, challenging,
and en e aining, and which also deno ed a pe son’s in e es
in expe iencing au onomy, yielded he g ea es (indi ec ) posi i e
e ec on lea ning ou comes, as well as he g ea es e ec on
game ul o ganiza ion o lea ning expe iences (H5b). O he
mo i e ca ego ies, Au o elic mo i es mos clea ly highligh ed
TABLE6 | Co ela ions (Spea man’s Rho) be ween expe ienced game ulness and dimensions o engagemen in a lea ning expe ience.
Pu pose ul Play Social
Connec edness Guided Compe i ion Abso p ion E o
A ec i e Engagemen 0.68 0.27 0.28 0.10 0.34 0.25
Beha io al
Engagemen 0.64 0.31 0.31 0.28 0.37 0.41
Cogni i e Engagemen 0.58 0.22 0.17 0.10 0.25 0.21
Mode a e and s onge co ela ions (o e 0.4) a e bolded.

Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 16 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
he na u e o a play ul disposi ion. Mo eo e , se e al dimensions
o expe ienced game ulness in lea ning had di ec posi i e e ec s
on lea ning ou comes (H5a). An impo an hing o no e he e
is ha he play ul and game ul dimensions ha seemed o
ha e he mos signi ican ole did no ela e o sho - e m
ewa ds o compe i ion, bu a he , hey ela ed o a mo e
p o ound and play ul p edisposi ion ha was associa ed wi h
eedom o choice and au onomy. This pa allels some p e ious
no ions o gami ica ion esea che s (Suh e  al., 2018) asse ing
ha gami ica ion should s i e o u ilizing di e se ypes o
game ul dynamics ha help people o sa is y hei long- e m
psychological needs. A leas , ou esul s imply ha me e use
o badges, poin s, and leade boa ds would no be he bes
solu ions o gene a ing e ec i e play ulness in lea ne s. On
he con a y, ou esul s highligh ha play ulness had a signi ican
ole in sel - egula i e mo i a ional de elopmen du ing he whole
p ocess o lea ning: om a pe son’s play ul a i ude o he
con ex ual engagemen wi h lea ning ac i i ies ha o ganize
play ul expe iences and ac ualizes he pe son’s play ul sel .
The dimensions iden i ied by he Mo i es o Au onomous
Lea ning (MAL) in en o y sugges ha easons o pa icipa e in
online cou ses do no only in o m us abou lea ning mo i es
bu also, and pe haps e en mo e impo an ly, abou p e alen
p edisposi ions o engage wi h ac i i ies ha enable and acili a e
au onomous expe iences. In his la e ega d, i makes sense ha
he six ac o s Capabili y, Au o elic, Achie emen , Social, Bo edom,
and Rewa d sha e p o ound simila i ies wi h mo i es o play digi al
games as pa icipa ing in bo h o hese ac i i y ypes is indeed
olun a y and au onomous (H1). These esul s indica e ha models
ha a e de eloped o measu ing con ex ual mo i es may also
gene a e knowledge abou mo e gene al and undamen al
p edisposi ions ha di ec ou ac i i ies ac oss mul iple con ex s
o expe ience. In game esea ch li e a u e, con ex ual and gene al
app oaches o gaming mo i es a e o en sepa a ed om each
o he (Ryan e  al., 2006; Yee, 2006). Ou esea ch adds o his
discussion by p o iding empi ical e idence ha e eals ha i is
no easonable o es ablish a clea -cu dis inc ion be ween con ex ual
and gene al models, bu a he o ask ins ead wha we can lea n
abou gene al human mo i a ion by s udying ou easons o engage
wi h pa icula ac i i ies, such as lea ning and playing games.
I was e ealed in his s udy ha GAMEFULQUEST, an
ins umen de eloped o assessing expe ienced game ulness
o a si ua ion, did no unc ion en i ely as was an icipa ed.
The ins umen did measu e se e al dimensions simila o he
model p esen ed in he o iginal alida ion s udy (Högbe g
e al., 2019), bu Play ulness and Accomplishmen did no o m
hei own ac o s. Ins ead, hese ac o s me ged oge he wi h
each o he alongside he addi ional i ems we de eloped o
measu ing au onomy, hus o ming a ac o wecall Pu pose ul
Play (H2). The combina ion o hose i ems ha loaded on
Pu pose ul Play eminds us o classic game de ini ions which
a gue ha a ainable, pu pose ul goals and au onomous playe s
who a e ee o pu sue mas e y a e necessa y condi ions o
all games (A edon, 1971; A edon and Su on-Smi h, 1971;
Mead, 2015). A eading o classic game de ini ions suppo s
an in e p e a ion o he EFA esul s (Table 3) acco ding o
which cons i u i e elemen s o all game expe iences loaded
TABLE7 | Mul iple eg essions be ween MAL ac o sco es and GAMEFULQUEST ac o sco es.
Mo i es
Pu pose ul Play Social Connec edness Guided Compe i ion Abso p ion E o
Be a S d. E Be a S d. E Be a S d. E Be a S d. E Be a S d. E Be a S d. E
Capabili y 0.20 0.04 0.11 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.09 0.05 −0.01 0.04 0.29 0.04
Au o elic 0.50 0.04 0.25 0.05 0.26 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.48 0.04 0.08 0.05
Achie emen 0.11 0.04 0.16 0.04 0.27 0.04 0.26 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04
Social 0.03 0.04 0.22 0.04 0.15 0.04 0.18 0.04 0.09 0.04 0.20 0.04
Bo edom –0.13 0.03 0.08 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.20 0.04 0.10 0.04 0.02 0.04
Rewa d 0.10 0.04 −0.03 0.05 −0.06 0.04 0.03 0.05 −0.02 0.04 0.08 0.05
R2 0.48 0.27 0.26 0.25 0.31 0.21
p < 0.05 a e bolded, p < 0.01 a e bolded and i alicized, and p < 0.001 a e bolded, i alicized, and unde lined.
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 17 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
TABLE8 | The di ec e ec s o expe ienced game ulness and indi ec e ec s o mo i es on lea ning.
Di ec E ec s
Lea ning he Topic Lea ning Me hod C i ical Re lec ion
Be a SD Be a SD Be a SD
Pu pose ul Play 0.57 0.04 0.33 0.05 0.21 0.05
Abso p ion 0.02 0.04 −0.02 0.05 0.17 0.06
E o 0.10 0.03 0.16 0.04 0.17 0.05
Social connec edness −0.08 0.04 0.14 0.05 0.27 0.06
Guided −0.01 0.04 −0.06 0.05 −0.14 0.06
Compe i ion −0.12 0.04 −0.06 0.05 0.04 0.06
Indi ec E ec s
Lea ning he Topic Lea ning Me hod C i ical Re lec ion
Mo i es Be a SD Be a SD Be a SD
Capabili y 0.12 0.02 0.12 0.02 0.12 0.03
Au o elic 0.27 0.02 0.18 0.03 0.24 0.04
Achie emen 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.03
Social 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.10 0.03
Bo edom −0.10 0.02 −0.04 0.02 0.01 0.03
Rewa d 0.06 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.03
p < 0.05 a e bolded, p < 0.01 a e bolded and i alicized, and p < 0.001 a e bolded, i alicized, and unde lined.
FIGURE2 | S uc u al model o in es iga ing he di ec e ec s o expe ienced game ulness and indi ec e ec s o explici mo i es on lea ning
ou comes.
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 18 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
on he Pu pose ul Play ac o (au onomy, pu pose ul goal,
challenge, and eedback) whe eas equen ly occu ing elemen s
o game expe iences (Social, Guided, Compe i ion, Abso p ion,
and E o ) each o med a ac o o hei own. This is an
impo an in e p e a ion since Pu pose ul Play was e ealed o
be he ac o ha had a mo e signi ican e ec on lea ning
han he o he ac o s o GAMEFULQUEST.
Pu pose ul Play did no only p edic lea ning ou comes bu
his dimension was also mo e s ongly co ela ed wi h a ec i e,
beha io al, and cogni i e engagemen han he o he aspec s
o expe ienced game ulness (Table6). Again, he esul s e ealed
ha no all ac o s o GAMEFULQUEST we e meaning ully
co ela ed wi h engagemen (H3a). Compe i ion, o ins ance,
was no co ela ed a all wi h a ec i e and cogni i e engagemen ,
and only weakly wi h beha io al engagemen . Ou in es iga ion
on how mo i es we e associa ed wi h engagemen u he mo e
e ealed ha he Au o elic mo i e was he s onges p eceden
o bo h a ec i e and beha io al engagemen whe eas Capabili y
and Au o elic bo h p edic ed a highe cogni i e engagemen
in a lea ning expe ience. Bu i was ound again ha no all
mo i es we e posi i ely ela ed o engagemen . The Social mo i e,
o ins ance, was no associa ed wi h engagemen a all, and
he Bo edom mo i e p edic ed a lowe le el o a ec i e, beha io al,
and cogni i e engagemen (H3b).
Fu he mo e, i was ound ha all ou MICI dimensions,
which ela e o mo i a ional suppo p o ided by he ins uc ional
con ex , s ongly co ela ed wi h he Pu pose ul Play ac o .
Only MICI’s Au onomy Suppo dimension also had signi ican
co ela ions o Social and Guided ac o s. This esul implies
ha Pu pose ul Play exhibi ed a posi i e associa ion wi h
expe ien ial dimensions o ins uc ional suppo and hus a guably
con ibu ed s ongly o he mo i a ional clima e o lea ning.
A eg ession be ween pa icipa ion mo i es o an au onomous
lea ne and expe ienced game ulness o a lea ning si ua ion
e ealed ha mo i es a e clea ly ela ed o how he lea ning
si ua ion is expe ienced and play ully o ganized by he lea ne .
The Au o elic mo i e s ongly p edic ed Pu pose ul Play and
Abso p ion. The mo i e o Capabili y was associa ed wi h
expe ienced E o , and he Achie emen mo i e wi h el
Compe i ion. Again, no all mo i es p edic ed expe ienced
game ulness (e.g., Rewa d), and all mo i e ac o s we e uniquely
associa ed wi h GAMEFULQUEST dimensions (H4). The mos
s iking e ec e ealed in his s udy is also he mos in e es ing
and po en . Au o elic was he main p eceden o Pu pose ul
Play, which was he mos signi ican p edic o o lea ning
ou comes. These indings e ec i ely e eal ha expe ienced
game ulness is no o be ega ded as a quali y applicable only
o games o gami ied si ua ions. Ins ead, aspec s o game ulness
a e p esen ac oss lea ning si ua ions, bu hey a e also unequal
om he pe spec i e o expec ed lea ning ou comes.
Implica ions
All in all, his esea ch has shed ligh on unde s anding mo i es
no only as p edisposi ions o engagemen (c ., Th ash e  al.,
2012), bu a he as me a- egula i e esou ces ha a e immanen ly
and dynamically in ol ed du ing ac i i ies o he whole lea ning
p ocess. In o he wo ds, mo i es o pa icipa ing in lea ning
we e no de ached om con ex ual engagemen . On he basis
o he esul s, we would a gue ha he ela ionship be ween
mo i es and engagemen is ecip ocal and co-cons i u i e in
na u e. I seems ha mo i es a e en angled wi h he expe ience
o lea ning and, o example, how his expe ience is s uc u ed
in e ms o play ulness. As we ha e discussed ea lie in his
pape , play ul mo i es ep esen only one, albei e y impac ul,
domain o mo i a ional disposi ions (i.e., mo i a ion backg ound)
ha has such a capaci y o con ibu e o he o ganiza ion o
con ex ual expe iences. Fo example, wi h he Capabili y mo i e,
which pa icula ly ela ed o he de elopmen o one’s compe ence,
he e was a ela ed emphasis on si ua ionally expe iencing
E o . Ou sugges ion is ha u u e s udies in es iga ing mo i es
and engagemen should mo e b oadly u he in es iga e he
co-cons i u ional na u e o mo i es du ing engagemen wi h
lea ning ac i i ies.
In ega d o p ac ical implica ions, he esul s o his s udy
s ongly pu o wa d an idea ha play ulness o game ulness
does no ha e o beexplici ly mani es ed in he design o he
cou se ma e ial o he lea ning en i onmen . As weha e seen
in his pa icula case, play ulness was exhibi ed as a p ominen
expe ien ial aspec o pa icipa ing in an online cou se, e en
hough he cou se was no in en ionally gami ied. In o he
wo ds, play ulness seemed o eme ge as a p ope y o he
lea ne ’s in en and he pe sonal ways o o ganizing he lea ning
expe ience. This ap ly eminds us o Sica ’s (2014, p. 11)
asse ion ha “play is app op ia i e, in ha i akes he con ex
in which i exis s and canno be o ally p ede e mined by
such con ex .” In p ac ice, i means ha gami ica ion o lea ning,
hence implemen ing game-like elemen s in he lea ning ac i i ies
o he con ex , does no de e mine play ul/game ul expe iences.
Gami ica ion, a he , is abou cons uc ing he lea ning
en i onmen s in a manne ha a o ds play, ha is, p omo es
(o a leas a oids denying) he possibili y o play ul/game ul
a i udes and expe iences o he au onomous lea ne .
Limi a ions and Fu u e Resea ch Di ec ions
The p esen wo k has ce ain limi a ions ha should
be conside ed when in e p e ing i s esul s and making
conclusions. One o he p ominen limi a ions ela es o he
ac ha , ins ead o adop ing a longi udinal me hodological
app oach, only a single poin o measu emen was used o
in es iga ing di e en phases o he lea ning p ocess. Ano he
hing o keep in mind is ha he p esen s udy ocused on
he use s o only a single MOOC. In he u u e, simila esea ch
design should be eplica ed in s udies ha a e a ge ed a
di e en ypes o lea ning, o gaining a be e unde s anding
o he e ec o di e en con ex s in e ms o di e en pedagogical
app oaches, lea ning opics, and mo i a ional clima es. I is
also impo an o conside eplica ing he su ey in a mo e
expe imen al ashion, o ins ance in he immedia e si ua ion
in which lea ning akes place. By doing so, he impac o
mo i es on he ongoing expe ience could be in es iga ed by
making use o mul i-me hod app oaches including psycho-
physiological measu es and quali a i e in e iews. Mo eo e ,
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 19 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
compa a i e s udies could also be a ge ed owa d he use s
o (en e ainmen ) game applica ions, and hei expe iences
ega ding mo i a ional de elopmen .
In e ms o play ulness, we may conside ou s udy as an
empi ical case o Masek and S en os’s (2021) concep ual syn hesis.
Hence, ou indings illus a e how play ulness is ecip ocally
p esen in he mo i a ional o ien a ion ha di ec s ou con ex ual
ac ions, as well as in he ways hese con ex ual ac ions o ganize
ou expe iences. The indings p o ide suppo o his concep ual
amewo k in which play ulness is seen wi hin wo on ological
s ances—as an a i ude and an ac i i y—bo h o which a e ied
o con ex ual engagemen . And inally, in e ms o he basic
need sa is ac ion o he sel -de e mina ion heo y (Deci and Ryan,
1991), ou indings also emind us esea che s no o conside
basic needs, ega ding au onomy, compe ence and ela edness,
me ely as backg ound ac o s o mo i a ion, bu a he as me a-
egula i e esou ces o con inuous mo i a ional de elopmen .
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The aw da a suppo ing he conclusions o his a icle will
be made a ailable by he au ho s, wi hou undue ese a ion.
ETHICS STATEMENT
E hical e iew and app o al was no equi ed o he s udy
on human pa icipan s in acco dance wi h he local legisla ion
and ins i u ional equi emen s. W i en in o med consen om
he pa icipan s’ legal gua dian/nex o kin was no equi ed
o pa icipa e in his s udy in acco dance wi h he na ional
legisla ion and he ins i u ional equi emen s.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
JV, KT, and TV con ibu ed o concep ion, design o he s udy,
and w o e sec ions o he manusc ip . JV o ganized he da a
and pe o med and epo ed he s a is ical analyses. All au ho s
con ibu ed o manusc ip e ision, ead, and app o ed he
submi ed e sion.
FUNDING
This wo k is unded by Business Finland, he go e nmen
o ganiza ion o inno a ion unding (9214/31/2019).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The au ho s would like o exp ess hei g a i ude o all he
pa icipan s in he s udy and would speci ically like o hank
Oska i Koskela, Mikko Myllykoski, and An i Päi inen o hei
help in planning and o ganizing he s udy. The au ho s also
wish o hank all he collabo a ing pa ne s a Reak o and
Uni e si y o Helsinki o hei aluable suppo .
REFERENCES
Aa se h, E. (2007). “I ough he law: ansg essi e play and he implied playe ,”
in DiGRA '07–P oceedings o he 2007 DiGRA In e na ional Con e ence:
Si ua ed Play, The Uni e si y o Tokyo; Sep embe , 2007, 130–133.
Adams, E. (2014). Fundamen als o Game Design. 3 d Edn. San F ancisco:
New Ride s.
Ames, C. (1992). Class ooms: goals, s uc u es, and s uden mo i a ion. J. Educ.
Psychol. 84, 261–271. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261
Apple on, J. J., Ch is enson, S. L., Kim, D., and Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measu ing
cogni i e and psychological engagemen : alida ion o he s uden engagemen
ins umen . J. Sch. Psychol. 44, 427–445. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
A edon, E. M. (1971). “The s uc u al elemen s o games,” in S udy o Games.
eds. E. A edon and B. Su on-Smi h (New Yo k: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.),
419–426.
A edon, E., and Su on-Smi h, B. (eds.) (1971). S udy o Games. New Yo k:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bahn, D. (2007). O ien a ion o nu ses owa ds o mal and in o mal lea ning: mo i es
and pe cep ions. Nu se Educ. Today 27, 723–730. doi: 10.1016/j.ned .2006.10.006
Beckmann, J., and Heckhausen, H. (2018). “Mo i a ion as a unc ion o expec ancy
and incen i e,” in Mo i a ion and Ac ion. 3 d Edn. eds. J. Heckhausen and
H. Heckhausen (New Yo k: Rou ledge), 163–220.
Bogos , I. (2007). Pe suasi e Games: The Exp essi e Powe o Videogames.
Camb idge, Massachuse s: The MIT P ess.
B own, T. A. (2015). Con i ma o y Fac o Analysis o Applied Resea ch. 2nd
Edn. New Yo k: The Guil o d P ess.
B une , J. S., Jolly, A., and Syl a, K. (eds.) (1976). Play: I s Role in De elopmen
and E olu ion. Ha mondswo h: Penguin.
B uns ein, J. C. (2018). “Implici and explici mo i es,” in Mo i a ion and Ac ion.
3 d Edn. eds. J. Heckhausen and H. Heckhausen (New Yo k: Rou ledge), 369–405.
Caillois, R. (2001). Man, Play and Games. Chicago: Uni e si y o Illinois P ess.
Cha sky, D. (2010). F om edu ainmen o se ious games: A change in he use
o game cha ac e is ics. Games Cul . 5, 177–198. doi: 10.1177/1555412009354727
Ch is enson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., and Wylie, C. (eds.) (2012). Handbook o
Resea ch on S uden Engagemen . Vol. 840. New Yo k, NY: Sp inge .
Coleman, J. S. (1971). “Lea ning h ough games,” in S udy o Games. eds. E.
A edon and B. Su on-Smi h (New Yo k: John Wiley & Sons), 322–329.
C aw o d, C. (1984). The A o Compu e Game Design. Be keley, Cali o nia:
Osbo ne/McG aw-Hill.
Cu is, H. S. (1915). Educa ion Th ough Play. New Yo k: Macmillan.
De G o e, F., B eue , J., Chen, V. H. H., Quan , T., Rabind a, R., and Van
Looy, J. (2017). Valida ing he digi al games mo i a ion scale o compa a i e
esea ch be ween coun ies. Commun. Res. Rep. 34, 37–47. doi:
10.1080/08824096.2016.1250070
Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (1991). “A mo i a ional app oach o sel : in eg a ion
in pe sonali y” in Neb aska Symposium on Mo i a ion: Pe spec i es on Mo i a ion
38. ed. R. Diens bie (Lincoln: Uni e si y o Neb aska P ess), 237–288.
Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (2012). “Mo i a ion, pe sonali y, and de elopmen
wi hin embedded social con ex s: An o e iew o sel -de e mina ion heo y”
in The Ox o d Handbook o Human Mo i a ion. ed. R. M. Ryan (New Yo k:
Ox o d Uni e si y P ess), 85–107.
Deme o ics, Z., U bán, R., Nagygyö gy, K., Fa kas, J., Zilahy, D., Me ó, B.,
e al. (2011). Why do youplay? The de elopmen o he mo i es o online
gaming ques ionnai e (MOGQ). Beha . Res. Me hods 43, 814–825. doi:
10.3758/s13428-011-0091-y
De e ding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., and Nacke, L. (2011). “F om game design
elemen s o game ulness: de ining gami ica ion,” in P oceedings o MindT ek’11;
Sep embe 28–30, 2011, Tampe e, Finland.
Di Paolo, E. A., Rohde, M., and De Jaeghe , H. (2010). “Ho izons o he
enac i e mind: alues, social in e ac ion, and play,” in Enac ion Towa d a
New Pa adigm o Cogni i e Science. eds. J. S ewa , O. Gapenne and E. A.
Paolo (Camb idge, MA: The MIT P ess), 33–87.
Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 20 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
Di Paolo, E., and Thompson, E. A. (2014). The enac i e app oach. In The
Rou ledge handbook o embodied cogni ion, ed. L. Shapi o (New Yo k:
Rou ledge), 68–76.
Dise h, Å., Pallesen, S., B unbo g, G. S., and La sen, S. (2010). Academic
achie emen among i s semes e unde g adua e psychology s uden s: he
ole o cou se expe ience, e o , mo i es and lea ning s a egies. High. Educ.
59, 335–352. doi: 10.1007/s10734-009-9251-8
DiS e ano, C., Min, Z., and Mînd ilã, D. (2009). Unde s anding and using
ac o sco es: conside a ions o he applied esea che . P ac . Assess. Res.
E al. 14, 1–11. doi: 10.7275/da8 -4g52
Eccles, J., and Wang, M.-T. (2012). “Pa Icommen a y: so wha is s uden engagemen
anyway?” in Handbook o Resea ch on S uden Engagemen . eds. S. L. Ch is enson
and A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie (New Yo k: Sp inge ), 133–145.
Ellio , A. J., and Th ash, T. (2001). Achie emen goals and he hie a chical
model o achie emen mo i a ion. Educ. Psychol. Re . 13, 139–156. doi:
10.1023/A:1009057102306
Faiella, F., and Riccia di, M. (2015). Gami ica ion and lea ning: a e iew o
issues and esea ch. J. Lea n. Knowledge Soc. 11, 13–21. doi:
10.20368/1971-8829/1072
F oese, T., and S ewa , J. (2012). Enac i e cogni i e science and biology o
cogni ion: A esponse o Humbe o Ma u ana. Cybe ne ics Hum. Knowing
19, 61–74.
Gee, J. P. (2003). Wha Video Games Ha e o Teach us Abou Lea ning and
Li e acy. Basings oke: Palg a e Macmillan.
Gibson, J. J. (1977). “The heo y o a o dances,” in Pe cei ing, Ac ing, and
Knowing: Towa ds an Ecological Psychology. eds. R. Shaw and J. B ands o h
(Hillsdale, NJ: Law ence E lbaum associa es), 67–82.
Go man, E. (1959). The P esen a ion o Sel in E e yday Li e. New Yo k:
Ancho Books.
Go man, E. (1961). Encoun e s. Two S udies in he Sociology o In e ac ion.
Mans ield Cen e, CT: Ma ino Publishing.
Gollwi ze , P. M., and Oe ingen, G. (2012). “Goal a ainmen ” in The Ox o d
Handbook o Human Mo i a ion. ed. R. M. Ryan (New Yo k: Ox o d Uni e si y
P ess), 208–231.
G oos, K. (1908). The Play o Man. New Yo k, London: D. Apple on and Company.
Hai , J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., and Ande son, R. E. (2010). Mul i a ia e
Da a Analysis. New Je sey: Pea son Educa ion.
Hama i, J., Koi is o, J., and Pakkanen, T. (2014). “Do pe suasi e echnologies
pe suade? a e iew o empi ical s udies,” in Pe suasi e Technology: 9 h
In e na ional Con e ence (LNCS 8462), PERSUASIVE 2014; May 21–23, 2014,
Padua, I aly.
Hama i, J., She no , D. J., Rowe, E., Colle , B., Asbell-Cla ke, J., and Edwa ds, T.
(2016). Challenging games help s uden s lea n: An empi ical s udy on
engagemen , low and imme sion in game-based lea ning. Compu . Hum.
Beha . 54, 170–179. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045
Henson, R. K., and Robe s, J. K. (2006). Use o explo a o y ac o analysis
in published esea ch: common e o s and some commen on imp o ed
p ac ice. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 66, 393–416. doi: 10.1177/0013164405282485
Higgins, E. T. (2008). Cul u e and pe sonali y: a iabili y ac oss uni e sal mo i es
as he missing link. Soc. Pe sonal. Psychol. Compass 2, 608–634. doi: 10.1111/j.
1751-9004.2007.00075.x
Högbe g, J., Hama i, J., and Wäs lund, E. (2019). Game ul expe ience ques ionnai e
(GAMEFULQUEST): an ins umen o measu ing he pe cei ed game ulness
o sys em use. Use Model. Use Adap. In e . 29, 619–660. doi: 10.1007/
s11257-019-09223-w
Huizinga, J. (1949). Homo Ludens: A S udy o he Play-Elemen in Cul u e.
Uni ed Kingdom: Rou ledge.
Janosz, M. (2012). “Pa IV commen a y: ou comes o engagemen and engagemen
as an ou come: Some consensus, di e gences, and unanswe ed ques ions,”
in Handbook o Resea ch on S uden Engagemen . eds. S. L. Ch is enson, A. L.
Reschly and C. Wylie (New Yo k: Sp inge ), 695–703.
Kahn, A. S., Shen, C., Lu, L., Ra an, R. A., Coa y, S., Hou, J., e al. (2015).
The T ojan playe ypology: A c oss-gen e, c oss-cul u al, beha io ally alida ed
scale o ideo game play mo i a ions. Compu . Hum. Beha . 49, 354–361.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.018
Ka hulah i, V.-M. (2015). De ining he ideogame. Game S u. 15
Kembe , D., Leung, D. Y. P., Jones, A., Loke, A. Y., McKay, J., Sinclai , K.,
e al. (2000). De elopmen o a ques ionnai e o measu e he le el o e lec i e
hinking. Assess. E al. High. Educ. 25, 381–395. doi: 10.1080/713611442
Kinnunen, J., Taskinen, K., and Mäy ä, F. (2020). Pelaajaba ome i 2020: Pelaamis a
ko onan aikaan. Tampe een yliopis o: Tampe e.
Kowe , R., and Quand , T. (2016). The Video Game Deba e. Un a elling he
Physical, Social, and Psychological E ec s o Video Games. New Yo k:
Rou ledge.
K a , I. (1971). “Pedagogical u ili y in un and games?” in S udy o Games.
eds. E. A edon and B. Su on-Smi h (New Yo k: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.),
326–329.
Lam, S. F., Jime son, S., Wong, B., Kikas, E., Shin, H., Veiga, F. H., e al.
(2014). Unde s anding and measu ing s uden engagemen in school: he
esul s o an in e na ional s udy om 12 coun ies. Sch. Psychol. Q. 29,
213–232. doi: 10.1037/spq0000057
Lam, S. F., and Law, Y. K. (2007). The oles o ins uc ional p ac ices and
mo i a ion in w i ing pe o mance. J. Exp. Educ. 75, 145–164. doi: 10.3200/
JEXE.75.2.145-164
Lam, S. F., Pak, T. S., and Ma, W. Y. K. (2007). “Mo i a ing ins uc ional
con ex s in en o y” in Issues in he Psychology o Mo i a ion. ed. P. R. Zelick
(Hauppauge, NJ: No a Science), 119–136.
Leino, O. T. (2010). Emo ions in Play on he Cons i u ion o Emo ion in Soli a y
Compu e Game Play. (Copenhagen, Denma k: IT Uni e si y o Copenhagen.
Liebe man, J. N. (1977). Play ulness: I s Rela ionship o Imagina ion and C ea i i y.
New Yo k: Academic P ess.
Mace, W. M. (1977). “James J. Gibson's s a egy o pe cei ing: ask no wha 's
inside you head, bu wha 's you head inside o ,” in Pe cei ing, Ac ing, and
Knowing: Towa ds an Ecological Psychology. eds. R. Shaw and J. B ands o h
(Hillsdale, NJ: Law ence E lbaum Associa es), 43–65.
Ma in, A. J. (2012). “Pa II commen a y: mo i a ion and engagemen : concep ual,
ope a ional, and empi ical cla i y,” in Handbook o Resea ch on S uden
Engagemen . eds. S. L. Ch is enson, A. L. Reschly and C. Wylie (New Yo k:
Sp inge ), 303–311.
Masek, L., and S en os, J. (2021). The meaning o play ulness: A e iew o
he con empo a y de ini ions o he concep ac oss disciplines. J. Comp.
Game Cul u e 12, 13–37.
Ma sunaga, M. (2010). How o ac o -analyze you da a igh : Do’s, Don’ s,
and how- o’s. In . J. Psychol. Res. 3, 97–110. doi: 10.21500/20112084.854
Maye , R. E. (2019). Compu e games in educa ion. Annu. Re . Psychol. 70,
531–549. doi: 10.1146/annu e -psych-010418-102744
McClelland, D. C., Koes ne , R., and Weinbe ge , J. (1989). How do sel -a ibu ed
and implici mo i es di e ? Psychol. Re . 96, 690–702. doi:
10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.690
Mead, G. H. (2015). Mind, Sel & Socie y. The De ini i e Edi ion. Chicago and
London: The Uni e si y o Chicago P ess.
Noë, A. (2009). Ou o ou Heads: Why you a e No you B ain, and O he
Lessons om he Biology o Consciousness. Uni ed Kingdom: Macmillan.
Phan, M. H., Keeble , J. R., and Chapa o, B. S. (2016). The de elopmen and
alida ion o he game use expe ience sa is ac ion scale (GUESS). Hum.
Fac o s 58, 1217–1247. doi: 10.1177/0018720816669646
Piage , J. (1952). Play, D eams and Imi a ion in Childhood. New Yo k: W. W.
No on & Company, Inc.
P ensky, M. (2001). Digi al Game Based Lea ning. New Yo k: McG aw-Hill.
P oye , R. T. (2013). The well-being o play ul adul s: adul play ulness, subjec i e
well-being, physical well-being, and he pu sui o enjoyable ac i i ies. Eu .
J. Hum. Res. 1, 84–98. doi: 10.7592/EJHR2013.1.1.p oye
P zybylski, A., Rigby, C. S., and Ryan, R. M. (2010). A mo i a ional model
o ideo game engagemen . Re . Gen. Psychol. 14, 154–166. doi: 10.1037/
a0019440
Reiss, S. (2004). Mul i ace ed na u e o in insic mo i a ion: The heo y o 16
basic desi es. Re . Gen. Psychol. 8, 179–193. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.8.3.179
Rheinbe g, F., and Engese , S. (2018). “In insic mo i a ion and low,” in
Mo i a ion and Ac ion. 3 d Edn. eds. J. Heckhausen and H. Heckhausen
(New Yo k: Rou ledge), 579–622.
Ryan, R., and Deci, L. (2000). In insic and ex insic mo i a ions: classic
de ini ions and new di ec ions. Con emp. Educ. Psychol. 25, 54–67. doi:
10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S., and P zybylski, A. (2006). The mo i a ional pull o
ideo games: A sel -de e mina ion heo y app oach. Mo i . Emo . 30, 344–360.
doi: 10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8
Saile , M., and Homne , L. (2020). The gami ica ion o lea ning: A me a-analysis.
Educ. Psychol. Re . 32, 77–112. doi: 10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w

Vahlo e al. Game ul Mo i a ion o Au onomous Lea ne s
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 21 Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 13 | A icle 825840
Sansone, C., and Ha ackiewicz, J. M. (2000). In insic and Ex insic Mo i a ion.
San Diego: Academic P ess.
Sche e , D., and Heckhausen, H. (2018). “T ai heo ies o mo i a ion,” in
Mo i a ion and Ac ion. 3 d Edn. eds. J. Heckhausen and H. Heckhausen
(New Yo k: Rou ledge), 67–112.
Schul heiss, O. C., and Wi h, M. M. (2018). “Biopsychological aspec s o
mo i a ion.” in Mo i a ion and Ac ion. 3 d Edn. eds. J. Heckhausen and
H. Heckhausen (New Yo k: Rou ledge), 407–451.
Schunk, D. H., and Ushe , E. L. (2012). “Social cogni i e heo y and mo i a ion”
in The Ox o d Handbook o Human Mo i a ion. ed. R. M. Ryan (New Yo k:
Ox o d Uni e si y P ess), 13–27.
She y, J. L., Lucas, K., G eenbe g, B. S., and Lachlan, K. (2006). “Video game
uses and g a i ica ions as p edic o s o use and game p e e ence,” in Playing
Video Games. Mo i es, Responses, and Consequences. eds. P. Vo de e and
J. B yan (New Yo k: Rou ledge, Taylo & F ancis G oup), 213–224.
Sica , M. (2014). Play Ma e s. Camb idge, MA, London: MIT P ess.
Sina a, G. M., Heddy, B. C., and Lomba di, D. (2015). The challenges o
de ining and measu ing s uden engagemen in science. Educ. Psychol. 50,
1–13. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924
Skinne , E. A., and Belmon , M. J. (1993). Mo i a ion in he class oom: ecip ocal
e ec s o eache beha io and s uden engagemen ac oss he school yea .
J. Educ. Psychol. 85, 571–581. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571
Skinne , E. A., and Pi ze , J. R. (2012). “De elopmen al dynamics o s uden
engagemen , coping, and e e yday esilience,” in Handbook o Resea ch on
S uden Engagemen . eds. S. L. Ch is enson, A. L. Reschly and C. Wylie
(New Yo k: Sp inge ), 21–44.
Smi h, P. K. (2005). “Play: ypes and unc ions in human de elopmen ,” in O igins
o he Social Mind: E olu iona y Psychology and Child De elopmen . eds. B.
J. Ellis and D. F. Bjo klund (New Yo k, London: Guil o d P ess), 271–291.
Squi e, K. (2003). Video games in educa ion. In . J. In . Games 2, 49–62.
S en os, J. (2014). In de ence o a magic ci cle: he social, men al and cul u al
bounda ies o play. T ans. Digi al Games Res. Assoc. 1, 147–185. doi: 10.26503/
odig a. 1i2.10
Suh, A., Wagne , C., and Liu, L. (2018). Enhancing use engagemen h ough
gami ica ion. J. Compu . In . Sys . 58, 204–213. doi: 10.1080/08874417.2016.1229143
Sui s, B. (1978). The G asshoppe . Games, Li e and U opia. Pe e bo ough:
B oad iew P ess.
Su on-Smi h, B. (1983). “Piage , play, and cogni ion, e isi ed” in The Rela ionship
Be ween Social and Cogni i e De elopmen . ed. W. F. O e on (Hillsdale:
Law ence E lbaum Associa es), 229–249.
Su on-Smi h, B. (2009). The Ambigui y o Play. Camb idge and London: Ha a d
Uni e si y P ess.
Thompson, E. (2007). Mind in Li e. Biology, Phenomenology, and he Sciences
o Mind. Camb idge: The Belknap P ess o Ha a d Uni e si y P ess.
Thompson, E., and S aple on, M. (2009). Making sense o sense-making:
e lec ions on enac i e and ex ended mind heo ies. Topoi 28, 23–30. doi:
10.1007/s11245-008-9043-2
Th ash, T. M., Ma uskin, L. A., and Ma in, C. C. (2012). “Implici -explici
mo i e cong uence” in The Ox o d Handbook o Human Mo i a ion. ed. R.
M. Ryan (New Yo k: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess), 141–156.
Tuu i, K., Pa iainen, J., and Pi honen, A. (2017). Who con ols who? Embodied
con ol wi hin human- echnology cho eog aphies. In e ac . Compu . 29,
494–511. doi: 10.1093/iwc/iww040
Vahlo, J. (2017). An enac i e accoun o he au onomy o ideogame gameplay.
Game S u. 17
Vahlo, J., and Hama i, J. (2019). “Fi e- ac o in en o y o in insic mo i a ions
o gameplay (IMG),” in P oceedings o he 52nd Hawaii In e na ional Con e ence
on Sys em Sciences, 2476–2485, Hawaii, Uni ed S a es. Janua y 7–11, 2019.
Vahlo, J., Smed, J., and Koponen, A. (2018). Valida ing gameplay ac i i y
in en o y (GAIN) o modeling playe p o iles. Use Model. Use Adap.
In e . 28, 425–453. doi: 10.1007/s11257-018-9212-y
Va ela, F. J., Thompson, E., and Rosch, E. (1992). The Embodied Mind: Cogni i e
Science and Human Expe ience. Cumbe land: MIT P ess.
Vi anen, T. E., Le kkanen, M. K., Poikkeus, A. M., and Kuo elah i, M. (2014).
S uden beha io al engagemen as a media o be ween eache , amily, and
pee suppo and school uancy. Lea n. Indi id. Di e . 36, 201–206. doi:
10.1016/j.lindi .2014.09.001
Vygo sky, L. S. (2004). Imagina ion and c ea i i y in childhood. J. Russ. Eas
Eu . Psychol. 42, 7–97. doi: 10.2753/RPO1061-0405280184
Webe , A., and Va ela, F. J. (2002). Li e a e Kan : na u al pu poses and he
Au opoie ic ounda ions o biological indi iduali y. Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci.
1, 97–125. doi: 10.1023/A:1020368120174
Whi on, N., and Moseley, A. (2014). Decons uc ing engagemen : e hinking
in ol emen in lea ning. Simul. Gaming 45, 433–449. doi:
10.1177/1046878114554755
Wou e s, P., and Van Oos endo p, H. (2017). O e iew o Ins uc ional Techniques
o Facili a e Lea ning and Mo i a ion o Se ious Games. In Ins uc ional
Techniques o Facili a e Lea ning and Mo i a ion o Se ious Games (Cham,
Swi ze land: Sp inge In e na ional Publishing), 1–16.
Yee, N. (2006). Mo i a ions o play in online games. J. Cybe Psychol. Beha .
9, 772–775. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9.772
Yee, N., Ducheneau , N., and Nelson, L. (2012). “Online gaming mo i a ion
scale.” in CHI '12: P oceedings o he SIGCHI Con e ence on Human Fac o s
in Compu ing Sys ems, May 5–10, 2012, Aus in, Uni ed S a es.
Zainuddin, Z., Chu, S. K. W., Shujaha , M., and Pe e a, C. J. (2020). The
impac o gami ica ion on lea ning and ins uc ion: A sys ema ic e iew o
empi ical e idence. Educ. Res. Re . 30:100326. doi: 10.1016/j.edu e .2020.100326
Zepke, N., and Leach, L. (2010). Imp o ing s uden engagemen : en p oposals
o ac ion. Ac . Lea n. High. Educ. 11, 167–177. doi: 10.1177/1469787410379680
Con lic o In e es : The au ho s decla e ha he esea ch was conduc ed in
he absence o any comme cial o inancial ela ionships ha could becons ued
as a po en ial con lic o in e es .
Publishe ’s No e: All claims exp essed in his a icle a e solely hose o he
au ho s and do no necessa ily ep esen hose o hei a ilia ed o ganiza ions,
o hose o he publishe , he edi o s and he e iewe s. Any p oduc ha may
be e alua ed in his a icle, o claim ha may be made by i s manu ac u e , is
no gua an eed o endo sed by he publishe .
Copy igh © 2022 Vahlo, Tuu i and Välisalo. This is an open-access a icle dis ibu ed
unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License (CC BY). The use,
dis ibu ion o ep oduc ion in o he o ums is pe mi ed, p o ided he o iginal
au ho (s) and he copy igh owne (s) a e c edi ed and ha he o iginal publica ion
in his jou nal is ci ed, in acco dance wi h accep ed academic p ac ice. No use,
dis ibu ion o ep oduc ion is pe mi ed which does no comply wi h hese e ms.