Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences

Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences

Effects of Video Sensing in Scratch-Based Educational Games on Learning and Perceived Juiciness: An Educational Intervention

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Mohsen Rahim Beygi 1
Yousef Mahdavinasab 2
Masoumeh Sadat Abtahi 3
Mahdi Ashoori 4
1 Department of Educational Studies and Curriculum Planning, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Educational Technology, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
3 Department of Educational Studies and Curriculum Development, SR.C., Islamic Azad University, City, Iran
4 Department of Educational Sciences, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran
10.30476/ijvlms.2026.110371.1372
Abstract
Background: Video sensing is a feature in Scratch 3.0 that enables the webcam to function as a sensor for detecting motion and color. This study examined whether incorporating video sensing into Scratch-based educational games could improve perceived juiciness and interaction among elementary school students.
Methods: A randomized pretest–posttest controlled design was conducted with 54 second-grade students recruited through convenience sampling in Ilam, Iran, between September 2024 and January 2025. Participants were randomly assigned to either a video-sensing intervention group or a control group, with 27 students in each group. Both groups used the same Scratch-based educational game during six 20-minute sessions; however, only students in the intervention group interacted with the game through video sensing. Mathematics achievement was assessed using a researcher-developed 20-item test, while perceived juiciness was measured using a researcher-developed questionnaire. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics, Version 22, with Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA), paired- and independent-samples t-tests, and Pearson’s correlation coefficient.
Results: Mathematics achievement in the video-sensing group increased markedly from pretest (M = 11.37, SD = 3.07) to posttest (M = 16.67, SD = 1.36), t(26) = 10.77, p < 0.001. The control group also demonstrated a statistically significant, although smaller, improvement from pretest (M = 11.89, SD = 3.72) to posttest (M = 13.56, SD = 2.52), t(26) = 3.24, p = 0.003. After controlling for baseline mathematics achievement, posttest scores were significantly higher in the video-sensing group than in the control group, F(1, 51) = 60.21, p < 0.001, ηp² = .541. In addition, the video-sensing group reported significantly higher overall perceived-juiciness scores than the control group (M = 3.49, SD = 0.37 vs. M = 2.80, SD = 0.45), t(52) = 6.15, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.67. However, within the video-sensing group, perceived juiciness was not significantly correlated with gains in mathematics achievement, r = −0.17, p = 0.404.
Conclusion: The incorporation of video sensing into Scratch-based educational games improved both mathematics achievement and perceived juiciness. Nevertheless, perceived juiciness was not related to learning gains, indicating that the quality of the gameplay experience and academic improvement may constitute separate outcomes.

Highlights

Mohsen Rahim Beygi (Google Scholar)

Yousef Mahdavinasab (Google Scholar)

Keywords
Computer-Assisted Instruction
Juiciness
Educational Technology
Scratch Programming
Learning
Academic Success
  1. Deterding S, Dixon D, Khaled R, Nacke L. From game design elements to gamefulness: defining “gamification.” In: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments; 2011 Sep 28-30; Tampere, Finland. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2011. p. 9-15. doi: 10.1145/2181037.2181040.
  2. Brull S, Finlayson S. Importance of gamification in increasing learning. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2016;47(8):372-375. doi: 10.3928/00220124-20160715-09. PubMed PMID: 27467313.
  3. Kalogiannakis M, Papadakis S, Zourmpakis AI. Gamification in science education: a systematic review of the literature. Educ Sci. 2021;11(1):22. doi: 10.3390/educsci11010022.
  4. Mahdavinasab Y, Fardaanesh H, Talaa’ee E, Haatami J. A model for designing learning games in elementary schools’ social studies course. J Educ. 2021;37(2):27-48. [In Persian].
  5. Prensky M. “Engage me or enrage me”: what today’s learners demand. EDUCAUSE Rev. 2005;40(5):60-65.
  6. Hung HT. Gamifying the flipped classroom using game-based learning materials. ELT J. 2018;72(3):296-308. doi: 10.1093/elt/ccx055.
  7. Clark RC, Mayer RE. Learning with computer games. In: e-Learning and the science of instruction: proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. 4th ed. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley; 2016. p. 369-90. doi: 10.1002/9781119239086.
  8. Rice JW. The gamification of learning and instruction: game-based methods and strategies for training and education [Book review]. Int J Gaming Comput Mediat Simul. 2012;4(4):81-83. doi: 10.4018/IJGCMS.2012100106.
  9. Qian M, Clark KR. Game-based learning and 21st century skills: a review of recent research. Comput Human Behav. 2016;63:50-58. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023.
  10. Gros B. Digital games in education: the design of games-based learning environments. J Res Technol Educ. 2007;40(1):23-38. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2007.10782494.
  11. Alotaibi MS. Game-based learning in early childhood education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Psychol. 2024;15:1307881. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1307881. PubMed PMID: 38629045; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC11018941.
  12. Giannakos MN. Enjoy and learn with educational games: examining factors affecting learning performance. Comput Educ. 2013;68:429-39. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.06.005.
  13. Vlachopoulos D, Makri A. The effect of games and simulations on higher education: a systematic literature review. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2017;14:22. doi: 10.1186/s41239-017-0062-1.
  14. Rich KM, Yadav A. Applying levels of abstraction to mathematics word problems. TechTrends. 2020;64(3):395-403. doi: 10.1007/s11528-020-00479-3.
  15. Westwood P. The problem with problems: potential difficulties in implementing problem-based learning as the core method in primary school mathematics. Aust J Learn Diffic. 2011;16(1):5-18. doi: 10.1080/19404158.2011.563475.
  16. Ashcraft MH. Math anxiety: personal, educational, and cognitive consequences. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2002;11(5):181-185. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00196.
  17. Barroso C, Ganley CM, McGraw AL, Geer EA, Hart SA, Daucourt MC. A meta-analysis of the relation between math anxiety and math achievement. Psychol Bull. 2021;147(2):134-68. doi: 10.1037/bul0000307. PubMed PMID: 33119346; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8300863.
  18. Wigfield A, Meece JL. Math anxiety in elementary and secondary school students. J Educ Psychol. 1988;80(2):210-216. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.210.
  19. Betz NE. Prevalence, distribution, and correlates of math anxiety in college students. J Couns Psychol. 1978;25(5):441-48. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.25.5.441.
  20. Ramirez G, Shaw ST, Maloney EA. Math anxiety: past research, promising interventions, and a new interpretation framework. Educ Psychol. 2018;53(3):145-64. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2018.1447384.
  21. Abrahamson D, Nathan MJ, Williams-Pierce C, Walkington C, Ottmar ER, Soto H, et al. The future of embodied design for mathematics teaching and learning. Front Educ. 2020;5:147. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2020.00147.
  22. Tran C, Smith B, Buschkuehl M. Support of mathematical thinking through embodied cognition: nondigital and digital approaches. Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2017;2(1):16. doi: 10.1186/s41235-017-0053-8. PubMed PMID: 28280771; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5321706.
  23. Georgiou Y, Ioannou A. Developing, enacting and evaluating a learning experience design for technology-enhanced embodied learning in math classrooms. TechTrends. 2021;65(1):38-50. doi: 10.1007/s11528-020-00543-y.
  24. Hicks K, Dickinson P, Holopainen J, Gerling K. Good game feel: an empirically grounded framework for juicy design. In: Proceedings of DiGRA 2018 Conference: The Game is the Message. 2018 July 25–28; Turin, Italy. Tampere, Finland: Digital Games Research Association; 2018. doi: 10.26503/dl.v2018i1.936.
  25. Kao D. The effects of juiciness in an action RPG. Entertain Comput. 2020;34:100359. doi: 10.1016/j.entcom.2020.100359.
  26. Maloney J, Resnick M, Rusk N, Silverman B, Eastmond E. The Scratch programming language and environment. ACM Trans Comput Educ. 2010;10(4):16:1-16:15. doi: 10.1145/1868358.1868363.
  27. Resnick M, Silverman B. Some reflections on designing construction kits for kids. In: Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Interaction Design and Children; 2005 Jun 8-10; Boulder, CO. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2005. p. 117-22. doi: 10.1145/1109540.1109556.
  28. Suriyaarachchi H, Denny P, Nanayakkara S. Scratch and Sense: using real-time sensor data to motivate students learning Scratch. In: Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Vol. 1. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2022. p. 983-89. doi: 10.1145/3478431.3499316.
  29. Abrahamson D, Bakker A. Making sense of movement in embodied design for mathematics learning. Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2016;1(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s41235-016-0034-3. PubMed PMID: 28180183; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5256464.
  30. Söderström S, Palm T. Feedback in mathematics education research: a systematic literature review. Res Math Educ. 2026;28(1):163-184. doi: 10.1080/14794802.2024.2401488.
  31. Cafaro F, Roberts J. Data through movement: designing embodied human-data interaction for informal learning. Cham: Springer; 2022. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-02610-2.
  32. Atanasov S. Juiciness: exploring and designing around experience of feedback in video games [Master’s Thesis]. Malmö: Malmö University; 2013.
  33. Erşen ZB, Ergül E. Trends of game-based learning in mathematics education: a systematic review. Int J Contemp Educ Res. 2022;9(3):603-23. doi: 10.33200/ijcer.1109501.
  34. Turgut S, Doğan Temur Ö. The effect of game-assisted mathematics education on academic achievement in Turkey: a meta-analysis study. Int Electron J Elem Educ. 2017;10(2):195-206. doi: 10.26822/iejee.2017236115.
  35. IJsselsteijn WA, de Kort YAW, Poels K. The Game Experience Questionnaire. Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit Eindhoven; 2013.
  36. Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI). Center for Self-Determination Theory. [cited 2025 Nov 4]. Available from: https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/intrinsic-motivation-inventory/
  37. Schrepp M, Hinderks A, Thomaschewski J. Applying the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) in different evaluation scenarios. In: Marcus A, editor. Design, user experience, and usability: theories, methods, and tools for designing the user experience. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 8517. Cham: Springer; 2014. p. 383-92. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-07668-3_37.
  38. Connolly TM, Boyle EA, MacArthur E, Hainey T, Boyle JM. A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Comput Educ. 2012;59(2):661-86. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.004.
  39. Wouters P, van Nimwegen C, van Oostendorp H, van der Spek ED. A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. J Educ Psychol. 2013;105(2):249-65. doi: 10.1037/a0031311.
  40. Ren J, Xu W, Liu Z. The impact of educational games on learning outcomes: evidence from a meta-analysis. Int J Game Based Learn. 2024;14(1):1-25. doi: 10.4018/IJGBL.336478.
  41. Yu Z, Gao M, Wang L. The effect of educational games on learning outcomes, student motivation, engagement and satisfaction. J Educ Comput Res. 2021;59(3):522-46. doi: 10.1177/0735633120969214.
  42. Lindgren R, Tscholl M, Wang S, Johnson E. Enhancing learning and engagement through embodied interaction within a mixed reality simulation. Comput Educ. 2016;95:174-87. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.001.
  43. Lee WJ, Huang CW, Wu CJ, Huang ST, Chen GD. The effects of using embodied interactions to improve learning performance. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies; 2012 Jul 4-6; Rome, Italy. IEEE; 2012. p. 557-59. doi: 10.1109/ICALT.2012.104.
  44. Malinverni L, Silva BL, Parés N. Impact of embodied interaction on learning processes: design and analysis of an educational application based on physical activity. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2012. p. 60-69. doi: 10.1145/2307096.2307104.
  45. Lei H, Wang C, Chiu MM, Chen S. Do educational games affect students’ achievement emotions? Evidence from a meta-analysis. J Comput Assist Learn. 2022;38(4):946-59. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12664.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 01 June 2026

  • Receive Date 28 December 2025
  • Revise Date 26 April 2026
  • Accept Date 12 May 2026
  • Publish Date 01 June 2026