Analyzing the Bibliometric Trends in Gamification Research Using the Bibliometrix R-Tool

Abstract

This study presents a bibliometric analysis of research papers in the field of gamification. With the use of three different databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science), we analyzed various types of studies in this field using the statistical program package R. After removing possible duplicates, we analyzed a dataset consisting of 18,389 articles regarding gamification research. The results of our study present a detailed view of the gamification landscape, showing the current trends, collaborations, and research interests. Key themes of gamification research include serious games, motivation, and design regarding its multidisciplinary nature. The results also show that there is a need for continued collaboration across disciplines and regions to address complex challenges. Based on the results, valuable insights could be provided for scholars, practitioners, and policymakers who could be interested in this dynamic and multidisciplinary field. This bibliometric analysis provides a deeper understanding of the current state of gamification studies.

1. Introduction

Gamification can be defined as using game design elements in non-game contexts. While the idea of gamification was tackled in the past by creating enjoyable user interfaces [1, 2], it did not gain popularity until the 2010s [3]. The rise of cheap sensors (e.g., Microsoft Kinect) played a great role in increasing the popularity of gamification [4]. It even surpassed the boundaries of entertainment and emerged as a powerful strategy tool with applications in different areas. Gamification is now a key player in education, business, health care, and marketing. By applying game mechanics, rules, reward systems, and interactive elements, gamification takes advantage of motivating users [5]. Gamification also enhances learning experiences and employee productivity while creating innovative solutions to challenges. The main purpose of gamification is to push the user’s behavior in a positive direction. In most cases it does that by forming a habit loop: elements of the environment trigger users to do certain actions, then those actions are rewarded. To motivate users there are extrinsic and intrinsic motivations. Rewards and penalties are extrinsic, and relatedness, autonomy, mastery, and purpose (RAMP) are intrinsic. These factors are important to understand to know what gamification is.

In this paper, we will explore the various applications of gamification by showing its transformative influence in various fields of research. For this goal, we will investigate the research trends regarding it using bibliometric analysis. Before conducting the investigation, however, we will present a short literature review regarding the state of gamification in various areas. Section 1.1 shows a few examples of gamification in education; Section 1.2 details the use of gamification in everyday life; Section 1.3 presents a few examples of gamification in marketing; and Section 1.4 shows a few examples of gamification in health care and rehabilitation. Our research questions will be presented in Section 1.5.

1.1 Education

Gamification has found significant applications in the field of education, enhancing engagement, motivation, and learning. According to Rahn, the significance of engagement within educational contexts depends on the nature of the simulation and the educational setting. He proposes that engagement becomes apparent when there is a sense of competitive team spirit, as well as active discussion and debate among team members [6]. Furthermore, the level of engagement is enhanced when students are provided with clear objectives, demanding assignments, an authentic and captivating narrative, a degree of novelty, and a diverse range of intriguing characters and roles.

Software exists as well that can gamify education. One of the most known examples is “Kahoot!” [7]. Kahoot! is a platform available on desktop and mobile that allows teachers to create quizzes, discussions, and surveys in a competitive environment. It focuses on active participation and reinforces learning with a quick feedback system. Although this tool is a computer and mobile-based application, it is mostly used in the classroom, where people are present.

In addition to “Kahoot!,” another prominent example of gamification in education is Duolingo [8]. Unlike classroom-centered platforms, Duolingo is designed for independent, solitary learning. This application’s purpose is to make language learning easier and more enjoyable by making it an everyday habit. It introduces short learning blocks with little new information and teaches language patterns with repetitive exercises. Users can earn points, unlock levels, and compete with friends while completing language exercises.

1.2 Everyday use

While educational gamification apps like Kahoot! and Duolingo have proven to be effective in enhancing learning experiences, the gamification trend extends beyond the classroom, transitioning from educational tools to those integrated into daily life.

For everyday use, several gamification apps can make various activities easier to complete. To enhance productivity and help users with ADHD, an application called Habitica can be very helpful [9]. It incorporates retro role-playing game (RPG) elements, hence making household chores, goals, and routines easier as well as more enjoyable. The completion of tasks within the application rewards users with gold, experience points, and items that can be used in the game. Additionally, it incorporates a leveling system and features collectible items to further enhance user involvement. Habitica also encourages users to cooperate with their friends.

GPS services and applications have become an integral part of everyday life, serving as essential tools for travel and navigation. Waze is primarily a navigation application, and it incorporates gamification elements by allowing users to earn points, compete for achievements and badges, and participate in community challenges based on their driving behavior [10]. It also encourages users to submit travel times and route details.

The primary goal of Waze is to provide users with real-time traffic information. Although other apps encourage people to explore their surroundings not simply just travel through areas. Pokémon GO is an augmented reality game, but at the same time, it encourages players to go outside [11, 12]. For example, one aspect of the game is to hatch eggs based on walked kilometers.

Another aspect of our daily lives is paying for something. Throughout the years, mobile payment has become easier. One of the mobile payment services is Google Pay, which incorporated gamification elements in India during the 2019 Diwali season [13, 14]. Participants needed to gather at least five different types of stamps. Successfully collecting them rewarded the user 251 INR (around 3 USD), along with the opportunity to win 1 INR Lakh (around 1207 USD). These stamps could be collected through various actions in the application: spending a certain amount, requesting a friend for a stamp, sharing a stamp, and many more actions.

1.3 Marketing

In marketing, consumer engagement is very important as well as brand loyalty. To achieve this, gamification emerged as a powerful tool and transformed the way businesses interact with their audience. With collectible badges, points, and rewards, companies motivate people to consume and use their products more frequently. Fast food restaurants around the world, such as McDonald’s, KFC, and Burger King have similar applications, where users can earn points or rewards for making purchases through them [15].

Gamification in marketing focuses on loyalty programs, interactive quizzes, and surveys. Mobile applications with rewards, referral programs, and social media challenges are also observable. While real-life gamification is rare in marketing, “Decoded,” Jay-Z’s memoir book employed an innovative marketing campaign that included gamification [16]. The campaign featured a digital scavenger hunt where pages of the book were hidden in various locations. By doing so, this campaign challenged fans to decode the clues and discover the hidden content. The scavenger hunt had both online and offline components. The gamification aspect added an element of excitement and exploration to the traditional book launch.

Marketing extends widely across all fields and industries, encompassing hospitality as well. One example of a marketing strategy that includes gamification is the Marriott Bonvoy, which is the loyalty program of the Marriott Hotels chain [17]. It applies a point-based system that rewards members for their interactions with the hotel chain. Interactions not only include hotel stays but also dining in restaurants or interacting with the brand through social media. By participating in the program, guests can have tiered memberships, and consequently, they can unlock exclusive perks, room upgrades, and access to special events.

Mariott Hotels also launched a game application for Facebook, a virtual simulation that allowed players to experience various aspects of running a Marriott hotel as the hotel manager [18]. The game’s goal was to promote careers in hospitality and to attract the workforce to the Marriott Hotels.

1.4 Health care and rehabilitation

In health care and rehabilitation, gamification apps have a transformative approach to patient engagement and recovery. The applications in health care can be categorized mainly into four categories: physical fitness, medication, and chronic condition management; solutions aimed at children; physical therapy; and rehabilitation. Gamification can also encourage people to engage in physical exercise and make fitness routines more enjoyable, at the same time can also help medical students, residents, and staff to learn [19, 20].

A validated laparoscopic serious game, Underground was developed to enhance laparoscopic skills training [21]. The game utilizes a virtual environment to simulate laparoscopic procedures, allowing users to practice and refine their skills in a risk-free setting. Underground incorporates game elements to make the learning and exercising process more enjoyable. There is also a storyline besides challenges, scenarios, and rewards creating an immersive environment. Underground seeks to overcome the barriers that may limit residents’ voluntary engagement in training activities.

In the case of people living with diseases and health problems, gamification can make everyday life easier and can effectively help them learn new habits to maintain their health regardless of their condition. Especially children need to learn at a young age how to live and protect their health with their conditions. One such serious game is called El Mundo de Celia [22]. The game aims to teach children with celiac disease to what is the disease they have, what are the symptoms, and what can they eat. The main character, Celia’s objective is to maintain her health by overcoming challenges, with each successful task rewarded with points and potential life restoration. The gameplay involves interactive elements and audiovisual aids, with characters providing instructions and reinforcement messages. However, there are numerous other serious games similar to this one, which can assist children in adopting healthy dietary habits and adapting to their condition.

At the same time, gamification can help with rehabilitation. While the patient focuses on a task, they experience less pain, and they are much more willing to do the exercises. Articares developed a portable arm rehabilitation robot called H-Man used for serious games [23]. The robot consists of a modular handle and a display. It autonomously adjusts to the user’s performance, continually assessing movements and modifying exercise complexity to optimize learning and offer real-time feedback on recovery progress. H-Man includes a range of games, such as exploring a virtual world, flying drones, matching hidden objects, and fishing. Similarly, the use of cheap sensors with the help of applications using gamification elements can assist in the physical rehabilitation of patients, even at their homes: according to studies in the literature, multiple algorithms were developed for this goal, mainly to maintain the motivations of patients during the rehabilitation process [24, 25].

1.5 Research questions

Throughout our introduction, we explored the concept of gamification and its widespread applications across various domains. From educational platforms to navigation apps, marketing, and payment services, gamification has become an integral aspect of numerous fields. By integrating gamification elements into non-gaming contexts, such as points, badges, challenges, and social features, these platforms seek to enhance engagement, motivation, and learning while transforming routine activities into interactive and rewarding experiences. Overall, gamification stands as a potential tool to revolutionize engagement, learning, and behavior change, transforming routine tasks into engaging activities across a spectrum of fields and applications.

As can be observed, however, the application of gamification elements is vast. Therefore, it is critical to understand the use of gamification in scientific studies. In light of the expansive reach of gamification, this study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of its literature by addressing how and when such studies were conducted. To understand this, a bibliometric analysis is needed which is a quantitative method to analyze several aspects of scientific literature [26, 27, 28]. Similarly to the increasing popularity of gamification, the popularity of bibliometric analysis has increased through the years. This method is used to uncover collaboration patterns and emerging trends and to understand how a certain domain is structured in the scientific literature [29, 30, 31]. Thus, with bibliometric analysis, the goal of this chapter is to understand how gamification research is conducted. Therefore, five research questions (RQs) were formed:

• RQ1: How does the trend of gamification research papers change through the years?

• RQ2: Which countries and institutions are prominent in gamification research?

• RQ3: What countries and institutions exhibit the highest levels of collaboration in gamification research?

• RQ4: What are the main themes in such research papers?

• RQ5: What are the most frequently occurring words in gamification studies?

By addressing these five research questions, we can understand the bibliometric trends of gamification studies. With the first research question, we aim to analyze the temporal evolution of gamification literature. By examining the publication trends over time, we can understand patterns of growth and fluctuations in gamification research. Understanding these temporal dynamics provides insights into the evolving interest and attention toward gamification across different periods. With the second research question, we seek to identify the geographical distribution and institutional affiliations contributing to gamification research. By analyzing the origins of published papers, we can determine the global prominence and concentration of research activity in gamification. Moreover, this analysis may reveal potential geographic or institutional clusters of expertise and collaboration networks within the field. In the case of the third research question, the focus is on exploring collaborative patterns among countries and institutions engaged in gamification research. Understanding the dynamics of collaboration can shed light on knowledge exchange, interdisciplinary interactions, and the formation of research networks driving gamification scholarship. With the fourth research question, we aim to identify recurring topics, concepts, and research themes explored in published papers. Through analyzing the abstracts, we can characterize the range of subjects addressed in gamification research. By identifying dominant themes, we can gain insights into the key areas of focus, emerging trends, and research priorities within the field. Lastly, in the case of the fifth research question, we aim to identify the most commonly occurring words, phrases, or terms across the papers. This analysis provides insights into the language and terminology employed by scholars in discussing concepts of gamification.

This chapter is structured as follows. First, the materials and methods are presented in Section 2, focusing on the data collection and analysis aspects of this study. Next, the results of the data analysis are presented in Section 3 of this book chapter. Afterward, the results are discussed in Section 4. Lastly, conclusions are drawn in Section 5.

2. Materials and methods

This section is split into three sections. Section 2.1 presents the data collection process from various scientific databases. Afterward, data analysis is detailed in Section 2.2.

2.1 Data collection

Data collection was conducted on September 3, 2023, using three databases: PubMed Central, Scopus, and Web of Science. The following phrase was used when searching for articles regarding gamification: “gamification” OR “gamify” OR “gamified” OR “game element.” 1808, 15,820, and 9497 articles were found in these three databases, respectively. This means a total of 27,125 articles. The abstracts and keywords of these articles were downloaded via the Web sites of these databases. The files of each database were imported into the statistical program package R with the convert2df function found in the bibliometrix package [32]. Besides importing, this function also creates bibliographic data frames in R.

R is a free and open-source programming language and software environment specifically designed for statistical computing and graphics. It is widely used by statisticians, data scientists, researchers, and analysts for data analysis, visualization, and modeling tasks. It offers powerful tools for manipulating data, including functions for data cleaning, transformation, subsetting, merging, and reshaping, among others. Its functionality can be extended through the use of other packages, which are collections of R functions, data, and documentation. There are thousands of packages available for various purposes. Such a package is the aforementioned bibliometrix package that was used for this research. Originally, it was a console application, but it was given a graphical user interface with the help of RStudio. This graphical user interface is shown in Figure 1. Overall, R is a versatile tool used for data analysis, and it is also widely used in scientific research as well as in bibliometric analysis [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40].

Figure 1.

Graphical user interface of R studio. Upper left window: This is where the users can write code. Lower left window: the console in which the results are yielded. Upper right window: the used variables (e.g., vectors and matrices) in the current environment. Lower right window: at the moment, the documentation of the used package.

2.2 Data analysis

Firstly, using the previously mentioned convert2df function, three data frames were created, one for each scientific database. Once the data regarding gamification research were downloaded and imported into R, the data preprocessing phase commenced. Preprocessing was necessary before analysis since there could be duplicates in the 27,125 articles. Removing duplicates was done with the mergeDbSources function. With this function, 8736 duplicates were removed from the data frame, resulting in 18,389 articles. To check whether there were still some duplicates in the data frame, the duplicatedMatching function was used with its default values. With them, this function uses the restricted Damerau-Levenshtein distance to find duplicated articles with at least 0.95 minimum relative similarity between their title fields. However, no other duplicates were found in the data frame. Therefore, the previously mentioned data frame of 18,389 articles was used for further investigation.

For the investigation, the biblioshiny function was used. As with the previously mentioned functions, this one can also be found in the bibliometrix package. This function provides an intuitive graphical user interface for investigating bibliographic data. A screenshot of this interface can be seen in Figure 2. This interface can be invoked with the use of the biblioshiny function in R.

Figure 2.

Screenshot of the bibliometrix package. It also provides the general results of the analysis.

As can be seen in Figure 2, the interface of the bibliometrix package is quite intuitive. There are different menus and buttons on its left side, and they simply had to be pressed. By doing so, the package automatically did the data analysis of the imported dataset. Therefore, by using this interface, data summaries and plots can be created with a click of a button. In this chapter, all plots (except for Figure 15) were created with this package. For the creation of Figure 15, the ggplot2 package was used in R. This aforementioned package contains functions for better visualization. For clustering in Sections 3.3 and 3.4, the Walktrap algorithm was used in this package as well.

3. Results

The 18,389 investigated documents consist of the following. Out of these, 7445 are articles, 117 are books, 4968 are conference papers, 554 are conference reviews, 146 are editorial materials, 3315 are proceedings papers, and 727 are reviews. The remaining 1117 are other types of documents such as letters, surveys, corrections, and data papers. 26,634 keywords were used overall in the investigated studies. The average age of the documents was 4.78. Regarding authors, their number in the data frame is 38,614. While the number of co-authors per document is 3.42 on average, only 1849 articles are written by a single author. The percentage of international co-authorship is 11.27%. Regarding citations, their average is 8.40 per document.

To examine these numbers in more detail, this section is split into five sections. Each section presents the results regarding each research question.

3.1 Annual scientific research on gamification

First, to understand the number of gamification papers in the literature, the annual publication information was investigated. The results are illustrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Annual scientific research on gamification between 1925 and 2023.

The first found research on gamification dates back to 1925. After that, little to no research was conducted until the 2000s when gamification started to gain popularity. Starting from 2008, the number of studies focusing on gamification was greater than 10. In 2012, the number of such studies became greater than 100, with 144 research papers. In 2016 the number of gamification studies was larger than 1000, with 1058 publications. Similarly, starting in 2019, the number of studies became greater than 2000 per year. In 2022, the number of published papers in the investigated datasets was 2927. Only 1710 studies were found in 2013, although the year was not yet over when this bibliometric analysis was conducted.

Afterward, the average number of citations was assessed throughout the years. They are shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Average number of citations per year.

As can be observed in Figure 4, the largest average number of citations can be found in 1999 with 11.62 citations. Soon after, this average number started to decline. However, it increased in 2011 to 7.64 per year. Afterward, it slowly decreased again. This is due to the increasing number of publications regarding gamification. As their number increases, the citations become more widespread among them.

3.2 Most relevant countries and institutions in gamification research

The most relevant countries in gamification research were the next to be investigated. Countries and articles were calculated based on the affiliation of the corresponding authors. The results of the analysis can be observed in Figure 5. Also, two abbreviations are present in the figure: multiple country publications (MCP) and single country publications (SCP).

Figure 5.

25 most relevant countries in gamification research.

The largest number of gamification articles are from the USA (1131); however, Spain is a close second (1120). Their rates of inter-country and intra-country publications are also very similar to each other. They are 0.132 and 0.131, respectively. The third largest number of gamification articles belongs to China (607), and its ratio of inter-country and intra-country is 0.211.

Next, the citations of these countries were assessed. The results of the analysis are shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6.

25 most cited countries in gamification research.

Regarding citations, the USA was the most cited country in gamification research with 15,500 citations. The next one was Spain with 8379, and China was the third with 6711 citations. As can be seen in Figures 5 and 6, the first three countries were the same ones in both cases. Afterward, their order changed drastically.

The next step was to assess the average number of citations of countries. The results are shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7.

25 most averagely cited countries in gamification research.

Compared to Figures 5 and 6, the order of countries is completely different when their average number of citations was investigated. Here, the first three most averagely cited countries are Finland, Canada, and Morocco, with 32.8, 20.5, and 20.3 citations, respectively.

To better understand where these documents were created, the various institutions were investigated next. The results of the investigation can be seen in Figure 8.

Figure 8.

25 most relevant institutions in gamification research.

Even though the largest number of gamification research papers come from the USA, Figure 8 shows that the largest number of articles are written by a Spanish university. University of Granada (or Univ Granada as seen in scientific databases) has written 182 articles regarding gamification. With 143 documents, the second place belongs to a Portuguese university: the University of Porto (Univ Porto). The third, with 132 documents, is Tampere University from Finland. The fourth affiliation is from the USA, the University of Pennsylvania.

Overall, 12 affiliations have written over 100 documents related to gamification. 53 affiliations have written at least 50 research papers in this field. However, 6969 affiliations have written less than 50 studies about gamification. Out of these, 6301 have written less than 10 documents in this field. The number of those affiliations that have written less than 5 studies is 5580. This fact suggests gamification is not the main profile of a large number of affiliations, or that they just started researching in this field.

3.3 Collaboration between countries and institutions

The following to investigate was the collaboration between countries. The results of the analyses are shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9.

Collaboration between countries.

Based on node color and size, it is possible to determine which countries frequently collaborate. The USA mainly collaborates with the United Kingdom, China, Australia, Iran, New Zealand, Singapore, Japan, South Africa, and the Philippines. It also collaborates—albeit less frequently—with Spain and other countries. Looking at the green color, it can be said that the European countries mainly collaborate with each other, with Spain being an exception. Spain frequently collaborates with Mexico, Colombia, Chile, Peru, and Ecuador. Some Asian and Middle-Eastern countries also frequently collaborate with each other: Thailand, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, Malaysia, Korea, and Pakistan.

Similarly, the collaboration between institutions was assessed as well. The results can be observed in Figure 10.

Figure 10.

Collaboration between institutions.

According to Figure 10, some universities frequently collaborate with each other. One of the largest collaborators is Tampere University which collaborates with the University of Waterloo, the University of Sao Paulo, the University of Turku, the University of Oulu, and the University of Toronto. This indicates a large collaboration between Finland and Canada. Another large collaborator is the University of Granada. It collaborates with the University of Alicante, the University of Salamanca, the University of Valladolid, the University of Murcia, the University of Seville, and the University of Almeria. This indicates a collaboration between Spanish universities. However, all have smaller collaborations with multiple universities from other countries. As can be seen in Figure 10, there are other collaborating universities as well, although they collaborate less frequently with each other.

3.4 Themes in gamification research

To understand gamification research, the themes of such papers were analyzed. The results are presented in Figure 11. They can be found in the form of a co-occurrence network.

Figure 11.

Co-occurrence network of themes in gamification research.

Naturally, the main theme of such studies is gamification. However, the themes are closely connected to each other. Serious games, motivation, design, game, education, learning, mobile applications, human(s), health, and video games are closely related. Similarly, students, computer games, behavioral research, artificial intelligence, learning systems, game-based learning, game elements, augmented reality, virtual reality, surveys, game design, software design, education computing, information use, information systems, human-computer interaction, teaching, e-learning, curricula, engineering education, and computer-aided instruction are also closely related. Also, classroom, management, impact, self-determination theory, model, satisfaction, games, intrinsic motivation, performance, engagement, framework, technology, and behavior are closely related.

Judging from the themes in gamification studies, the following can be observed. There are three main categories of themes, centering around gamification elements. The first is about serious games which can be created for multiple purposes. The second is about design elements in such contexts. Lastly, the third is about the gamified environment and its impact on users.

3.5 Words in gamification research

To better understand the themes in papers related to gamification, the words in their abstracts were investigated. Firstly, the investigation continued with unigrams. The results of the analysis can be observed in Figure 12.

Figure 12.

25 most common unigrams in the abstracts of gamification studies.

When looking at the 25 most common unigrams in the abstracts, the following can be concluded. The most common word is gamification with 26,977 occurrences, followed by learning and students, with 24,237 and 19,229 respective occurrences. Game (18,088), study (13,423), and design (11,172) are also common, indicating some themes of the research. Common words also include motivation (6429), educational (6080), and engagement (5948).

However, to better understand the contents of the investigated research papers about gamification, the investigation continued with bigrams. The results are shown in Figure 13.

Figure 13.

25 most common bigrams in the abstracts of gamification studies.

Regarding bigrams, the most common was “game elements” with 2613 occurrences. This was followed by “game design,” “gamification elements,” “virtual reality,” and “learning process” with 1443, 1195, 1112, and 1078 occurrences, respectively. “Game-based learning” (1059), “game mechanics” (740), “user experience” (704), “intrinsic motivation” (609), and “learning experience” (552) were also frequent.

Next, trigrams were assessed. The results of the assessment can be observed in Figure 14.

Figure 14.

25 most common trigrams in the abstracts of gamification studies.

Regarding trigrams, “game design elements,” “virtual reality vr,” “augmented reality vr,” “systematic literature review,” and “randomized controlled trial” were frequent with a respective occurrence of 496, 280, 238, 223, and 138. Other trigrams include “autism spectrum disorder” (73), “increase student engagement” (73), and “virtual learning environments” (71).

Lastly, the keywords of the studies were assessed. The most common keywords can be observed in Figure 15.

Figure 15.

Most common keywords in gamification research.

It can be observed in Figure 15 that “gamification” was the most common keyword with 5094 occurrences. This means 20% of all investigated documents. The next keyword was students, with 1572 occurrences (6% of the investigated documents). Afterward, motivation and education were the most common with 1362 and 1187 occurrences, respectively. Both keywords could be found in around 5% of the investigated documents. They were followed by e-learning (843), design (801), human-computer interaction (746), serious games (735), and engagement (650). The occurrences of the other keywords were 2% at most.

4. Discussion

A bibliometric analysis holds significant importance in academic research. It provides a quantitative assessment of scholarly output within a particular field or discipline. By analyzing publication data, citations, and other bibliographic indicators, it is possible to gain insights into trends and the impact of research outputs over time. It is also possible to map collaboration networks among researchers, institutions, and countries. By analyzing co-authorship patterns and collaboration networks, researchers can identify key collaborators, research clusters, and interdisciplinary connections. This information is valuable for fostering collaboration, promoting knowledge exchange, and enhancing research productivity.

Naturally, like any research method, bibliometric analysis has its strengths and limitations. Its accuracy depends on various factors. The accuracy of bibliometric analysis also depends on the comprehensiveness and coverage of the database used. Different databases may have varying coverage of publications across different disciplines, languages, and regions. Incomplete or biased coverage can limit the accuracy of the analysis, particularly when drawing conclusions about the investigated field of research. Also, bibliometric data are dynamic and subject to change over time. New publications are constantly being added, and citation counts can evolve as research progresses. Updates to the dataset are necessary to maintain the accuracy of bibliometric analysis over time.

However, it is possible to understand what the field of gamification research looks like at this current moment. According to the results, the research questions were answered. Regarding RQ1, the following can be stated. There has been a large increase in the number of gamification research papers over the years, particularly from the 2000s onwards. This rise coincides with the growing popularity of gamification as a research topic. Notably, starting from 2012, there has been a substantial surge since the number of studies exceeded 1000 per year by 2016. This exponential growth suggests a heightened interest and recognition of the importance of gamification in various domains. The average number of citations per year provides additional insight, showing fluctuations over time. The peak in 1999 followed by a decline could be attributed to the nascent stage of gamification research. Here, the seminal works might have garnered initial attention. Subsequent fluctuations reflect the dynamic nature of research trends and the increasing number of publications.

Regarding RQ2, the following can be stated. The USA emerges as a main contributor to gamification research in terms of both the number of publications and citations. However, Spain and China also demonstrate significant activity, with Spain particularly notable for its high citation rate relative to publication count. This suggests the high quality and impact of research that originates from Spain. The analysis of institutions reveals several contributors: the University of Granada, the University of Porto, and Tampere University can be found among the leaders. While the USA leads in overall output, individual institutions from Spain, Portugal, and Finland demonstrate notable engagement and productivity in gamification research.

In the case of RQ3, the results implicate the following. Collaboration between countries and institutions plays a significant role in advancing gamification research. The analysis highlights patterns of collaboration, with the USA engaging in extensive international partnerships, particularly with European and Asian countries. Spain emerges as an active collaborator with mainly Latin American nations. These facts indicate regional research networks. Among institutions, Tampere University stands out for its large number of collaborations. It also has connections with universities across different countries. Similarly, the University of Granada demonstrates a strong network of collaboration within Spain and other countries. This showcases the importance of institutional partnerships in advancing gamification research.

The results of RQ4 shows that there are several key areas of focus within gamification research. These areas include serious games, motivation, design, education, and learning. These themes intersect and contribute to a holistic understanding of gamification’s applications and implications across various domains. The emphasis on educational contexts shows the complex nature of gamification research.

Similarly, the results of RQ5 present the frequent words in gamification research. The frequency of terms such as “gamification,” “learning,” “students,” and “motivation” reflects dominant themes and areas of interest. Bigrams and trigrams provide additional information that highlights specific combinations of words that recurrently appear in research papers, such as “game elements,” “virtual reality,” and “game-based learning.”

Consequently, the importance of the results offers valuable insights into various aspects of this vast field. By tracking the annual publication count and citation trends, researchers, policymakers, and practitioners can gain a comprehensive understanding of the trajectory of gamification research. This awareness allows them to anticipate emerging trends, identify gaps in knowledge, and allocate resources. The analysis of collaboration between countries and institutions presents the global nature of gamification research. Collaborations can exchange diverse perspectives, methodologies, and expertise. This can enrich the research landscape about gamification. Such collaborations can also promote the dissemination of best practices and innovative approaches. The identification of countries and institutions in gamification research serves multiple purposes. First, it provides recognition for the contributions of leading researchers and institutions. Additionally, it helps aspiring researchers and institutions identify potential collaborators and mentors. This could allow for mentorship and knowledge transfer within the academic community. Thematic analysis reveals the primary areas of focus within gamification research. This could guide researchers in making informed decisions regarding research priorities, resource allocation, and strategic initiatives.

Overall, the insights gained from gamification research have practical implications for various sectors, including education, health care, marketing, and research. Effective design principles can enable researchers to develop more engaging and effective applications. For educators, gamification principles can enhance student engagement, motivation, and learning outcomes, leading to more effective pedagogical practices. Policymakers can also gain insights from gamification research to inform the development of frameworks and guidelines regarding its ethical use.

5. Conclusions

The findings of this study shed light on the trajectory, global distribution, collaborative networks, thematic focus, and prevalent terminology within the research areas of gamification. Understanding these aspects is essential for appreciating the significance and implications of gamification in various domains.

Regarding the results, the following could be stated. First, the interest in gamification research papers increased throughout the years. This increase shows the need for continued exploration of gamification elements and applications. Second, the involvement of countries such as the USA, Spain, and China in gamification research highlights its global relevance and the diversity of perspectives contributing to its development. Collaborative networks play a pivotal role in fostering knowledge exchange and innovation in this dynamic field. Third, the identification of key themes such as serious games, motivation, and design presents the multidisciplinary nature of gamification research. As was mentioned, these themes intersect with various disciplines, including education, health care, and business, emphasizing the multidisciplinary nature of gamification and its potential to address complex challenges. Fourth, by understanding the prevalent themes and terminology within gamification research, researchers can design more effective gamified environments, policies, and strategies for their desired outcomes.

As gamification continues to evolve, future research directions may include exploring emerging technologies (e.g., virtual reality and augmented reality), assessing the long-term impacts of gamified environments, and investigating cultural variations in gamification. Additionally, there is a need for continued collaboration across disciplines and regions to address complex challenges. In conclusion, the results presented in this study contribute to a deeper understanding of gamification research and its implications. By leveraging these insights, researchers can enhance user engagement, motivation, and learning outcomes across diverse contexts.

Acknowledgments

This work has been implemented by the TKP2021-NVA-10 project with the support provided by the Ministry of Culture and Innovation of Hungary from the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund, financed under the 2021 Thematic Excellence Programme funding scheme.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.