This study examines the impact of content format and instructional framing on knowledge outcomes, highlighting differences in engagement and interest for Roman history.
This study investigated effects of content format and instructional framing on knowledge attainment, situational interest, and academic emotions in digital history learning. In a 2 (format: game versus text) × 2 (instruction: learning versus fun) between-subjects design, 143 university students engaged with either a historically accurate video game on the Roman Empire or a structurally aligned interactive text application, each paired with instructions to focus on learning or fun. Both formats presented the same historical content through main narratives, optional missions, and supplemental historical information in the form of codex entries. The findings revealed that participants in the game condition reported higher enjoyment and greater triggered situational interest, indicating that the game enhances the positive affective experience of engaging with historical content and sparks learners’ interest. However, our hypothesis that knowledge test performance would be higher in the game condition was not supported. Instead, knowledge test scores were higher in the text condition. No statistically significant effects emerged for instructional framing or for the interaction between format and framing on the outcomes. Additional analyses of behavioural data showed that text participants engaged more extensively with codex entries, and that codex engagement strongly predicted knowledge outcomes across both formats. This suggests that knowledge outcomes depend on the visibility and integration of supplemental materials, and learners’ engagement with them. Overall, this study contributes to research on digital history learning by offering a controlled comparison of identical content delivered through game and text and shedding light on the role of instructional framing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Viccari et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: