A meta‐analysis of existing meta‐analyses on gamification practices in education: It does not fit all

In the literature, there are conflicting results on the effectiveness of gamification on learning outcomes, despite numerous meta‐analyses and experimental studies on this issue. Moreover, existing meta‐analyses have limitations in terms of effect size calculations and sample size. These limitations make it difficult to determine whether the reported positive effects of gamification are robust and generalizable across educational contexts. To address these limitations, this study aimed to combine 10 existing meta‐analyses by recalculating effect sizes and extracting outliers using a large sample size. Additionally, unlike previous meta‐analyses, this study reported prediction intervals for the mean effect sizes to provide an index of how the true effects may vary among the populations. The results of this study demonstrate that gamification practices have a positive effect on academic performance/achievement and motivation/engagement. However, these effects decreased after accounting for outliers and potential publication bias. The adjusted (trim‐and‐fill) estimates showed small effects for academic performance ( g = 0.316) and weak‐to‐small effects for motivation/engagement ( g = 0.183). Importantly, the prediction intervals for both outcomes included negative values, indicating substantial variability in true effects and suggesting that gamification may not be effective across all educational contexts. Overall, the results highlight that the effectiveness of gamification is highly dependent on contextual and implementation‐related factors. Context and implications Rationale for this study: Gamification has become a widely adopted educational practice, yet existing meta‐analyses provide inconsistent results. This meta‐analysis of meta‐analyses provides a more comprehensive estimate of its overall effects by synthesizing evidence across prior meta‐analyses. Why the new findings matter: This study offers a broader perspective by synthesizing multiple first‐order meta‐analyses. This approach enables researchers to evaluate the consistency of findings, detect variability in effect sizes, consider the influence of outliers and assess publication bias more comprehensively than a single meta‐analysis could achieve. Implications for practitioners, researchers, and policy‐makers: This study shows that while gamification generally has positive effects on academic performance and motivation, its impact varies across learner characteristics. For practitioners, this underlines that gamification may not ensure success for every group; therefore, carefully analysing the learner population is crucial before implementing such strategies. For researchers, it highlights the need for clearer design frameworks and more rigorous evaluations of gamification practices. For policy‐makers and funders, the results suggest that investments in gamification should be made with careful consideration rather than assuming uniform benefits. This evidence‐based understanding can inform more effective integration of gamification in educational systems.