Multimedia Design in Educational Game: Pretraining, Feedback and Segmenting Principles

Year 2026, Volume: 13 Issue: 2, 85 - 101, 08.03.2026

Zeynep Cömert , Yavuz Samur

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.20.13.2

https://izlik.org/JA26KK95FW

Abstract

Despite growing empirical support, limited research has examined how specific multimedia design principles influence both learning performance and affective experience (such as cognitive load and flow) in educational games. The question of how to establish a balance between learning and entertainment for games that have proven effective on learning success has still not been answered. In order to answer this question, within the scope of the research, four different versions of the same educational game were prepared based on the principles of pre-training, feedback and segmentation in multimedia design principles. Two knowledge tests, cognitive load and flow scales were used in this study, which was planned as a randomized experimental study with a pre-test post-test control group. In the study, which was carried out with the voluntary participation of seventh grade students studying at different campuses of a private school in Turkey. As a result, pre-training has a negative effect in terms of entertainment experience, it provides a statistically significant contribution in terms of learning performance. It has been concluded that knowledge-of-correct-response (KCR) feedback has a critical importance for learner success and different feedback designs such as progress bars support the learner experience in educational games. While the level system did not significantly influence intrinsic cognitive load, it significantly influenced flow experience.

Keywords

educational game , multimedia design , flow , cognitive load

References

• Atkinson, R. K., Mayer, R. E., & Merrill, M. M. (2005). Fostering social agency in multimedia learning: Examining the impact of an animated agent’s voice. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(1), 117-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.07.001
• Baştürk, S., Dönmez, G., & Dicle, A. N. (2013). Validity and reliability. S. Baştürk (Ed.), Scientific research methods (p. 161-196). Ankara: Vize Publishing.
• Best, J.W. & Kahn, J.V. (2006). Research in education (10th Edition), Pearson Education Inc., Cape Town.
• Breien, F. S., & Wasson, B. (2021). Narrative categorization in digital game‐based learning: Engagement, motivation & learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(1), 91-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13004
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2016). Scientific research methods. Pegem: Ankara.
• Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. John Wiley & Sons.
• Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Killingsworth, S. S. (2016). Digital games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 79-122. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582065
• Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.
• Cömert, Z., & Samur, Y. (2023). Flow Experience Scale Development Study in Educational Games. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 21(3), 1933-1951.
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row.
• Çeken, B., & Taşkın, N. (2022). Multimedia learning principles in different learning environments: A systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 9(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00200-2
• Dattalo, P. (2008). Determining sample size: Balancing power, precision, and practicality. Oxford University Press.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Conceptualizations of intrinsic motivation and self-determination. In Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior (pp. 11-40). Boston, MA: Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-72
• Es-Sajjade, A., & Paas, F. (2020). Educational theories and computer game design: lessons from an experiment in elementary mathematics education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(5), 2685-2703. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09799-w
• Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). Paper-based aids for learning with a computer-based game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 1074. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028088.
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education, New York: McGraw-Hill.
• George, D., & Mallery, P. (2012). IBM SPSS statistics 19 step by step. Boston, Mass.
• Güzeller, S. (2022). Designing and developing a hyper-casual educational game for practicing fractions (Master Thesis), Bahçeşehir University, Turkey. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
• Habgood, M. J., & Ainsworth, S. E. (2011). Motivating children to learn effectively: Exploring the value of intrinsic integration in educational games. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(2), 169-206. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2010.508029
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. (2013). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education.
• Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow, and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 170–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045
• Johnson, C. I., Bailey, S. K., & van Buskirk, W. L. (2017). Designing effective feedback messages in serious games and simulations: A research review. Instructional Techniques to Facilitate Learning and Motivation of Serious Games, 119-140. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39298-1_7
• Kalyuga, S. (2007). Expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 509-539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9054-3
• Kester, L., Kirschner, P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2005). The management of cognitive load during complex cognitive skill acquisition by means of computer‐ simulated problem solving. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(1), 71-85. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709904X19254
• Kılıç, E., & Karadeniz, Ş. (2004). Specifying students; Cognitive load and disorientation level in hypermedia. Educational Administration in Theory and Practice, 40(40), 562-579. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kuey/article/126808
• Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
• Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705
• Lusk, D. L., Evans, A. D., Jeffrey, T. R., Palmer, K. R., Wikstrom, C. S., & Doolittle, P. E. (2009). Multimedia learning and individual differences: Mediating the effects of working memory capacity with segmentation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 636–651. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00848.x
• Makransky, G., Mayer, R., Nøremølle, A., Cordoba, A. L., Wandall, J., & Bonde, M. (2020). Investigating the feasibility of using assessment and explanatory feedback in desktop virtual reality simulations. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 293-317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09690-3
• Mayer, R. E. (2020). Computer games for learning: An evidence-based approach. MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262027571/computer-games-for-learning/
• Mayer, R. E. (2017). Using multimedia for e‐learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(5), 403-423. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12197
• Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811678
• Mayer, R. E., & Chandler, P. (2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages?.Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 390-397. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.390
• Mayer, R. E., & Johnson, C. I. (2010). Adding instructional features that promote learning in a game-like environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(3), 241-265. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.42.3.a
• Mayer, R. E., Mautone, P., & Prothero, W. (2002). Pictorial aids for learning by doing in a multimedia geology simulation game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 171-185. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.171
• Mete, S. E., Merter, K. & Samur, Y. (2014). Should there be a limitation for segmenting principle in multimedia presentations?. 8th International Computer & Instructional Technologies Symposium, Edirne, Türkiye. https://dosyalar.trakya.edu.tr/egitim/docs/Kongreler/ICITS2014_TamMetin.pdf
• Moreno, R. (2007). Optimising learning from animations by minimising cognitive load: Cognitive and affective consequences of signalling and segmentation methods. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 21(6), 765-781. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1348
• Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: Effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instructional Science, 32, 99-113. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021811.66966.1d
• Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2004). Personalized messages that promote science learning in virtual environments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 165.-173. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.165
• Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002a). Learning science in virtual reality multimedia environments: Role of methods and media. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 598-610. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.598
• Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002b). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 156-163. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.156
• Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents?. Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177-213. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI1902_02
• Ninaus, M., Cortez, R., Hazin, I., Kiili, K., Wortha, S. M., Klein, E., ... & Moeller, K. (2023). The added value of game elements: better training performance but comparable learning gains. Educational technology research and development, 71(5), 1917-1939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10263-8
• Paas, F. G., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (1993). The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and performance measures. Human Factors, 35(4), 737-743. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872089303500412
• Parong, J., Wells, A., & Mayer, R. E. (2020). Replicated evidence towards a cognitive theory of game-based training. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(5), 922-937. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000413
• Qian, M., & Clark, K. R. (2016). Game-based Learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 50-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023
• Rey, G. D., Beege, M., Nebel, S., Wirzberger, M., Schmitt, T. H., & Schneider, S. (2019). A meta-analysis of the segmenting effect. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 389-419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-9456-4
• Samur, Y., Cömert, Z., & Edip, S. (2022). How did the teachers cope with emergency remote teaching?. Curriculum and Teaching, 37(1), 55-78. https://doi.org/10.7459/ct/37.1.04
• Samur, Y., & Özkan, Z. (2019). Fill in the blanks: Students want to play …….. at school. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 21(1), 20-43. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.466699
• Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
• Sitzmann, T. (2011). A meta‐analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer‐based simulation games. Personnel psychology, 64(2), 489-528. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01190.x
• Skuballa, I. T., Fortunski, C., & Renkl, A. (2015). An eye movement pre-training fosters the comprehension of processes and functions in technical systems. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 598. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00598
• Spiro, R. J., Collins, B. P., & Ramchandran, A. R. (2008). Modes of openness and flexibility in cognitive flexibility hypertext learning environments. In Online and distance learning: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 1903-1908). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1- 59904-325-8.ch002
• Sweller, J. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09701-3
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston,MA: Pearson.
• Uchaikin, V. V., & Zolotarev, V. M. (1999). Chance and stability: Stable distributions and their applications. VSP BV, Utrecht.
• van Merriënboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies. Medical Education, 44(1), 85-93. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03498.x
• Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 90(3), 537–576. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087
• Wright, M. T. (2017). Paradox of the learning game: The promise and plight of video games and learning. Philadelphia, PA: Design Meets Mind.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166–183. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207312909