Effectiveness of AI-Supported Game-Based Learning: A Systematic Review of Outcomes, Challenges, and Future Directions
BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES, cilt.16, sa.7, ss.1-27, 2026 (SSCI, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Derleme
- Cilt numarası: 16 Sayı: 7
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.3390/bs16071050
- Dergi Adı: BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Academic Search Ultimate (EBSCO), Scopus, Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Linguistic Bibliography, Psycinfo, Directory of Open Access Journals
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1-27
- Açık Arşiv Koleksiyonu: AVESİS Açık Erişim Koleksiyonu
- Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Background: AI-supported game-based learning (AI-GBL) integrates artificial intelligence mechanisms, including adaptive difficulty adjustment, large language model (LLM) scaffolding, intelligent non-player characters (NPCs), and stealth assessment, into game-based educational environments. Objective: This systematic review synthesizes the empirical evidence on AI-GBL effectiveness, adaptive mechanisms, and intelligent assessment approaches across diverse educational contexts. Method: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, 55 peer-reviewed empirical studies (2021–2026) were identified from Web of Science and Scopus databases. Two independent reviewers screened records (κ = 0.89; 100% consensus on disagreements), extracted data using a standardized coding scheme, and assessed methodological quality using a five-criterion rubric. A thematic synthesis approach was adopted due to the heterogeneity of the evidence base. Results: The reviewed studies generally suggest promising positive effects of AI-GBL on knowledge acquisition, intrinsic motivation, and affective engagement under a range of educational conditions. LLM-based scaffolding reduces cognitive load but risks fostering passive dependency; adaptive difficulty adjustment benefits depend critically on the direction and magnitude of adaptation; AI NPCs function as credible instructional partners in both EFL and STEM contexts; stealth assessment achieves AUCs of 0.848–0.913. Challenges include algorithmic bias in assessment models, LLM latency, over-reliance risks, and a near absence of longitudinal evidence. Conclusions: AI-GBL’s effectiveness rests on principled alignment between AI mechanisms and learning theory rather than algorithmic sophistication per se. Equity-by-design approaches and longitudinal evidence constitute the field’s priority research needs.