The effect of game-based approaches on decision-making, knowledge, and motor skill: A systematic review and a multilevel meta-analysis

IF 2.6 2区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

European Physical Education Review Pub Date : 2024-04-09 DOI:10.1177/1356336x241245305

Mika Manninen, Eric Magrum, Sara Campbell, Sarahjane Belton

{"title":"The effect of game-based approaches on decision-making, knowledge, and motor skill: A systematic review and a multilevel meta-analysis","authors":"Mika Manninen, Eric Magrum, Sara Campbell, Sarahjane Belton","doi":"10.1177/1356336x241245305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed to compare the effect between game-based approaches (GBAs) and traditional skill approaches on decision-making, knowledge and motor skill in physical education students and athletes. A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies available before October 2023 was conducted. The initial search yielded 8431 articles, with 28 articles ( n = 1600) meeting the inclusion criteria. Studies were analyzed using three-level random-effects models with a robust variance estimation. Outcomes were computed as raw mean differences and Hedges’s g effect sizes. Results indicate that GBAs have a positive heterogeneous effect on decision-making in game situations (ES = 11.41%; 95% CI [4.39, 18.43]) and motor skill in skill tests ( g = 0.36; 95% CI [0.14, 0.57]). GBAs did not have an effect on knowledge ( g = 0 .37; 95% CI [−0.12, 0.86]) or motor skill in game situations (ES = 1.13%; 95% CI [−2.43, 4.68]). Meta-regression analyses revealed that the experience of the interventionist, the quality of the studies, and the comparison condition significantly influence the impact of GBAs on motor skill tests. More detailed and transparent reporting of trials would benefit the field.","PeriodicalId":47681,"journal":{"name":"European Physical Education Review","volume":"138 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Physical Education Review","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336x241245305","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the effect between game-based approaches (GBAs) and traditional skill approaches on decision-making, knowledge and motor skill in physical education students and athletes. A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies available before October 2023 was conducted. The initial search yielded 8431 articles, with 28 articles ( n = 1600) meeting the inclusion criteria. Studies were analyzed using three-level random-effects models with a robust variance estimation. Outcomes were computed as raw mean differences and Hedges’s g effect sizes. Results indicate that GBAs have a positive heterogeneous effect on decision-making in game situations (ES = 11.41%; 95% CI [4.39, 18.43]) and motor skill in skill tests ( g = 0.36; 95% CI [0.14, 0.57]). GBAs did not have an effect on knowledge ( g = 0 .37; 95% CI [−0.12, 0.86]) or motor skill in game situations (ES = 1.13%; 95% CI [−2.43, 4.68]). Meta-regression analyses revealed that the experience of the interventionist, the quality of the studies, and the comparison condition significantly influence the impact of GBAs on motor skill tests. More detailed and transparent reporting of trials would benefit the field.

查看原文本刊更多论文

基于游戏的方法对决策、知识和运动技能的影响：系统回顾和多层次荟萃分析

本研究旨在比较基于游戏的方法（GBAs）和传统技能方法对体育教育专业学生和运动员的决策、知识和运动技能的影响。研究人员对 2023 年 10 月之前的实验研究进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。初步检索共获得 8431 篇文章，其中 28 篇文章（n = 1600）符合纳入标准。研究采用三级随机效应模型和稳健方差估计进行分析。结果以原始均值差异和赫奇斯 g效应大小计算。结果表明，GBA 对游戏情境中的决策（ES = 11.41%；95% CI [4.39，18.43]）和技能测试中的运动技能（g = 0.36；95% CI [0.14，0.57]）具有积极的异质性影响。GBAs 对知识（g = 0.37；95% CI [-0.12，0.86]）和游戏情况下的运动技能（ES = 1.13%；95% CI [-2.43，4.68]）没有影响。元回归分析表明，干预者的经验、研究的质量以及对比条件都会显著影响GBA对运动技能测试的影响。更详细、更透明的试验报告将使该领域受益匪浅。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

European Physical Education Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

7.60

自引率

5.90%

发文量

期刊介绍： - Multidisciplinary Approaches: European Physical Education Review brings together contributions from a wide range of disciplines across the natural and social sciences and humanities. It includes theoretical and research-based articles and occasionally devotes Special Issues to major topics and themes within the field. - International Coverage: European Physical Education Review publishes contributions from Europe and all regions of the world, promoting international communication among scholars and professionals.