Does gamification really facilitate learning? An experiment with matching-to-sample

The Matching-to-Sample (MTS) procedure is frequently used in stimulus equivalence research. Although many variables have been studied using MTS, its format and design have remained largely unchanged since it was first described more than fifty years ago. While maintaining its simple characteristics has advantages, MTS is often described as a tedious learning procedure. Considering that the inclusion of game elements in other procedures (i.e., gamification) can positively impact learning and motivation, this study aimed to compare three MTS procedures differing in the number of game elements included. Forty-nine participants were divided into three groups: a traditional MTS (G1), a traditional MTS with some game elements (G2), and a fully gamified version of MTS (G3). In all groups, participants underwent conditional discrimination training and tests for the derivation of three 3-member equivalence classes. Results demonstrated that the inclusion of game elements both facilitated (G3) and disrupted (G2) the derivation of equivalence classes compared to G1, with a higher percentage of participants achieving the equivalence class formation criterion in G3 (77%) than in G1 (63%) and G2 (50%). The findings are discussed in terms of the game elements included, their interactions, and directions for future research.