Full length article Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning Juho Hamari a, * , David J. Shernoff b , Elizabeth Rowe c , Brianno Coller d , Jodi Asbell-Clarke c , Teon Edwards c a Game Research Lab, School of Information Sciences, University of Tampere, Finland b Center for Mathematics, Science, and Computer Education, Rutgers University, USA c Educational Gaming Environments Group at TERC, USA d Department of Mechanical Engineering, Northern Illinois University, USA article info Article history: Received 13 March 2015 Received in revised form 10 June 2015 Accepted 22 July 2015 Available online 15 August 2015 Keywords: Game-based learning Gamification Serious games Flow Engagement Immersion abstract In this paper, we investigate the impact of flow (operationalized as heightened challenge and skill), engagement, and immersion on learning in game-based learning environments. The data was gathered through a survey from players (N ¼ 173) of two learning games (Quantum Spectre: N ¼ 134 and Spumone: N ¼ 40). The results show that engagement in the game has a clear positive effect on learning, however, we did not find a significant effect between immersion in the game and learning. Challenge of the game had a positive effect on learning both directly and via the increased engagement. Being skilled in the game did not affect learning directly but by increasing engagement in the game. Both the challenge of the game and being skilled in the game had a positive effect on both being engaged and immersed in the game. The challenge in the game was an especially strong predictor of learning outcomes. For the design of educational games, the results suggest that the challenge of the game should be able to keep up with the learners growing abilities and learning in order to endorse continued learning in game-based learning environments. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Pervasive student disengagement is both a national and an international problem, with 20e25% of students in 28 OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) coun- tries classified as having low participation and/or a low sense of belonging (Drigas, Ioannidou, Kokkalia, & Lytras, 2014; Willms, 2003). A promising strategy for increasing engagement in a mean- ingful way has been thought to stem from video games (Connolly, Boyle, MacArthur, Hainey, & Boyle, 2012; Gee, 2007; Steinkuehler, Squire, & Barab, 2012) and gamification (Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, 2014) as observed by educational scholars for several decades. In an ideal educational game setting, students learn how to solve complex problems. The problems within a game typically start off easy and then progressively become more difficult as players' skills develop. Players are motivated to learn, in part, because learning is situated and occurs through a process of hypothesizing, probing, and reflecting upon the simulated world within the game. In addition, the goals are clear, and information becomes available to players at just the time that it is needed to reach each goal. Making sense of that information becomes a goal intrinsic to gameplay. As McGonigal (2011) observed: “In a good computer or video game you're always playing on the very edge of your skill level, always on the brink of falling off. When you do fall off, you feel the urge to climb back on. That's because there is virtually nothing as engaging as this state of working at the very limits of your ability. (p. 24)” Computer games have been observed to scaffold learning in ways that keeps players at the edge of their seats fostering continued interest in the game for hours, weeks, and even years. Players hone their skills and build knowledge as long as they continue to play. In some rare cases game developers, such as Valve (see Valve 2007, 2011), have described their effective design framework of “layered learning” which attempts to optimize learning elements consistent with interrelated principles of chal- lenge, skills, engagement and immersion. In this framework, * Corresponding author. Game Research Lab, School of Information Sciences, FIN- 33014 University of Tampere, Finland. E-mail addresses: juho.hamari@uta.fi (J. Hamari), david.shernoff@rutgers.edu (D.J. Shernoff), elizabeth_rowe@terc.edu (E. Rowe), bcoller@niu.edu (B. Coller), jodi_asbell-clarke@terc.edu (J. Asbell-Clarke), teon_edwards@terc.edu (T. Edwards). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Computers in Human Behavior journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045 0747-5632/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Computers in Human Behavior 54 (2016) 170e179