Author(s)

Xinzhe Liao ¹, Nurul Fazmidar Mohd Noor ²

Affiliation(s)

¹ School of Film and Meida, Communication University of Kunming, Kunming, China
² Department of Computer System & Technology, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, University Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Corresponding Author

Xinzhe Liao

ABSTRACT

Serious games, defined as interactive digital systems designed with a primary purpose beyond entertainment, have been extensively applied across diverse sectors, including education, training, military, and healthcare. By transforming conventional pedagogical activities into dynamic, interactive learning experiences, these games shift learners from passive knowledge recipients to active constructors of knowledge. Empirical studies consistently demonstrate that serious games significantly enhance learner motivation, engagement, and educational outcomes. The dual imperative of serious games—simultaneously fulfilling educational objectives (e.g., knowledge acquisition, skill development, and affective improvement) and maintaining intrinsic playability—poses a critical challenge for designers and educators, necessitating a balance between instructional efficacy and motivational appeal. Flow theory, pioneered by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, has emerged as a pivotal framework for optimizing engagement in educational contexts. Research indicates that students achieving flow states—characterized by deep immersion and focused interaction—exhibit superior learning performance. This study synthesizes existing flow theory models and their applications in serious game design to propose seven key design elements: (1) learning and game goals, (2) immediate feedback, (3) adaptive challenge, (4) control and autonomy, (5) concentration, (6) reward and punishment, (7) sensory immersion. These elements collectively address the tension between educational rigor and engagement sustainability, offering evidence-based guidelines for designing serious games that optimize cognitive absorption, learner engagement, and pedagogical effectiveness. These key design components underscore the necessity of harmonizing skill-challenge equilibrium and systemic coherence to operationalize flow theory in practice, thereby advancing theoretical and applied dimensions of serious game design and development.

KEYWORDS

Serious game, Flow theories, Gamification, Game-based learning

CITE THIS PAPER

Xinzhe Liao, Nurul Fazmidar Mohd Noor, Design components of serious game based on flow theories. Advances in Educational Technology and Psychology (2025) Vol. 9: 67-80. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23977/aetp.2025.090311.

REFERENCES

[1] Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety. https://openlibrary.org/books/OL4879227M/ Beyond_boredom_and_anxiety
[2] Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2016). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Joosr Ltd : Made available through hoopla.
[3] Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Yung, Y. (1998). Modeling the structure of the flow experience among web users. INFORMS Marketing Science and the Internet Mini-Conference. http://wiki.commres.org/pds/Project_7eNrf2010_2f_ec_ 82_ac_ed_9a_8c_ed_95_99_ec_a0_81_ec_a0_91_ea_b7_bc/Modeling%20the%20structure%20of%20the%20flow%20experience%20  among%20Web%20users.pdf
[4] Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Yung, Y. (2000). Measuring the customer experience in Online Environments: A structural modeling approach. Marketing Science, 19(1), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.19.1.22.15184
[5] Deng, P. (2006). The flow experience of the potential and pleasure of life. Journal of Distance Education, (03), 74–78. https://doi.org/10.15881/j.cnki.cn33-1304/g4.2006.03.020.
[6] Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (1988). Optimal experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.
[7] Teng, C., & Huang, H. (2012). More than flow: Revisiting the theory of four channels of flow. International Journal of Computer Games Technology, 2012, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/724917
[8] Guo, Y. M., & Klein, B. D. (2009). Beyond the test of the four channel model of flow in the context of online shopping. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 24. https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.02448
[9] Lambert, J., Chapman, J., & Lurie, D. (2013). Challenges to the four-channel model of flow: Primary assumption of flow support the moderate challenging control channel. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 8(5), 395–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2013.809138 
[10] Massimini, F., & Carli, M. (1988). The systematic assessment of flow in daily experience. Cambridge University Press eBooks, 266–287. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511621956.016
[11] Finneran, C. M., & Zhang, P. (2003). A person–artefact–task (PAT) model of flow antecedents in computer mediated environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 475–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1071-5819(03)00112-5
[12] Abt, C. (1970). Serious games. https://openlibrary.org/books/OL2739177M/Serious_games
[13] Prensky, M. (2003). Digital game-based learning. Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 950566.950596
[14] Stewart, J., Bleumers, L., & Van Looy, J. (2013). The potential of digital games for empowerment and social inclusion of groups at risk of social and economic exclusion: Evidence and Opportunity for Policy. Joint Research Centre of the European Commission (JRC). http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC78777.pdf
[15] Pei, L. S., & Shang, J. J. (2015). The context and hot spot analysis of video game and education: Based on the bibliometric results based on the hundred years literature of Web of Science(WOS). Journal of Distance Education, 33(02), 104–112. https://doi.org/10.15881/j.cnki.cn33-1304/g4.2015.02.014
[16] Fissler, P., Kolassa, I., & Schrader, C. (2015). Educational games for brain health: revealing their unexplored potential through a neurocognitive approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01056
[17] Cao, L. (2022). Three fundamental learning theories and educational game design. Open Education Research, 28(05), 29–38, 92. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2022.05.004.
[18] Shang, J. J., & Pei, L. S. (2015). Reshaping the learning style: the core value and future applicationin education of games. China Educational Technology, (05), 41–49.
[19] Wu, C., Tzeng, Y., & Huang, Y. (2020). Measuring performance in leaning process of digital game-based learning and static E-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(5), 2215–2237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s 11423-020-09765-6
[20] Fu, Q., Lin, C., Hwang, G., & Zhang, L. (2019). Impacts of a mind mapping-based contextual gaming approach on EFL students' writing performance, learning perceptions and generative uses in an English course. Computers & Education, 137, 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.005
[21] Zhang, L., Hu, R. N., Zeng, J. L., & Shang, J. J. (2021). How to design scientific, effective and fun educational games—Research on math game design from an interdisciplinary perspective of learning science. e-Education Research, 42(10), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2021.10.010.
[22] Yu, Z., Gao, M., & Wang, L. (2020). The effect of educational games on learning outcomes, student motivation, engagement and satisfaction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(3), 522–546. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0735633120969214
[23] Laine, T. H., & Lindberg, R. S. N. (2020). Designing engaging games for Education: A systematic literature review on game motivators and design principles. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13(4), 804–821. https://doi.org/10.1109/tlt.2020.3018503
[24] Pei, L. S., & Shang, J. J. (2019). Math educational games based on learning sciences: design, development and application. China Educational Technology, (01), 94–105.
[25] De Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2006). How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated? Computers & Education, 46(3), 249–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.007
[26] Arnab, S., Lim, T., Carvalho, M. B., Bellotti, F., De Freitas, S., Louchart, S., Suttie, N., Berta, R., & De Gloria, A. (2014). Mapping learning and game mechanics for serious games analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 391–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12113
[27] Lv, Q. Y., & Wang, J. Y. (2021). Prospect of international serious games: Historical review and category focus. Open Education Research, 27(03), 104–111. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2021.03.011
[28] Sweetser, P., & Wyeth, P. (2005). GameFlow: a model for evaluating player enjoyment in games. Computers in Entertainment, 3(3), 3. https://doi.org/10.1145/1077246.1077253
[29] Fu, F., Su, R., & Yu, S. (2008). EGameFlow: A scale to measure learners' enjoyment of e-learning games. Computers & Education, 52(1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.004
[30] Khanana, K., & Law, E. L. (2013). Designing children's digital games on nutrition with playability heuristics. In CHI '13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1071–1076). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2468356.2468548  
[31] Kiili, K. (2005). Digital game-based learning: Towards an experiential gaming model. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.12.001
[32] Kiili, K., De Freitas, S., Arnab, S., & Lainema, T. (2012). The design principles for flow experience in educational games. Procedia Computer Science, 15, 78–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2012.10.060
[33] Song, M. Z., & Zhang, S. J. (2009). Construction of EFM educational game design model. China Educational Technology, (01), 24–27.
[34] Kirriemuir, J., & McFarlane, A. (2004). Literature review in games and learning. https://telearn.hal.science/hal-00190453
[35] Shang, J. J., Li, F. L., & Li, H. W. (2004). "Light Games": The hope and future of educational games. e-Education Research, (01), 24–26. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2005.01.005.
[36] Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). Psychology of the child. New York : Basic Books.
[37] Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Pearson.
[38] Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S. & Masia, B. B. (Eds.). (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook II: The affective domain. New York: McKay.
[39] Simpson, E. (1972), The classification of educational objectives in the psychomotor domain: The psychomotor domain. Vol. 3. Washington, DC: Gryphon House.
[40] Harrow, A. (1972) A taxonomy of the psychomotor domain - a guide for developing behavioral objectives. New York: David McKay.
[41] Dave, R. H. (1970), Developing and Writing Behavioural Objectives. (R J Armstrong, ed.) Tucson, Arizona: Educational Innovators Press.
[42] Yao, J. H., & Zou, H. H. (2023). Inspiration from digital games for classroom teaching in primary and secondary Schools: From the Perspective of Flow Theory. Educational Science Research, (04), 5–10.
[43] Shute, V. J., & Ke, F. (2012). Games, learning, and assessment. In Springer eBooks (pp. 43–58). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3546-4_4
[44] Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7

Sponsors, Associates, and Links

---

• Curriculum and Teaching Methodology
  
  
• Transactions on Comparative Education
  
  
• Applied & Educational Psychology
  
  
• Advances in Vocational and Technical Education
  
  
• Adult and Higher Education