Does Gamified Training Improve Retention? What the Evidence Shows
August 2, 2026 · Education · 6 min read
Gamification can make learning more engaging, but it does not create a universal “90% retention rate,” nor does the evidence show that organisations become seven times more profitable simply because training includes points, badges or leaderboards.
The research is more useful than those headline claims. Well-designed gamification can improve motivation, participation and some learning outcomes, but results depend heavily on the learners, subject, design and duration of the intervention.
What gamification means in training
Gamification means adding game-like design elements to an activity that is not itself a game. In learning, that can include:
- progress indicators;
- levels or challenges;
- feedback loops;
- badges or points;
- scenario choices;
- team challenges;
- leaderboards where appropriate.
The purpose should be to support the learning behaviour you want, not simply make the interface look more entertaining.
What meta-analysis says about learning outcomes
A 2023 meta-analysis covering 41 studies, 49 independent samples and more than 5,000 participants found a significant positive overall effect of gamification on learning outcomes. The effect varied according to factors such as user type, discipline, design, duration and learning environment.
That variation matters. Gamification is not one intervention, and a result from one educational setting should not be turned into a universal workplace-retention percentage.
Source: Meta-analysis of gamification in educational settings.
Gamification can improve engagement without automatically improving learning
A systematic review and meta-analysis of computerized cognitive training found that gamified tasks were more motivating and engaging than non-gamified tasks, but the meta-analysis did not find an overall effect on the underlying training domain.
That distinction is important for L&D teams. More activity, enjoyment or completion does not automatically mean more durable learning.
Source: Vermeir et al., systematic review and meta-analysis of gamified cognitive training.
Behavioural effects are also context-dependent
A separate meta-analysis of controlled educational studies found a moderate positive overall effect of gamified interventions on behavioural change, but also found that duration and learner group affected results.
Short interventions produced stronger effects in that analysis than much longer interventions, reminding designers that game mechanics can lose impact when they become routine or burdensome.
Source: Meta-analysis of gamification and behavioural change in education.
Why the “learning pyramid” retention percentages should be avoided
Claims such as “people retain 20% of lectures, 30% with visuals and 90% by doing” are often presented as established learning science. They are not a reliable basis for training design.
Retention depends on what is being learned, prior knowledge, practice, retrieval, feedback, spacing and the delay before testing. A gamified activity can still produce shallow learning if it rewards speed, guessing or point collection rather than the target skill.
When gamification is useful
Gamification tends to be most useful when the game element reinforces the behaviour the learner needs to perform.
Examples include:
- frequent retrieval practice;
- scenario decisions with immediate feedback;
- progress through a sequence of increasingly difficult tasks;
- repeated practice of procedures;
- team challenges that require discussion and application;
- visible progress toward a genuine learning goal.
When gamification gets in the way
It can backfire when:
- points become more important than understanding;
- leaderboards embarrass weaker learners;
- competition undermines collaboration;
- rewards encourage shortcuts;
- the design adds cognitive load without instructional value;
- learners focus on finishing the game rather than transferring the skill.
How to evaluate gamified training
Do not stop at participation rates. Measure:
- whether learners actually improved knowledge or skill;
- whether they can retrieve the learning after a delay;
- whether the skill transfers into work;
- whether engagement remains useful over time;
- whether the game mechanics improve or distort behaviour.
Decide whether gamification is solving a real learning problem
Before adding game mechanics, define the behaviour the learner needs to practise. If the target behaviour is unclear, badges and points will only make an unclear activity more elaborate.
| Design question | What to decide |
|---|---|
| Target capability | What should the learner know or be able to do differently? |
| Practice behaviour | What action should the game mechanic encourage: retrieval, decision-making, repetition, diagnosis or collaboration? |
| Feedback | How will the learner know why an answer or action was effective? |
| Failure risk | Could speed, competition or rewards encourage guessing, shortcuts or superficial completion? |
| Transfer | Where will the same capability be used in real work after the activity? |
| Evidence | What measure would show learning rather than entertainment? |
A practical example: gamifying decision practice
Suppose a compliance team wants employees to recognise risky scenarios. A weak gamified design awards points for clicking through policy slides quickly. A stronger design gives learners short realistic situations, asks them to choose an action, explains the consequence and increases difficulty as performance improves.
The game element is useful only because it supports repeated decision practice and feedback. If the same learning objective can be achieved more simply without points or competition, the simpler design may be better.
Build an evaluation plan before launch
A practical evaluation sequence can separate four different questions:
- Engagement: Did learners participate and complete the activity?
- Learning: Did knowledge or skill improve immediately after practice?
- Retention: Can learners still retrieve or demonstrate the capability after a meaningful delay?
- Transfer: Is the capability used correctly in real work?
If possible, compare the gamified version with a reasonable non-gamified alternative. That helps determine whether the game mechanics added value or whether the underlying practice activity was doing most of the work.
Questions to ask after a pilot
- Which mechanics supported the learning behaviour and which became distractions?
- Did stronger engagement correspond with better delayed performance?
- Did competitive elements discourage any learners?
- Were learners practising the real skill or learning how to score points?
- Did managers observe any change in workplace behaviour?
- Should the intervention be expanded, simplified or stopped?
For related evidence on memory and reinforcement, see what the forgetting curve really shows in workplace learning.
Match the mechanic to the learning behaviour
Different game mechanics encourage different actions. Progress indicators can support persistence. Scenario choices can create decision practice. Immediate feedback can correct misconceptions. Team challenges can support discussion. Leaderboards create comparison and competition, which may help in some contexts and distract or discourage in others.
The design question is therefore not “How can we gamify this course?” It is “What behaviour needs more practice, and which mechanic would make that practice more frequent, informative or motivating?” If the mechanic does not strengthen the learning behaviour, it is decoration.
Control for novelty
Engagement can rise when a new format is introduced simply because it is different. When piloting gamification, review whether participation remains useful after the novelty fades. Compare delayed performance, not only immediate completion or learner enjoyment.
A pilot should also collect qualitative feedback on frustration, fairness and cognitive load. A mechanic that motivates high performers but discourages beginners may worsen the learning environment even if overall completion rises.
Design an exit condition
Gamification should not become permanent because a platform has already been purchased. Define what evidence would justify expanding, simplifying or removing the mechanic. If a simpler practice format produces the same learning outcome with less complexity, use the simpler format.
Use game mechanics as instructional design, not decoration
Gamification can be valuable when it creates better practice, feedback and motivation. It should not be treated as proof of retention on its own.
MATSH’s Train the Trainer Course covers learning design, facilitation, practice, reinforcement and evaluation for professionals who need training to produce real workplace capability.
Need In-House Training?
We run all our courses as private programmes for organisations across the GCC and Africa.
Request In-House →