Hierarchical Cognitive Structuring and Game Mechanics Alignment in Educational Game Systems: A Systematic Literature Review
Abstract
Educational games are increasingly used to support meaningful learning, yet the ways in which cognitive progression is translated into game mechanics and system-level design remain insufficiently explicit in the literature. This study followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines to review empirical studies published between 2015 and 2025 and indexed in Scopus and IEEE Xplore. After screening and eligibility assessment, 68 studies were included. Constructivist approaches were predominant, while only 15 studies (22.1%) explicitly represented a hierarchical cognitive structure to organize gameplay progression; the remaining 53 studies (77.9%) represented cognitive progression implicitly. Recurring operational patterns included level-based progression, sequenced task organization, and adaptive scaffolding through feedback. The findings indicate that explicit cognitive-mechanics alignment is underreported in the reviewed corpus rather than absent from educational game design. For design practice, the results highlight the need for traceable frameworks that connect cognitive objectives with missions, rules, feedback, progression, and assessment tasks. Because the search was limited to Scopus and IEEE Xplore, the findings should not be interpreted as exhaustive coverage of all educational game research.
Related
- The role of big data analytics in financial fraud detection: A systematic literature review
- Educational and behavioural interventions for reducing fear of hypoglycaemia in adults with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- Governing Agentic AI in Africa: A Systematic Literature Review of Ethical Challenges, Framework Gaps, and Ubuntu-Informed Governance Solutions
- Graph-Enhanced Knowledge Tracing for Explainable Learner Modeling: A Systematic Literature Review
- Mapping E-Readiness Dimensions for Digital Village Development: A Systematic Literature and Bibliometric Review
BibTeX
@article{rosyidah2026hierarchical,
title = {{Hierarchical Cognitive Structuring and Game Mechanics Alignment in Educational Game Systems: A Systematic Literature Review}},
author = {Umi Rosyidah and Purwanto and Putri Taqwa Prasetyaningrum},
journal = {Journal of Information Systems and Informatics},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.63158/journalisi.v8i5.1739},
url = {https://doi.org/10.63158/journalisi.v8i5.1739},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Hierarchical Cognitive Structuring and Game Mechanics Alignment in Educational Game Systems: A Systematic Literature Review
AU - Umi Rosyidah
AU - Purwanto
AU - Putri Taqwa Prasetyaningrum
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/24
JO - Journal of Information Systems and Informatics
DO - 10.63158/journalisi.v8i5.1739
UR - https://doi.org/10.63158/journalisi.v8i5.1739
AB - Educational games are increasingly used to support meaningful learning, yet the ways in which cognitive progression is translated into game mechanics and system-level design remain insufficiently explicit in the literature. This study followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines to review empirical studies published between 2015 and 2025 and indexed in Scopus and IEEE Xplore. After screening and eligibility assessment, 68 studies were included. Constructivist approaches were predominant, while only 15 studies (22.1%) explicitly represented a hierarchical cognitive structure to organize gameplay progression; the remaining 53 studies (77.9%) represented cognitive progression implicitly. Recurring operational patterns included level-based progression, sequenced task organization, and adaptive scaffolding through feedback. The findings indicate that explicit cognitive-mechanics alignment is underreported in the reviewed corpus rather than absent from educational game design. For design practice, the results highlight the need for traceable frameworks that connect cognitive objectives with missions, rules, feedback, progression, and assessment tasks. Because the search was limited to Scopus and IEEE Xplore, the findings should not be interpreted as exhaustive coverage of all educational game research.
SN - 2656-5935
SN - 2656-4882
ER -