Exploring Cooperation and Competition in Computer Science

Education: An Investigation Based on Game Theory

Waldir Siqueira Moura, Edgar Delbem, Juliana Baptista dos Santos França

and Angélica Fonseca da Silva Dias

Computer Science Graduate Program, PPGI, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Térreo, Bloco E, CCMN/NCE,

University City, post code 68.530, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Keywords: Cooperation, Competition, Gamification, Computer Teaching.

Abstract: The study investigates the use of the game Overcooked as a pedagogical tool in primary education, focusing

on cooperation and competition. The research, conducted throughout 2022, analyzed one semester as a

baseline and another with pedagogical interventions. Four groups were studied: control (no interventions),

game without instructions, game with teamwork guidance, and game without verbal communication.

Questionnaires and qualitative/quantitative data assessed engagement, motivation, and cooperation. The

interventions significantly improved performance, motivation, and skills such as teamwork and problem-

solving, validating gamification as an educational resource.

1 INTRODUCTION

Gamification has emerged as a pedagogical strategy,

offering an engaging and motivating approach in the

educational context. By incorporating game design

elements into non-game-related activities, it seeks to

promote active student participation, intrinsic

motivation, and the development of transferable skills

(Hamari, Koivisto & Sarsa, 2014). In the field of

computer science, where collaboration and teamwork

are essential, exploring cooperation and competition

through gamification is particularly relevant, as it

challenges students to make strategic decisions, work

in teams, communicate effectively, and solve

complex problems—fundamental skills in the

technological era (Xavier Junior, 2015).

The game Overcooked, frequently used as an

educational tool, places players in a chaotic kitchen

environment where they must work as a team to

prepare meals and overcome challenges. This ideal

setting allows for the investigation of cooperation and

competition dynamics, requiring quick decisions,

coordination, and effective communication (Benyon,

2014). Studies indicate that gamification not only

increases engagement but also develops essential

social skills, such as collaboration and problem-

solving, which are crucial for student development.

Given the persistent challenge of student

demotivation in school subjects, which negatively

impacts learning, educational games emerge as a

promising solution by integrating playful and

interactive elements that promote engagement and

transform students into active agents of their own

learning (Prensky, 2001). As Xavier Junior (2015)

points out, personalized learning approaches enable

the integral development of students, linking

motivation and knowledge acquisition in a

meaningful way.

In this study, four experimental groups were

formed: a control group (no specific interventions),

an experimental group with free play, another with

teamwork guidance, and, finally, a group instructed

to play without verbal communication. After the

initial sessions, questionnaires assessed engagement

and motivation, and pedagogical interventions, such

as training in communication and collaboration, were

applied before reapplying the experiment.

The research aims to assess how cooperation and

competition decisions mediated by gamification in

Overcooked can promote engagement and develop

socio-emotional and academic skills in high school

computer science students. Although limited to this

context, the research reinforces the potential of

gamification to create a stimulating and

interdisciplinary learning environment.

274

Moura, W. S., Delbem, E., França, J. B. S. and Dias, A. F. S.

Exploring Cooperation and Competition in Computer Science Education: An Investigation Based on Game Theory.

DOI: 10.5220/0013216700003932

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2025) - Volume 1, pages 274-282

ISBN: 978-989-758-746-7; ISSN: 2184-5026

2 THEORETICAL FOUNDATION:

GAMIFICATION AND THE USE

OF GAMES AS PEDAGOGICAL

SUPPORT TOOLS IN THE

Michels et al. (2019), in a systematic review on

gamification in mathematics education, highlight its

positive impact on student motivation and

performance, making learning more engaging.

Although focused on mathematics, the study aligns

with this research by emphasizing active student

participation. However, this research broadens the

context by addressing gamification in high school

education in an interdisciplinary way.

Oliveira et al. (2020), in an integrative review on

digital games in science education, show that games

promote motivation and practical learning but do not

conduct experiments in school environments. In

contrast, this research carried out practical

experiments with the game Overcooked, exploring its

cooperation and competition dynamics in face-to-

face teaching.

Neo et al. (2021) explores gamification in virtual

environments, highlighting benefits such as intrinsic

motivation and social skills. Differently, this research

uses Overcooked in a face-to-face context,

associating competition and cooperation with

educational objectives.

Johnson et al. (1993), in a meta-analysis, point out

that games increase motivation and engagement but

do not explore gamification as a complementary

strategy. This research innovates by integrating

Overcooked as a pedagogical tool in basic education,

a context rarely explored, investigating skills such as

teamwork, problem-solving, and communication.

Thus, this research contributes to future

pedagogical practices, promoting collaborative and

immersive learning that develops both technical and

socio-emotional competencies, essential for success

in the digital age.

3 EXPERIMENT FORMAT

To gain a deeper understanding of the dynamics of

cooperation and competition in the game

Overcooked, the study was structured into four

distinct groups, each with specific characteristics and

interventions.

• Group 1, the control group, included Students 1 to

12, who participated in the game without any

additional instruction or intervention, establishing

a neutral comparative reference for the other

groups.

• In Experimental Group I, composed of Students 13

to 20, participants played freely, without specific

guidelines on cooperation or communication.

• Experimental Group II, including Students 21 to

28, received detailed instructions on optimizing

teamwork and communication during the game,

aiming to observe if these instructions would

positively impact collaborative performance.

• Experimental Group III, composed of Students 29

to 32, had verbal communication restricted,

allowing only non-verbal communication to

investigate how this limitation would influence

cooperation dynamics and problem-solving.

This methodological division enabled a

comparative analysis of the interventions,

highlighting the specific effects of each game

condition on students’ performance and behavior.

3.1 Preliminary Assessment of Student

Performance and Engagement in

Subjects

A survey was conducted to assess students' academic

performance in key pedagogical subjects, using a

grade table and an initial questionnaire to analyze

performance before the experiment began. The table

revealed that 35% of students scored below the

expected average (score 7), 40% achieved the average

(scores between 7 and 8), and only 25% scored above

average (scores between 9 and 10). This data,

referring to the first semester of 2022, indicates a high

percentage of students with unsatisfactory or median

performance, highlighting the need for pedagogical

interventions to increase interest and motivation in

these subjects.

Before participating in the practical activities of

the experiment, students answered a questionnaire

with 10 Likert scale questions (1 to 5) to assess their

levels of engagement and motivation in school

subjects. Based on the Self-Determination Theory

(Deci & Ryan, 2000), the questionnaire distinguished

between intrinsic motivation, related to personal

interest and satisfaction, and extrinsic motivation,

associated with external rewards or pressures. This

instrument allowed the identification of the students'

initial levels of engagement and motivation,

establishing a baseline to assess the impact of the

experimental interventions. After analyzing the

responses, it was observed that:

• 75% of students do not feel engaged or motivated

with school subjects, indicating a negative

Exploring Cooperation and Competition in Computer Science Education: An Investigation Based on Game Theory

275

perception regarding the value and relevance of

the content learned.

• 10% of students reported that they see potential

for improvement, suggesting that some elements

of motivation and interest are present, though

insufficient for full engagement.

• 15% of students declared themselves satisfied.

Given these data, we can consider that student

engagement is low. With 35% of students performing

below average and 75% declaring themselves

unmotivated, a significant disconnection from school

content is evident. Only 25% of students achieve

satisfactory performance, and 15% demonstrate

positive engagement. This scenario suggests the need

for pedagogical interventions to promote a more

stimulating and effective learning environment.

Table 1: Academic Motivation and Engagement

Questionnaire.

Considering a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 represents “Totally

Disagree” and 5 “Totally Agree”, indicate:

I feel motivated to participate in school subject classes.

 1  2  3  4  5

I find purpose and value in the activities carried out in each

discipline.

 1  2  3  4  5

I believe that the content learned is relevant to my academic and

professional future.

 1  2  3  4  5

I am interested in learning more about the subjects I study.

 1  2  3  4  5

I feel confident when carrying out activities and exercises in the

subjects.

 1  2  3  4  5

I have the opportunity to actively participate in classes and

express my ideas.

 1  2  3  4  5

I feel encouraged by teachers and colleagues to learn and

dedicate myself to the subjects.

 1  2  3  4  5

Classes are structured in a way that makes learning interesting

 1  2  3  4  5

I can see progress in my learning throughout the subjects.

 1  2  3  4  5

I feel that the classes allow me to develop skills that I consider

important.

 1  2  3  4  5

3.2 Establishment of the Comparison

Standard

In the experiment, the control group played

Overcooked under standard conditions, without the

application of specific cooperation or competition

strategies, which were directed only at the

experimental groups. This procedure was essential to

establish a baseline for the comparative analysis of

the results obtained by the other groups.

During the control group session, reference

parameters were defined, including task execution

effectiveness (score achieved and time required to

complete activities), error frequency (such as

incorrect dishes or delays), and natural patterns of

communication and coordination among players.

These main metrics were used to evaluate the impact

of the interventions on the experimental groups

compared to the control group.

Table 2: Metrics for comparative analysis of experiment

groups.

I. Task Completion Effectiveness: Assessment of the

total time to complete each task and the final score

obtained in the game. This metric measures the

students' ability to achieve the game's objectives

efficiently.

II. Error Frequency: Count of errors made during the

game, such as incorrect preparation of dishes, delays

in preparation steps, and problems in organizing tasks.

This metric allowed us to assess the accuracy and

attention of students throughout the game.

III. Communication and Coordination Patterns:

Observation of the frequency and quality of

interactions between players, considering the nature

and effectiveness of communication, whether verbal

(when allowed) or non-verbal (in groups with

restrictions). This metric analyzed the impact of

interventions on the abilit

to wor

as a team.

IV.Adaptation to Unforeseen Situations: Assessment

of how quickly and effectively students reacted to

unexpected challenges in the game, such as changes

in the environment and new food orders. This

parameter measured the cognitive flexibility and

roblem-solvin

abilit

of the

artici

ants.

V.Engagement and Motivation: Observation of

student behavior during the game, considering signs

of interest, persistence and commitment to the

activities. This metric sought to identify the impact of

interventions on student motivation and active

involvement.

Additionally, aspects such as the ability to adapt

to unforeseen situations and the level of engagement

without external stimuli were observed, allowing for

the identification of differences in the impact of

specific interventions applied to the experimental

groups. These data established metrics to evaluate the

influence of cooperation and communication

strategies on the results observed in the other groups.

3.3 Experimental Group I - Game

Introduction and Free Round,

Without Instructions

In this stage of the experiment, participants in the

group had a free round, with only the game’s

CSEDU 2025 - 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

276

objectives presented, but without formal instructions.

The absence of specific guidelines in this initial phase

aimed to observe the players’ spontaneous behavior

and how they explored the game’s features. This

approach allowed the evaluation of the potential for

intuitive learning and the players’ ability to recognize

patterns and understand rules through their own

experiences. Data analysis showed that Experimental

Group I performed slightly better than the Control

Group in some key metrics, as shown below:

Total Interaction Time: Experimental Group I

interacted with the game for an average of 10%

longer, suggesting greater initial interest or curiosity

about the game.

Number of Actions Performed: Participants in

Experimental Group I executed 12% more actions

during the free round compared to the Control Group.

This result indicates a more active exploration, which

may suggest higher motivation and initiative in

experimentation.

Pattern Identification: Observational analysis

showed that 75% of participants in Experimental

Group I correctly identified at least one basic game

pattern or rule, while only 60% of the Control Group

achieved the same. This indicates that, even without

formal instructions, Experimental Group I was

slightly more effective in understanding the core

dynamics of the game.

Problem Solving: Experimental Group I

performed 15% better in tasks requiring problem-

solving, overcoming obstacles, and completing small

spontaneous missions within the game.

3.4 Performance Analysis of

Experimental Group II - Game

Introduction and Instructed Round

During this phase of the experiment, unlike

Experimental Group I, participants in Experimental

Group II received formal instructions on the

importance of communication and teamwork before

starting the free round. These guidelines aimed to

encourage player interaction and collaboration to

assess the impact of communication strategies on

performance. Data analysis showed a significant

improvement in engagement and motivation in

Experimental Group II, with interaction time about

15% higher than the Control Group and Experimental

Group I. The frequency of actions also increased by

approximately 18%, reflecting greater enthusiasm

and willingness to participate.

However, efficiency metrics revealed challenges:

the lack of clear task division led to overlapping

actions and confusion, negatively affecting scores and

task completion. Problem-solving and adaptability

were about 20% lower than in Experimental Group I,

which showed a more intuitive approach despite the

absence of prior instructions.

3.5 Performance Analysis of

Experimental Group III -

Instructed Round Without

Communication

Experimental Group III, composed of Students 29 to

32, participated in a guided round without verbal

communication, being encouraged to use silent

cooperation strategies. The objective was to evaluate

the impact of communication restrictions on

performance and task coordination.

Surprisingly, Group III outperformed all other

groups across all evaluated metrics. Although the

total interaction time was slightly lower than that of

Group II, tasks were executed in a coordinated and

efficient manner, resulting in high scores and

successful achievement of objectives. Participants

avoided task overlaps, intuitively divided activities,

and progressed quickly through the game.

Regarding pattern recognition and problem-

solving, 90% of the participants identified the main

rules and applied effective solutions, achieving a

performance approximately 20% higher than the

other groups. The communication restriction, instead

of being an obstacle, encouraged observation and

strategic adaptation, maximizing collective

efficiency.

4 DATA ANALYSIS:

METHODOLOGY AND

PROCEDURES

To evaluate students' performance and behavior

during the game Overcooked, a data collection

process was implemented, primarily based on direct

observation. Three researchers actively participated,

providing a holistic and detailed analysis of the

game's dynamics. The approach combined qualitative

and quantitative aspects.

The research employed "Ethnographic

Observation" (Geertz, 2017) to interpret social

interactions and underlying meanings through

immersion in the participants' environment.

Complementarily, "Quantitative Content Analysis"

(Krippendorff, 2004) was used to numerically code

behaviors and actions for statistical analysis. This

multidimensional approach aligned with

Exploring Cooperation and Competition in Computer Science Education: An Investigation Based on Game Theory

277

"Interdisciplinary Research" (Repko, 2012),

integrating methods from different disciplines, and

followed "Grounded Theory" (Strauss and Corbin,

1990), allowing empirical data to shape the

theoretical framework and guide the study.

5 DATA ANALYSIS

During the investigation, participants' responses to

Likert scale-based questions were analyzed to evaluate

the correlation between students' performance and

engagement in the game Overcooked. The analysis

considered perceptions of the gaming experience,

engagement levels, clarity of instructions, decision-

making impact, and effectiveness in cooperative and

competitive contexts.

Initial results indicated a correlation between

higher reported engagement and better game

performance. More engaged students demonstrated

greater proactivity and skill in competitive situations,

highlighting the role of intrinsic motivation in

performance. However, differences among the

groups revealed that effective communication, or the

lack thereof, significantly impacts the quality of

cooperative and competitive actions. Experimental

Group III, which played under verbal communication

restrictions, achieved superior performance,

developing cognitive and non-verbal strategies to

coordinate actions and adapting quickly to the

imposed conditions. This resulted in more structured

task division and a better understanding of group

priorities, demonstrating that the absence of explicit

communication can foster observation and implicit

coordination.

On the other hand, Experimental Group II, which

received explicit instructions on the importance of

communication, faced difficulties in efficiently

dividing tasks. Excessive communication and the lack

of a clear structure resulted in overlapping actions and

confusion, limiting performance. The results highlight

the importance of moderating communication and

pairing it with a clear division of responsibilities to

maximize learning in collaborative scenarios.

• Control Group: The Control Group’s performance

remained relatively constant across metrics, with

minimal variations. This stability may indicate

that, without specific interventions or guidance,

the group showed regular performance with

moderate engagement and task execution. This

group served as a comparison baseline to

understand the impact of interventions on the

other groups.

• Experimental Group I: This group, which had the

freedom to explore the game without initial

instructions, showed slight variation in metrics

but maintained a performance close to that of the

Control Group. The lack of formal instructions

seems to have encouraged spontaneous

exploration, resulting in median performance.

Students in Experimental Group I demonstrated

some adaptive capacity and intrinsic motivation,

but without clear guidance, their performance

remained limited.

• Experimental Group II: Experimental Group II,

which received instructions on the importance of

communication but no guidance on task division,

exhibited a highly irregular curve. Initial

performance was relatively low, indicating that

excessive communication without clear

responsibility division may have caused

confusion. However, the abrupt increase in one of

the final metrics suggests that the group

eventually developed some organizational

strategy, albeit inconsistently and late. This group

illustrates the negative impact of unstructured

communication, which initially hindered

efficiency and coordination.

• Experimental Group III: Experimental Group III,

which operated under verbal communication

restriction, achieved the best performance across

all metrics. The consistent and upward curve

indicates that the lack of explicit communication

encouraged a more observational approach and

intuitive task division. This result aligns with

Flow Theory (Csikszentmihalyi, 2009),

suggesting that the restriction led participants to a

state of immersion and focus, optimizing

engagement and performance. Experimental

Group III demonstrates that, under certain

conditions, the absence of direct communication

can foster a more structured and efficient

environment, unlike what was observed in

Experimental Group II.

6 ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT

COOPERATION AND

ENGAGEMENT LEVELS AND

IMPLICATIONS FOR

PEDAGOGICAL

INTERVENTIONS

The analysis of the collected data allowed for the

measurement of students' levels of cooperation and

CSEDU 2025 - 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

278

engagement in different interaction scenarios, using

the game Overcooked as an experimental

environment. The dynamics of each group were

observed in varied contexts of communication and

organization, identifying factors that directly impact

academic performance and student involvement.

The data were essential for identifying behavioral

patterns and areas for improvement in cooperative

and motivational aspects. These insights led to

proposals for pedagogical interventions aimed at the

classroom environment, with strategies to promote

more effective cooperation and intrinsic engagement,

fostering active learning and improving academic

performance.

The suggested pedagogical interventions include

techniques to better structure communication, clearly

divide tasks, and utilize gamification elements. Such

practices aim to enhance student engagement and

create a more collaborative and productive learning

environment.

I. Enhancement of Intrinsic Motivation:

Promotion of an environment where students

are encouraged to work together and explore

content in a practical and engaging manner,

stimulating intrinsic motivation. According to

the Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan,

2000), activities that foster autonomy,

competence, and relatedness can awaken

internal interest and satisfaction.

II. Fostering Cooperation and Communication:

Introduction of practices that encourage

effective cooperation and communication,

promoting collaboration, listening, and respect

for peers' contributions. This includes

developing social and communication skills

aimed not only at improving academic

performance but also at engaging with the

school environment. Supported by Vygotsky’s

Sociocultural Theory (2012), this approach

emphasizes that social interaction is

fundamental to learning, stimulating critical

thinking and collaborative problem-solving.

III. Structured Task Division: Ensuring that

opportunities are created for strategic task

division, as observed in Experimental Group

III, where students learned to organize

responsibilities and prioritize activities.

IV. Use of Gamification Elements: Applying

gamification elements in pedagogical

practices, such as challenges, scoring,

immediate feedback, etc. As highlighted by

Hamari, Koivisto, and Sarsa (2014),

gamification promotes engagement by making

learning a fun and rewarding experience.

V. Enhancement of Self-Confidence and

Performance: Providing structured activities

where students can develop greater confidence

in their abilities.

7 COMPARISON OF STUDENTS’

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

IN THE SECOND SEMESTER

OF 2022 AFTER

PEDAGOGICAL

INTERVENTIONS

The pedagogical interventions were designed to

increase students' engagement, cooperation, and

motivation, essential elements for improving

academic performance. The comparative analysis of

final grades between the first and second semesters

provides a comprehensive view of the effects of these

practices. In the first semester, before the

interventions, it was observed that 35% of the

students had grades below 7, 40% were in the median

range (between 7 and 8), and only 25% exceeded this

average with grades between 9 and 10. This data

revealed a pattern of median or unsatisfactory

performance, highlighting the need for pedagogical

practices to boost interest, motivation, and

collaboration in the classroom. The interventions

implemented included gamification practices, the

promotion of more structured communication, the

organization of task division in group activities, and

actions aimed at increasing students' intrinsic

motivation. The comparison of grades between the

two semesters revealed an average improvement of

25% in individual student performance by the end of

the academic year.

The results indicate a significant increase in the

number of students with grades above 8 and a

considerable reduction in those with below-average

performance. This progress reflects not only greater

knowledge retention but also a positive development

in students' cooperation and problem-solving skills.

Furthermore, the improvement in grades was

attributed to the strengthening of intrinsic motivation

and student engagement, promoted by the

implemented strategies, such as the challenges and

rewards of gamification and more organized and

effective collaboration.

Exploring Cooperation and Competition in Computer Science Education: An Investigation Based on Game Theory

279

8 IMPACT OF PEDAGOGICAL

INTERVENTIONS ON

STUDENT ENGAGEMENT AND

MOTIVATION

By conducting a comparative analysis of the Kiviat

diagrams, which represent student engagement levels

before and after the pedagogical interventions, we

observe a significant improvement in nearly all

evaluated aspects.

I. Motivation Level to Participate in Classes

• After the Intervention: a significant change was

observed, with most students reporting higher

levels of motivation. This change can be attributed

to gamification practices and the

contextualization of the content applied during the

semester. According to Deci and Ryan's Self-

Determination Theory (2000), intrinsic

motivation is strengthened when students' needs

for competence, autonomy, and relatedness are

met, which seems to have been promoted by the

adopted pedagogical strategies.

• Perception of Purpose and Value in Activities:

Before the intervention, students did not clearly

perceive the purpose and value of the activities

carried out, which may reflect pedagogical

practices that failed to demonstrate the

applicability of the content in real or future

contexts. After the intervention, there was a

significant increase in this perception.

Adjustments in planning, such as presenting

scenarios with practical applications and

contextualizing the topics, helped students

understand the relevance of what they were

learning. According to Eccles and Wigfield

(2002), when students perceive content as

relevant to their lives, their engagement and

willingness to learn increase.

• Interest in Learning More and Confidence in

Activities: Before the intervention, many students

showed little interest in deepening their

knowledge and displayed low confidence in

performing activities, indicating that the classes

were not fostering curiosity or a sense of self-

efficacy. After the interventions, interest and

confidence increased significantly. This can be

explained by the introduction of more dynamic

and interactive activities, such as gamified

practices, which encourage students to explore

and learn playfully. According to Hamari,

Koivisto, and Sarsa (2014), gamification is an

effective tool for increasing interest and

motivation by introducing elements of challenge

and reward. Positive feedback and well-structured

activities that allowed students to feel competent

were also key to boosting self-confidence.

• Class Structure and Encouragement from

Teachers and Peers Before the intervention: the

organization of classes and the encouragement

received from teachers and peers were perceived

as not very motivating. The absence of a

collaborative environment contributed to students

feeling less supported. After the intervention, this

perception changed positively. Pedagogical

practices began to include opportunities for group

work, role definition, and the promotion of

effective communication. According to

Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory (1978), learning

is enhanced in social and collaborative

environments where students construct

knowledge together, fostering a sense of

community, motivation, and engagement.

• Progress in Learning and Development of

Important Skills Before the intervention: students

did not perceive significant progress in their

learning or the development of applicable skills,

suggesting that the activities carried out were not

providing a meaningful or tangible learning expe-

rience. After the intervention, students reported a

greater perception of progress and the development

of skills considered important. The activities were

reformulated to emphasize the relevance of the

content and include constant feedback, aligning

with Dweck's (2006) Growth Mindset approach.

When students perceive progress in learning, they

feel more confident to face new challenges and

engage more actively in activities.

9 CONCLUSIONS

This research investigated the impact of pedagogical

interventions based on gamification, content

contextualization, and collaboration on the

engagement and motivation of high school students

during educational activities, using the game

Overcooked as a support tool. The main objective was

to understand how interactive pedagogical strategies

can influence students' interest in subjects and

promote the development of socio-emotional and

cognitive skills, essential both for the school context

and for students' personal development.

The study was structured with experimental

groups and a control group, subjecting participants to

different gameplay conditions, ranging from

situations with and without instructions, with

communication restrictions, and with specific

CSEDU 2025 - 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

280

cooperation guidelines. The application of Likert

scale-based questionnaires before and after the

interventions enabled the measurement of changes in

students' engagement and perceptions. The results

showed a significant increase in motivation, sense of

purpose, and the development of applicable skills

after the introduction of methodological practices that

encouraged interaction and contextualization of

learning.

Despite the positive results, some limitations were

identified. The experiment was conducted in a

controlled environment and focused on a single

specific game, which may hinder the generalization

of findings to other subjects, games, or educational

settings. Moreover, the results depend directly on

students' receptiveness to the chosen game and

teachers' ability to mediate and promote effective

collaborative interactions. These variables may limit

the applicability of the results in scenarios with

different student, teacher, or infrastructure profiles.

Based on the results and observed limitations, this

research proposes some directions for future work. It

is recommended to expand the use of educational

games to other content and subjects, exploring

various forms of gamification that adapt to different

pedagogical contexts and student profiles.

Additionally, it would be valuable to investigate the

sustainability of these practices in the long term,

considering costs, planning time, and teacher training.

Evaluating the feasibility of these strategies in

educational environments with limited resources or

greater cultural and socioeconomic diversity may

provide relevant insights for consolidating and

expanding the use of gamification as a pedagogical

tool.

Finally, this research reinforces the importance of

innovative and interactive methodologies in teaching,

highlighting how the strategic use of gamification,

contextualization, and collaboration can transform

the learning experience, making it more engaging and

meaningful for students.

REFERENCES

Benyon, David. Spaces of Interaction, Places for

Experience. 1. ed. Cham: Springer, 2014. (Synthesis

Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics). v. XVI, 113

p. ISBN 978-3-031-01078-1. DOI: https://doi.org/

10.1007/978-3-031-02206-7.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. 2009. Flow: The psychology of

optimal experience. Harper & Row.

Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M, 2000. Self-determination theory

and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social

development, and well-being. American Psychologist,

55(1), 68–78. https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=

10.1037%2F0003-066X.55.1.68

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of

Success. New York: Random House Publishing Group.

Eccles, Jacquelynne S.; Wigfield, Allan. Motivational

beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of

Psychology, v. 53, p. 109-132, 2002. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.1351

53.

Geertz, Clifford. 2017. The interpretation of cultures. Basic

books.

HAMARI J., J. KOIVISTO AND H. SARSA. 2014. Does

Gamification Work? A Literature Review of Empirical

Studies on Gamification. 47th Hawaii International

Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI, USA,

2014, pp. 3025-3034. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.

2014.377.

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An

Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd ed.) Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/

10.4135/9781071878781.

Johnson, David W.; Johnson, Roger T.; Holubec, Edythe

Johnson. 1993. Circles of Learning: Cooperation in the

Classroom. 4. ed. Edina: Interaction Book Company.

229 p.

Michels, Tatiana & Paz, Daiane & Ferreira, Aline. 2019.

Gamificação Como Estratégia de Ensino. Revista

Mundi Engenharia, Tecnologia e Gestão (ISSN: 2525-

4782). 4. https://doi.org/10.21575/25254782rmetg20

19vol4n1733.

Moura, W.; Ferreira da Silva, M.; de Souza, J. and Souza,

T. (2022). Analysis of Social Networks of Students'

Learning with a Focus on Their Performance. In

Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on

Computer Supported Education - Volume 1: CSEDU;

ISBN 978-989-758-562-3; ISSN 2184-5026,

SciTePress, pages 257-264. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52

20/0011052300003182.

Moura, W.; Silva, M.; Sampaio, J.; Souza, T.; Marinho, E.

and Prado, V. (2021). A Social Network Approach for

Student’s School Performance Measurement. In

Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on

Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU;

ISBN 978-989-758-502-9; ISSN 2184-5026,

SciTePress, pages 311-318. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52

20/0010480003110318.

Neo, Jun Rong Jeffrey; Won, Andrea Stevenson; Shepley,

Mardelle McCuskey. 2021. Designing immersive

virtual environments for human behavior research.

DOI: 10.3389/frvir.2021.603750.

Oliveira, Wilk; Joaquim, Sivaldo. A Influência dos Jogos

Educativos Analógicos e Digitais na Interação Social

dos Estudantes. In: Workshop De Informática Na

Escola (WIE), 26. 2020, Evento Online. Anais [...].

Porto Alegre: Sociedade Brasileira de Computação,

2020. p.409-418. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/cbie.w

ie.2020.409.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Game-Based Learning.

McGraw-Hill, New York. 1. https://doi.org/10.1145/95

0566.950567.

Exploring Cooperation and Competition in Computer Science Education: An Investigation Based on Game Theory

281

Repko, Allen F. 2012. Interdisciplinary Research: Process

and Theory. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE

Publications.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. 1990. Basics of qualitative

research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.

Sage Publications, Inc.

Vygotsky, L. S. 2012. Mind in Society: The Development

of Higher Psychological Processes. Editado por

Michael Cole, Vera John-Steiner, Sylvia Scribner e

Ellen Souberman. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard

University Press.

Xavier Junior, J. F. Psicogenética Educacional. 2. ed.

Tremembé-SP: Editora VespeR, 2018.

CSEDU 2025 - 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

282