Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, Volume 20, Issue 3, 2025 
 
 
 
Unlocking the Power of Gamification for Customer 
Engagement: A Review and Research Agenda 
 
 
Diksha Panwar 
Amity Business School, Amity University 
Uttar Pradesh Greater Noida, 201310, India 
Tel: +919917895007 
Email: dikshapanwar9090@gmail.com 
 
Sailaja Bohara 
Amity Business School, Amity University 
Uttar Pradesh Greater Noida, 201310, India 
Tel: +919760330185 
Email: shailja.bohara002@gmail.com 
 
Shivendra Singh Chaudhary 
Amity Business School, Amity University 
Uttar Pradesh Greater Noida, 201310, India 
Tel: +919910215085 
Email: shivendra12@gmail.com 
 
Amitabh Bhargava 
Amity Business School, Amity University 
Uttar Pradesh Greater Noida, 201310, India 
Tel: +919828513322 
Email: bhargava.amitabh1@gmail.com 
 
Sonam Rani 
Amity College of Commerce and Finance, Amity University 
Uttar Pradesh Greater Noida, 201310, India 
Tel: +918171345421 
Email: sonamrani0908@gmail.com 
 
 
Abstract 
 
Gamification has emerged as a potent strategy for boosting consumer engagement in marketing over recent 
years. This research synthesizes existing literature to pinpoint gaps and propose a future research agenda. A 
systematic  literature  review  and  bibliometric  analysis  of  43  Scopus-indexed  articles  from  2014  to  2024 
revealed the evolution of gamification research, key theoretical frameworks, influential authors, highly cited 
works, and leading countries in the field. The findings highlight gamification’s ability to transcend traditional 
marketing,  fostering  dynamic  consumer  interactions  in  digital  environments.  The  study  organizes  the 
literature by theory, context, characteristics, and methodology, identifying underexplored areas such as cross-
cultural applications and advanced analytics. This work provides business and management scholars with a 
comprehensive  overview  of  gamification’s  role,  offering  actionable  insights  for  marketers  to  enhance 
engagement strategies. It also sets a clear research agenda to guide future studies in addressing untapped 
areas and refining existing models, advancing the field of gamification in marketing. 
 
Keywords:  gamification  in  marketing,  customer  engagement,  marketing  and  society,  communities, 
technology and innovation 

Diksha Panwar, Sailaja Bohara, Shivendra Singh Chaudhary, Amitabh Bhargava, Sonam Rani

Applied Management under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. Our journal is an

open-access resource, which means that all content is freely available without charge. Users are allowed to

read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles or use them for any other

lawful purpose without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. For more information about

this paper and our journal, please visit our website.

Submitted: 2025-04-15 / Accepted: 2025-07-30 / Published: 2025-10-14

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

1. INTRODUCTION

Over the past decade, gamification has emerged as a powerful strategy for enhancing customer retention

and engagement, gathering significant attention in both business and academia. Gamification has been

defined as the integration of game elements into non-game contexts (Deterding et al., 2011). It has been

widely adopted across diverse industries to foster engagement, as in the education sector (e.g., Hakulinen et

al., 2013), health (e.g., Hamari & Koivisto, 2015), marketing (e.g., Terlutter & Capella, 2013), and teamwork

(e.g., Marlow et al., 2016). Beyond driving sales and profits, gamification enhances customer engagement

through interactive experiences, it strengthens brand recognition, and fosters long-term customer loyalty

(e.g., Hamari et al., 2014; Yang et al., 2017). These applications underline gamification’s ability to enhance

customer interactions, providing a foundation for a deeper exploration of its theoretical and practical

implications.

Gamification’s growing adoption is reshaping consumer behaviour and organizational strategies by

leveraging game elements—such as points, rewards, challenges, and leaderboards—to enhance customer

engagement, defined as the strength of customers’ interactions with brands across platforms (Brodie et al.,

2011). These elements foster such behaviours as product acceptance and brand loyalty across marketing,

retail, digital services, and mobile applications (Hamari et al., 2014; Hofacker et al., 2016). Research

highlights gamification’s role in nurturing user interaction, emotional involvement, and loyalty (Xi &

Hamari, 2019; Koivisto & Hamari, 2019). According to a Markets and Markets report, the gamification

market, valued at $9.1 billion in 2020, is projected to reach $30.7 billion by 2025, reflecting a compound

annual growth rate (CAGR) of 27.4%. This growth is driven by strategies that recognize and reward success,

offer appealing incentives, and promise higher returns on investment. Despite this progress, existing literature

lacks a comprehensive, structured review that systematically captures the academic foundations and thematic

evolution of gamification in customer engagement.

Previous studies involves critical limitations. For example, Mishra and Malhotra (2021) examined in-

game advertising’s psychological effects but focused on empirical findings without synthesizing the broader

gamification literature. Similarly, Whittaker et al. (2021) explored gamification in sustainable marketing, and

Kunkel et al. (2023) investigated motivational affordances in mobile apps, yet both have a narrow contextual

and methodological scope. Tobon et al. (2020) conducted a bibliometric study using SciMAT to explore

gamification and online customer decisions but failed to provide a structured framework integrating theory,

context, constructs, and methods. Recent studies by Saxena et al. (2023) and Tsai (2024) highlight gaming

mechanics and brand congruity’s impact on consumer behaviour but focus on specific cases without offering

a field-wide perspective. None of these studies adopt a systematic review framework that traces

gamification’s conceptual evolution or integrates the Theory, Context, Constructs, and Methodology

(TCCM) framework (Paul & Rosado-Serrano, 2019). This gap limits our understanding of gamification’s

theoretical foundations, applications, and methodological approaches in relation to customer engagement.

Additionally, prior reviews often lack transparent criteria for literature selection, hindering efforts to map

influential authors, journals, institutions, and countries.

To address these gaps, this study combines bibliometric analysis with the TCCM framework to provide

a holistic understanding of gamification’s role in customer engagement. This approach visualizes thematic

structures and citation networks while categorizing the literature by theoretical foundations, research

contexts, key constructs, and methodologies. By doing so, it offers deep insights into the fragmented

gamification landscape and identifies underexplored areas for future research. The study addresses key

research questions: Which authors, articles, journals, and countries have significantly contributed to

gamification in customer engagement? What thematic areas and research domains dominate the field? Which

theories, contexts, constructs, and methods are prevalent, and what gaps within the TCCM framework offer

opportunities for future research?

This study provides a structured synthesis of the gamification literature, translating complex academic

information into a manageable format that clarifies theoretical developments, practical applications, and

methodological trends. For researchers, it offers a critical assessment of what drives consumer engagement,

how gamified experiences can be optimized, and where future research should focus. For practitioners, it

supports evidence-based decision-making to enhance customer interaction, loyalty, and satisfaction.

Ultimately, this review serves as a foundational resource for scholars and practitioners, enabling them to

leverage gamification to foster deeper, more sustained customer engagement.

The review is structured as follows: Section 1 introduces gamification. Section 2 details the

methodology, including the literature review, synthesis, and application of the TCCM framework. Section 3

Diksha Panwar, Sailaja Bohara, Shivendra Singh Chaudhary, Amitabh Bhargava, Sonam Rani

presents a descriptive analysis of the articles. Section 4 applies the TCCM framework, analyzing its

components in the literature. Section 5 identifies future research areas within the TCCM framework. The

review concludes with implications and limitations.

2. METHODOLOGY

This study employs a systematic literature review as it classifies the methodology and characteristics

of the review process (Psomas, 2022). A systematic literature review is based on scientific and transparent

procedures to mitigate the possibility of bias (Paluri and Mishal, 2020). The preferred reporting tool for

systematic reviews and meta-analyses is PRISMA, which uses a scientific and systematic process to select papers

(Senna et al., 2021). This tool is used for the final selection of the research papers. The Tranfield et al. (2003)

three-stage model is used to conduct the systematic literature review. Intent-based targeting is used to choose

the keywords. For the scope of the literature review, the intent-based keywords (keywords which reflect the

underlying purpose or goal of the search query) are useful in searching the research papers on gamification

and Customer engagement. Non-intent-based keywords only reflect a topic, whereas intent-based keywords

incorporate a researcher's specific objective. Intent-based keywords help narrow down the search and not

only mention the topic but also focus on the relationship or effect being investigated, thereby improving the

relevance and quality of the sources retrieved.

According to (Shafqat et al. (2022), intent-based keyword strategies enhance academic search by

aligning search terms more closely with the research question, enabling more targeted literature discovery.

Stage I: planning the review

Prior to starting thereview, a panel comprised of five members, all from academia, was formed to guide in

the research process. The review panel’s primary role was to direct the process and exclude irrelevant papers not

associated with the study. The panel members also contributed to designing the process of review. It is essential

to delimit the literature’s size and support the review’s relevance based on previous studies. This stage laid the

foundation for investigating gamification’s role in engaging customers, with the search result shown in Table

Table 1: Search results

Data Source

Search syntax

www. scopus. com

((TITLE-ABS-KEY ( gamification* OR gamified marketing* AND customer

engagement*) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( SUBJ-AREA, "Business, management &

accounting) OR LIMIT-TO ( SUBJ-AREA, "social-science" ) OR LIMIT-

TO ( SUBJ-AREA, "psychology" ) AND ( LIMIT-

TO ( DOCTYPE, "article" ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( LANGUAGE, "English" ) )

Stage II

In this stage a detailed systematic review is conducted using the PRISMA tool (Moher et al., 2009; Paluri

& Mishal, 2020). The final selection of papers for the study is done using a five-stage procedure. The

PRISMA flow diagram is shown in Figure 1.

Stage III

Step 1: searching for the initial list of articles. We conducted a search in the Scopus database using the

keywords Gamification OR gamified marketing AND customer engagement to find relevant Gamification OR

gamified marketing AND customer engagement publications. The Scopus database yielded 182 results.

Step 2: screening. We screened the articles by reading the abstract, discussion, and conclusion of the

articles. The majority of the articles are associated with gamification marketing and customer engagement.

Our screening delivered 60 articles after removing the duplicate articles.

Step 3: retrieval. Finally, we reviewed the whole text of the screened articles and found 50 articles that we

included in our study. We obtained the retrieved articles by subtracting the total excluded articles from the

fully-screened articles.

Step 4: eligibility. The final 50 papers were rigorously examined to determine their eligibility.

Step 5: studies included in the review. The two authors thoroughly reviewed each article and identified 7

articles not relevant to gamification or gamification marketing. Finally, we were left with 43 articles for review.

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

For the study R and Vosviewer was used. To highlight the current gaps in the literature and suggest

future research, the TCCM framework is used (Knight et al. (2004); Paul and Rosado-Serrano (2019), where

T stands for theory, C for context, C for characteristics and M for methodology)

Figure 1: The PRISMA flow diagram for the literature search on the factors that influence

cooperatives' performance.

3. ANALYSIS

Through rigorous content analysis and bibliometric methods, this study analyzed 43 Scopus-indexed

articles (2014–2024) to map the landscape of gamification in customer engagement using the TCCM

framework (Paul & Rosado-Serrano, 2019).

3.1 Publication Trend

The study of gamification as a field of knowledge has become relevant in all fields. Figure 2 shows the

total number of articles published every year and the average number of citations every year. The respective

number of articles published during the year relevant to our study, between 2014 and 2024 was 43: 1 in 2014,

1 in 2015, in 2016, 3, in 2018, 2, in 2020, 7; in 2021, it increased to 12; the highest number of articles

published was 14 in 2023. Therefore, in 2014, although the number of articles published was lower, the

average number of citations was high. Figure 3 shows the list of the Top 10 most productive countries, where

Portugal is the leading area, with a total contribution of 34 articles, India with 26, and China 14; table 2 shows

Diksha Panwar, Sailaja Bohara, Shivendra Singh Chaudhary, Amitabh Bhargava, Sonam Rani

the Top 10 most cited countries, where the United Kingdom was leading with a total citation of 147, followed

by Spain, Portugal, China, and Australia with 144, 89, 88, and 70, respectively.

Figure 2: No. of articles and Avg. citations per year.

(Source- self-work of authors)

Figure 3: Publication trend of countries.

(Source- self-work of authors)

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

No. of Articles

Avg. Citation

years

No. of articles and Avg. Citation

Avg. Citations No. of Articles

No. of articles

Countries

Publication trend of countries

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

Table 2: Most cited countries

(Source- self-work of authors)

Country

United Kingdom

147

Spain

144

Portugal

China

Australia

India

USA

Finland

Italy

Germany

3.2 The most influential author

The most influential authors are those who have produced high-quality work and helped the evolution

of research. The knowledge of influential authors is necessary for contributing to the specific subject.

Version-influenced authors contributed to the area of gamification, specifically. Table 3 shows the most

relevant influential authors in the gamification field. Of the 124 authors, the most relevant and influential

author is Dwivedi Y.K., who has an h-index of 134, from the UK. The most relevant and influential authors

are from the USA, the UK, India, and Portugal.

Table 3: The most influential authors

(Source- self-work of authors)

Authors

Articles

Institution

Country

H-Index

Lopes Jm

Miguel Torga Institute Of Higher Education

& University Of Beira Interior & NECE

Portugal

Gomes S

REMIT—Research On Economics,

Management And Information

Technologies, Portucalense University

Portugal

Mishra S

Marketing Institute Of Management

Technology

India

Dwivedi Yk

Emerging Markets Research Centre

(Emarc), School Of Management, Swansea

University Bay Campus, Wales,

134

Ghosh T

T.A.Pai Management Institute

India

Jain S

Indian Institute Of Management

Visakhapatnam

India

Kunkel T

School Of Sport, Tourism And Hospitality

Management, Temple University

USA

Lock D

Department Of Sport And Event

Management, Bournemouth University

Rodrigues I

ISAG—European Business School

Portugal

Saxena G

Department Of Marketing, Institute Of

Management Technology

India

Diksha Panwar, Sailaja Bohara, Shivendra Singh Chaudhary, Amitabh Bhargava, Sonam Rani

3.3 Most Appropriate sources & Most cited articles

This section identifies the primary publications and the most influential articles related to the study.

Table 4 lists the top 10 journals contributing to this field, while Table 5 highlights the most cited articles and

their thematic focus.

Table 4 presents the top 10 most appropriate sources. 5 articles are published in Sustainability, 3 in

Psychology and Marketing, 2 in Administrative Sciences, and 2 in Decision Support Systems. The most

relevant paper for the source field of gamification is made rather comprehensible. The cut-off limit of the top

10 citations was selected for the most influential articles published.

Table 4: Most relevant sources

(Source- self-work of authors)

Sources

Articles

Cite score (2023)

Sustainability (Switzerland)

6.8

Psychology And Marketing

11.9

Administrative Sciences

4.8

Decision Support Systems

14.5

Information Systems Research

International Journal Of Information

Management

52.5

International Journal Of Retail And

Distribution Management

8.5

Journal Of Business Research

Journal Of Retailing And Customer

Services

20.3

Marketing Intelligence And Planning

7.9

Table 5: Most cited articles in the field of gamification on customer engagement (Year 2014-2024)

(Source- self-work of authors)

Year

Title

Author

Journal

Total

Citations

2020

Gamification and

online customer

decisions: Is the game

over?

Sandra Tobon; José L. Ruiz-Alba;

Jesús García-Madariaga

Decision

Support Systems

112

2014

Gamification and the

online retail experience

Victoria Insley; Daniel Nunan

International

Journal of Retail

& Distribution

Management

110

2017

Gamification as a

platform for brand co-

creation experiences

Helena Nobre & André Ferreira

Journal of Brand

Management

2021

Go with the flow’ for

gamification and

sustainability

marketing

Lucas Whittaker, Rory Mulcahy,

Rebekah Russell-Bennett

International

Journal of

Information

Management

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

2021

The gamification of in-

game advertising:

Examining the role of

psychological

ownership and

intrusiveness

Sita Mishra , Gunjan Malhotra

International

Journal of

Information

Management

2020

Can gamification

increase customers’

engagement in fitness

apps? The moderating

role of

commensurability of

the game elements

Wenting Feng, Rungting Tu, Peishan

Hsieh

Journal of

Retailing and

Customer

Services

2015

Customer Engagement

in Value Co-Creation:

what Kind of Value it

creates for Company?

Zaneta Piligrimiene; Aiste Dovaliene;

Regina Virvilaite

Engineering

Economics

2021

Gamification via

mobile applications: A

longitudinal

examination of its

impact on attitudinal

loyalty and behavior

toward a core service

Thilo Kunkel, Daniel Lock, Jason P.

Doyle

Psychology &

Marketing

2021

Moving beyond the

content: The role of

contextual cues in the

effectiveness of

gamification of

advertising

S. Sreejesh, Tathagata Ghosh, Yogesh

K. Dwivedi

Journal of

Business

Research

2021

Does gamification

engage users in online

shopping?

Alejandro García-Jurado, Mercedes

Torres-Jiménez, Antonio L. Leal-

Rodríguez, Pilar Castro-González

Electronic

Commerce

Research and

Applications

Table 5 provides a list of the most highly cited papers on the gamification of customer engagement from

reputed peer-reviewed journals. The highly cited paper, “Gamification and online customer decisions: Is the

game over?”, published by Tobon S.; Ruiz-Alba J.L.; García-Madariaga J. in 2020, helps with understanding

more about gamification in the context of customer purchases. According to Insley V.; Nunan D.,

“Gamification and the online retail experience” is the 1st most cited, most informative article. This shows

that in the previous study the authors observed that if retailers made their online retail stores more “gamified”

and evolved new strategies, they would significantly alleviate the manifestation of undesirable conduct by

customers. Therefore, highly cited articles have shown the popular areas in the discipline.

Table 6: Distribution of research methodology

(Source- self-work of authors)

Method

Percentage

Case Study

4.65

Review

11.62

Interview

13.95

Structural Equation Modelling

30.23

Other

37.2

Diksha Panwar, Sailaja Bohara, Shivendra Singh Chaudhary, Amitabh Bhargava, Sonam Rani

Table 6 presents an overview of the research methodology of previous studies for data collection and

analysis. The SEM method was the most used in this research methodology, with the following being

common method bias, and following the experimental study or DEMETAL with Interview methods or review

methods.

3.4 Keyword Co-occurrence Analysis

The keyword co-occurrence analysis was conducted using VOSviewer (Figure 4), and it offers an

inclusive summary of the conceptual landscape within gamification-related research on customer

engagement. In total, 5 clusters were formed that are represented by different colours. These keywords

provide some useful insight. The network reveals that constructs were used across multiple studies. The Red

colour cluster (cluster 1), dominated by keywords such as engagement, mobile apps, marketing, and in-game

advertising, indicates that gamification has been significantly studied within digital marketing and mobile

user experience situations. Though this area has bred substantial empirical work, it is predominantly grounded

in a limited set of theoretical models, suggesting a need for variance in conceptual frameworks. The blue

colour cluster (Cluster 2), such as customer engagement, affective commitment, and brand experience, shows

increasing interest in the psychological and relational facets of gamification, particularly in focusing on how

it influences long-term customer-brand relationships.

Less densely connected clusters (Cluster 3, green), including sustainability, consumer brand engagement,

co-creation, and online retail experience, indicate emerging areas of study. These focus on the potential of

gamification to drive developmental change and involve value creation in novel contexts. However, the

scarce linkages between these clusters indicate conceptual crumbling and a lack of amalgamation across

domains. Cluster 4, the Yellow colour cluster, connects co-creation and online retail experience. This shows

a potential interest in gamification’s role in qualifying interactive customer participation through different

programs in e-commerce platforms. Cluster 5: Gamified Marketing (Purple colour cluster) is an isolated node

related to gamified marketing, which interrelates with themes in the red cluster but occurs as a distinct

conceptual category. This points toward the strategic use of game elements in digital campaigns. Despite

gamification being the central anchor of the network, the field appears classified, with limited theoretical

merging or cross-domain studies. This analysis underscores the need for future research to bridge isolated

clusters through interdisciplinary frameworks and to expand empirical investigations into under-represented

yet strategically important areas of application.

Figure 4: keyword co-occurrence analysis

(Source- self-work of authors)

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

3.5 TCCM Analysis

The analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the gamification research related to customer

engagement. It primarily maps the frequency and relational structure of the terms used across different

studies. However, a deeper understanding of the above constructs is embedded within broader theoretical

frameworks, research contexts, or methodological approaches. To address this, the TCCM (Theory–

Context–Characteristics–Methodology) framework was employed as a complementary analytical tool. The

TCCM framework was introduced and implemented by Paul and Rosado-Serrano (2019). Indeed, the TCCM

model helps to structure the content and fill in the gaps in the existing literature. Figure 5 clearly represents

a summary of the TCCM framework for gamification.

3.5.1 Theoretical perspectives (T)

In order to better comprehend how gamification influences customer engagement and what theories were

utilized in prior studies, the theoretical framework is relevant. Previous studies focused more on topics like

"gamification and engagement" or "gamification and brand experience." To address this, a detailed manual

review of the selected articles was conducted in which each study’s abstract, introduction, and theoretical

sections was studied to identify the specific theories referenced. This process allowed us to classify studies

based on their alignment with established theories, thereby mapping the theoretical landscape of the

gamification literature in relation to customer engagement. Figure 5 illustrates the theories that have been

applied in previous studies. Connecting existing theories with data driven analysis or machine learning model

user beaviour can be particularly fruitful, so future research needs to blend exploration with theory-based

approaches. The self-determination theory proposed by Deci and Ryan (2000) posits that individuals need to

fulfill their three psychological needs (relatedness, autonomy, and competence) to function optimally. In the

present study, it was found that SDT (self-determination theory) serves as a foundational theory in various

research studies (Nobre H.; Ferreira A. (2017); Lopes J.M.; Gomes S.; Lopes P.; Silva A.; Lourenço D.;

Esteves D.; Cardoso M.; Redondo V. (2023); Syrjälä H.; Kauppinen-Räisänen H.; Luomala H.T.; Joelsson

T.N.; Könnölä K.; Mäkilä T. (2020); Tobon S.; Ruiz-Alba J.L.; García-Madariaga J. (2020)). Flow theory is

the second most commonly used theory in gamification research on customer engagement. This theory helps

researchers in making perceptions of the cognitive and emotional states of customers, allowing for the

optimization of customer experience through gamified marketing strategies (Rehman U.; Abbasi A.Z.; Ting

D.H.; Hassan M.; Khair N. (2024); Whittaker L.; Mulcahy R.; Russell-Bennett R.(2021); Hsu C.-L. (2023);

Jain S.; Mishra S.; Saxena G. (2023). Apart from this, other theories used are TAM, which explains the user

adoption of gamified systems by emphasizing the perceived ease of use and usefulness, informing the design

of engaging digital platforms (García-Jurado et al., 2021). Behavioural Economic theories highlight how

gamified incentives leverage cognitive biases and reward structures to influence customer decision-making

(Ghosh et al., 2022). Cognitive dissonance theory examines how gamification aligns conflicting attitudes to

enhance brand loyalty (Ghosh et al., 2022). Learning theory elucidates how gamified interactions facilitate

knowledge acquisition, supporting skill development in marketing contexts (Rodrigues et al., 2021).

However, there is more to explore in gamification research by incorporating various other theories.

3.5.2 Context perspective (C)

“Context” refers to the circumstances forming the research (Paul and Rosado-Serrano, 2019). In this

study, we have analyzed the countries and industries that have been used in the previous studies. Previous

studies have shown that Gamification has been explored in over 12 different countries, including the USA,

Portugal, India, the UK, Australia, Spain, Canada, China, Sweden, South Africa, and Taiwan. In the context

of industries, gamification research has been explored in retailing (Tsai P.-H.2024, Bidler M.; Zimmermann

J.; Schumann J.H.; Widjaja T. 2020), online shopping (Lopes J.M.; Gomes S.; Lopes P.; Silva A.; Lourenço

D.; Esteves D.; Cardoso M.; Redondo V. 2023, García-Jurado A.; Torres-Jiménez M.; Leal-Rodríguez A.L.;

Castro-González P.2021), health care (Cho I.; Kaplanidou K.; Sato S. 2021, Charry K.; Poncin I.; Kullak A.;

Hollebeek L.D.2024), and gaming (Pamuru V.; Khern-Am-Nuai W.; Kannan K. 2021, Lopes J.M.; Gomes

S.; Santos N.; Cussina H.; Vieira I.; Escudeiro M.; Maio L.; Magalhães Y. 2023). Therefore, there is an

opportunity to carry out research in other fields and different countries.

3.5.3 Characteristics perspective (C)

In this section of the analysis, the researchers examined the research on gamification that used theoretical

frameworks and synthesized the antecedents, mediators, or moderators, and outcomes. Abstracts, conceptual

frameworks, and results sections were carefully reviewed to determine how the constructs were positioned

Diksha Panwar, Sailaja Bohara, Shivendra Singh Chaudhary, Amitabh Bhargava, Sonam Rani

in the study, whether as independent variables (antecedents), intervening mechanisms (mediators or

moderators), or dependent outcomes. Antecedents include gameful experience (GFUL), in-game advertising

(Mishra S.; Malhotra G. 2021), e-commerce, social media, social affordance, progression-based affordance

(Kunkel T.; Hayduk T.; Lock D. 2023), brand identification, self-expressiveness (Hsu C.-L. 2023),

augmented reality (Pamuru V.; Khern-Am-Nuai W.; Kannan K. 2021) fostering immersive and personalized

experiences in digital and retail contexts. Mediator and moderator constructs include perceived in-game

advertisement effectiveness, psychological ownership (Mishra S.; Malhotra G. 2021), gamified systems

(Tobon S.; Ruiz-Alba J.L.; García-Madariaga J. 2020), customer motivations and social comparisons (Ho

Y.-J.I.; Liu S.; Wang L. 2022), illustrating game elements (Bidler M.; Zimmermann J.; Schumann J.H.;

Widjaja T. 2020), customer experience (Sreejesh S.; Ghosh T.; Dwivedi Y.K. 2021). Based on the synthesis

of the literature, concerning outcomes, gamers' attitudes (Mishra S.; Malhotra G. 2021), online customer

decisions, customer engagement (Tobon S.; Ruiz-Alba J.L.; García-Madariaga J. 2020), perception

(Whittaker L.; Mulcahy R.; Russell-Bennett R. 2021), user behaviour, and an increased likelihood of

customers (Bidler M.; Zimmermann J.; Schumann J.H.; Widjaja T. 2020) are the most frequently studied

consequences. In future research, there is also a need to investigate the moderating effect of demographic

variables such as age, income, and gender on customer engagement. Future studies should prioritize empirical

studies using theoretical frameworks to examine user behaviour in gamification.

3.5.4 Methodology perspective (M)

In this section, articles are categorized according to the research approach utilized and the data analysis

methods employed in the literature. Figure 5 illustrates the distribution of research methods, complementing

the other frameworks. The most used methodology in the previous studies includes case analysis, review

papers, structural equation modelling, common method bias and interview (Nobre H.; Ferreira A. 2017; Lu

H.-P.; Ho H.-C. 2020; García-Jurado A.; Torres-Jiménez M.; Leal-Rodríguez A.L.; Castro-González P. 2021;

Cho I.; Kaplanidou K.; Sato S. 2021; Hsu C.-L. 2023 Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017).). However, other

methods such as mixed-methods, longitudinal studies, and integrating quantitative surveys with qualitative

interviews remain unexplored in the area of study. Future research could also integrate mixed-method

approaches.

Figure 5: TCCM framework for gamification

(Source- self-work of authors)

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

These findings suggest that gamification enhances engagement through targeted game elements, offering

marketers tools to boost loyalty in digital retail. Future research should explore diverse theories, new

industries, and use mixed methods to address these gaps.

4. DISCUSSION AND FUTURE SCOPE OF STUDY

Content analysis of the selected Scopus-indexed articles (2014–2024) reveals limitations in gamification

research on customer engagement, analyzed through the TCCM framework (Paul & Rosado-Serrano, 2019).

Table 7 below summarizes the limitations and proposes the direction for future study .

The self-determination theory (SDT) and flow theory (e.g., Nobre & Ferreira, 2017; Whittaker et al.,

2021) dominate gamification’s impact on motivation but limits investigation of alternate frameworks like

Fogg’s Behavior Model (FBM) or UTAUT, which could clarify behavioural and technology acceptance

(Fogg, 2002; Venkatesh et al., 2003). The narrow theoretical focus can lead to nuanced marketing

applications. Previous research concentrates on industries like retail and online shopping in countries like

Portugal and India (e.g., Tsai, 2024; Bidler et al., 2020), whereas industries like education and regions like

Africa remain underexplored. This confines gamification’s applicability to diverse markets, especially post-

COVID digital contexts. Antecedents (like gameful experiences driving engagement and brand loyalty), are

mediated by psychological ownership (e.g., Mishra & Malhotra, 2021). However, demographic factors (e.g.,

age, gender) are not taken as moderators and cultural factors (e.g., Hofstede’s dimensions) that hinder

strategies for global audiences. Structural equation modelling (30.23%) is the most used methodology, with

mixed methods underutilized (Table 6). This limits comprehensive insights related to user behaviour across

contexts.

These constraints highlight opportunities for marketers to use gamification for personalized engagement

(e.g., AI-driven experiences) and for researchers to explore interdisciplinary theories, new industries, and

mixed methods that are still under exploration. Table 7 outlines these directions for future research.

Table 7: TCCM Framework Limitations and Future Research Directions

(Source- self-work of authors)

Domain

Limitations

Research Directions

Theory

Overreliance on SDT and flow

theory limits behavioural and

technological insights

Apply FBM to study motivation

triggers and UTAUT to assess

technology acceptance in

gamification (Fogg, 2002;

Venkatesh et al., 2003).

Context

Focus on digital platforms

(e.g., retail) and select countries

(e.g., Portugal)

Explore gamification in

education and underrepresented

regions (e.g., Africa) to address

digital fatigue post-COVID.

Characteristics

Limited study of demographic

and cultural moderators (e.g.,

Hofstede’s dimensions)

Investigate age, gender, and

cultural impacts (e.g., collectivist

vs. individualist responses) on

gamified engagement (Hofstede,

1980).

Methodology

Dominance of SEM; underuse

of mixed methods

Employ mixed-method studies to

capture nuanced user behaviours

in gamified systems.

The COVID pandemic has shifted the world to digitalization, which has presented an opportunity to

understand and explore digital fatigue. This is because gamification was being used in webinars, online

meetings, and e-commerce. Further, work can be done to understand whether the quizzes, mini-games, and

gamification tools that are being used to generate leads are impactful or not. Also the Big Five personality

Trait model can be used to understand the different personality experiences in connection with gamification.

Further, the trending technology “Artificial Intelligence” is being integrated into gamification, creating

Diksha Panwar, Sailaja Bohara, Shivendra Singh Chaudhary, Amitabh Bhargava, Sonam Rani 
14 
 
personalized  gamified  experiences.  To  understand  this,  multiple  case  studies  can  be  conducted  across 
industries.  
 
5.  CONCLUSION  
Over  the past  12  years,  researchers  have been exploring the  concept  of gamification  and its role in 
customer engagement by marketers. This paper aimed to take a close look at these studies to identify research 
gaps in this area and lay out a plan for future research in the area. The study highlights key journals, the most 
relevant authors, countries, and the co-citation network of keywords in this area. The study also outlines the 
evolution of research and the most productive countries. This study will help to identify the development of 
the research area systematically. The study uses the TCCM framework to classify the literature into theory, 
context,  characteristics,  and  methodology.  By  using  TCCM  and  bibliometric  analysis,  the  study  offers 
valuable  insights  for  future  research.  The  study  highlights  the  point  that  gamification  can  go  beyond 
traditional boundaries in providing a sense of customer engagement that is revolutionizing the landscape of 
marketing. The study provides a clear overview of the concept of gamification. The research agenda was not 
only to synthesize existing knowledge but also to establish a clear direction for future research. This study 
will help researchers and marketers to explore those areas that are untouched and also refine the existing 
models and contribute meaningfully to the evolving landscape of gamification. 
 
ACKNOWLEDGMENT 
The authors would like to express their gratitude to all those who contributed to the completion of this 
research. As authors we would also like to thank the editor and the anonymous reviewer for their valuable 
insights 
 
 
REFERENCES 
 
Aria,  M.,  &  Cuccurullo,  C.  (2017).  bibliometrix:  An  R-tool  for  comprehensive  science  mapping 
analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007 
Bidler, M., Zimmermann, J., Schumann, J. H., & Widjaja, T. (2020). Increasing customers’ willingness 
to engage in data disclosure processes through relevance-illustrating game elements. Journal of Retailing, 
96(4), 507–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2020.10.001 
Brodie, R. J., Hollebeek, L. D., Jurić, B., & Ilić, A. (2011). Customer engagement: Conceptual domain, 
fundamental  propositions,  and  implications  for  research. Journal  of  Service  Research,  14(3),  252–
271. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670511411703 
Charry,  K.,  Poncin, I., Kullak, A.,  & Hollebeek,  L. D.  (2024).  Gamification’s  role  in  fostering  user 
engagement  with  healthy  food-based  digital  content. Psychology  &  Marketing,  41(1),  23–
37. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21892 
Cho, I., Kaplanidou, K., & Sato, S. (2021). Gamified wearable fitness tracker for physical activity: A 
comprehensive literature review. Sustainability, 13(13), Article 7017. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137017 
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: 
Defining  “gamification”.  In Proceedings  of  the  15th  International  Academic  MindTrek  Conference: 
Envisioning  future  media  environments (pp.  9–15).  Association  for  Computing 
Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040 
Domínguez, A.,  Saenz-de-Navarrete,  J.,  de-Marcos,  L.,  Fernández-Sanz,  L.,  Pagés,  C.,  &  Martínez-
Herráiz, J.-J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers & 
Education, 63, 380–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020 
Fogg,  B.  J.  (2002).  Persuasive  technology:  Using  computers  to  change  what  we  think  and  do. 
In Proceedings  of  the  2002 ACM  SIGCHI  conference  on  human  factors in  computing  systems (pp. 1–8). 
Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/503376.503378 
García-Jurado, A.,  Torres-Jiménez,  M.,  Leal-Rodríguez, A.  L.,  &  Castro-González,  P.  (2021).  Does 
gamification engage users in online shopping? Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 48, Article 
101076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2021.101076 

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org 
 
15 
 
Gerdenitsch,  C.,  Sellitsch, D.,  Besser,  M.,  Burger, S.,  Stegmann,  C., Tscheligi,  M., &  Kriglstein,  S. 
(2020).  Work  gamification:  Effects  on  enjoyment,  productivity,  and  the  role  of  leadership. Electronic 
Commerce Research and Applications, 43, Article 100994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2020.100994 
Ghosh, T., Sreejesh, S., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2022). Brands in a game or a game for brands? Comparing 
the persuasive effectiveness of in-game advertising and advergames. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 30(5), 
417–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2021.1877898 
Hakulinen, L., Auvinen, T., & Korhonen, A. (2013). Empirical study on the effect of achievement badges 
in  TRAKLA2  online  learning  environment.  In 2013  Learning  and  teaching  in  computing  and 
engineering (pp. 47–54). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/LaTiCE.2013.34 
Hamari,  J.,  & Koivisto,  J. (2015). Working  out  for  likes: An  empirical  study on  social  influence  in 
exercise  gamification. Computers  in  Human  Behavior,  50,  333–
347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.018 
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical 
studies on gamification. In Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (pp. 
3025–3034). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377 
Ho,  Y.-J.  I.,  Liu,  S.,  &  Wang,  L.  (2022).  Fun  shopping:  A  randomized  field  experiment  on 
gamification. Information Systems Research, 33(4), 1389–1407. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2022.1147 
Hofacker, C. F., de Ruyter, K., Lurie, N. H., Manchanda, P., & Donaldson, J. (2016). Gamification and 
mobile  marketing  effectiveness. Journal  of  Interactive  Marketing,  34,  25–
36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2016.03.001 
Hsu,  C.-L.  (2023). Impact of  gamification  on  brand  identification  and self-expressiveness  in luxury 
marketing. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 41(2), 171–185. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-05-2022-0208 
Huotari, K., & Hamari, J. (2017). A definition for gamification: Anchoring gamification in the service 
marketing  literature. Electronic  Commerce  Research,  17(1),  39–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-016-
9241-6 
Jain,  S.,  Mishra,  S.,  &  Saxena,  G.  (2023).  Luxury  customer’s  motivations  to  adopt 
gamification. Marketing  Intelligence  &  Planning,  41(2),  156–170. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-05-2022-
0207 
Jones, B. A., Madden, G. J., & Wengreen, H. J.  (2014). The  FIT game:  Preliminary evaluation of a 
gamification approach to increasing fruit and vegetable consumption in school. Preventive Medicine, 68, 76–
79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.04.015 
Knight, G., Madsen, T. K., & Servais, P. (2004). An inquiry into born-global firms in Europe and the 
USA. International Marketing Review, 21(6), 645–666. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651330410568060 
Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2019). The rise of motivational information systems: A review of gamification 
research. International  Journal  of  Information  Management,  45,  191–
210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.013 
Kunkel, T., Hayduk, T., & Lock, D. (2023). Push it real good: The effects of push notifications promoting 
motivational affordances on customer behavior in a gamified mobile app. European Journal of Marketing, 
57(9), 2592–2618. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-06-2021-0388 
Lopes, J. M., Gomes, S., Lopes, P., Silva, A., Lourenço, D., Esteves, D., Cardoso, M., & Redondo, V. 
(2023). Exploring the role of gamification in the online shopping experience in retail stores: An exploratory 
study. Societies, 12(4), Article 235. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12040235 
Markets  and  Markets.  (2020). Gamification  market (Report  No.  TC 
1445). https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/gamification-market-991.html 
Marlow, S. L., Salas, E., Landon, L. B., & Presnell, B. (2016). Eliciting teamwork with game attributes: 
A  systematic  review  and  research  agenda. Computers  in  Human  Behavior,  55,  413–
423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.028 
Mishra,  S., & Malhotra,  G. (2021). The gamification of  in-game advertising: Examining  the role  of 
psychological  ownership  and  advertisement  intrusiveness. International  Journal  of  Information 
Management, 61, Article 102245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102245 
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting 
items  for  systematic  reviews  and  meta-analyses:  The  PRISMA  statement. PLoS  Medicine,  6(7), 
e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 
Nobre, H., & Ferreira, A. (2017). Gamification as a platform for brand co-creation experiences. Journal 
of Brand Management, 24(4), 349–361. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-017-0055-3 

Diksha Panwar, Sailaja Bohara, Shivendra Singh Chaudhary, Amitabh Bhargava, Sonam Rani 
16 
 
Pamuru, V., Khern-am-nuai, W., & Kannan, K. N. (2021). The impact of an augmented reality game on 
local  businesses:  A  study  of  Pokémon  Go  on  restaurants. Information  Systems  Research,  32(3),  950–
966. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2021.1001 
Paul, J., & Rosado-Serrano, A. (2019). Gradual internationalization vs. born-global/international new 
venture  models:  A  review  and  research  agenda. International  Marketing  Review,  36(6),  830–
858. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-10-2018-0280 
Prestopnik, N. R., & Tang, J. (2015). Points, stories, worlds, and diegesis: Comparing player experiences 
in  two  citizen  science  games. Computers  in  Human  Behavior,  52,  492–
506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.051 
Rapp,  A.  (2020).  An  exploration  of  World  of  Warcraft  for  the  gamification  of  virtual 
organizations. Electronic  Commerce  Research  and  Applications,  42,  Article 
100985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2020.100985 
Rodrigues,  I.,  Lopes,  J.  M.,  Borges,  A.,  Oliveira,  J.,  &  Oliveira,  M.  (2021).  How  can  gamified 
applications drive engagement and brand attitude? The case of the Nike Run Club application. Administrative 
Sciences, 11(3), Article 92. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci11030092 
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, 
social  development,  and  well-being. American  Psychologist,  55(1),  68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.55.1.68 
Saxena, G., Jain, S., & Mishra, S. (2023). Enhancing affective commitment through gamified services 
of luxury brands: Role of game mechanics and self-congruity. Journal of Services Marketing, 37(8), 1018–
1031. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-06-2022-0217 
Shafqat,  W.,  Byun, Y.-C.,  &  Park,  S.  (2022).  Intent-based  keyword  extraction  for  academic  search 
optimization:  A  systematic  approach. Journal  of  Information  Science,  48(5),  672–
689. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515211001707 
Sigala, M. (2015). Gamification for crowdsourcing marketing practices: Applications and benefits in 
tourism. In F. Garrigos-Simon, I. Gil-Pechuan, & S. Estelles-Miguel (Eds.), Advances in crowdsourcing (pp. 
129–145). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18341-1_10 
Sreejesh, S., Ghosh, T., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2021). Moving beyond the content: The role of contextual 
cues  in  the  effectiveness  of  gamification  of  advertising. Journal  of  Business  Research,  132,  88–
101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.007 
Syrjälä, H., Kauppinen-Räisänen, H., Luomala, H. T., Joelsson, T. N., Könnölä, K., & Mäkilä, T. (2020). 
Gamified  package:  Customer  insights  into  multidimensional  brand  engagement. Journal  of  Business 
Research, 119, 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.089 
Terlutter, R., & Capella, M. L. (2013). The gamification of advertising: Analysis and research directions 
of in-game advertising, advergames, and advertising in social network games. Journal of Advertising, 42(2–
3), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2013.774638 
Tobon, S., Ruiz-Alba, J. L., & García-Madariaga, J. (2020). Gamification and online customer decisions: 
Is the game over? Decision Support Systems, 128, Article 113167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2019.113167 
Rehman, A. Z. U., Abbasi, D. H., Ting, M., Hassan, M., & Khair, N. (2024). Exploring the impact of 
gamified  experiences  on  user  engagement  in  fitness  apps:  A  GAMEFULQUEST  perspective. IEEE 
Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 3613–3628. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2023.3347231 
Vegt, N., Visch, V., de Ridder, H., & Vermeeren, A. (2015). Gamification in education and business. In 
J.  C.  H.  van  der  Heijden  (Ed.), Gamification  in  education  and  business (pp.  513–533). 
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10208-5_26 
Whittaker,  L.,  Mulcahy,  R.,  &  Russell-Bennett,  R.  (2021).  ‘Go  with  the  flow’  for  gamification  and 
sustainability  marketing. International  Journal  of  Information  Management,  61,  Article 
102305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102305 
Xi,  N., &  Hamari,  J.  (2019). Does  gamification  satisfy  needs? A study  on  the relationship  between 
gamification features and intrinsic need satisfaction. International Journal of Information Management, 46, 
210–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.12.002 
Xi, N., & Hamari, J. (2019). The relationship between gamification, brand engagement, and brand equity. 
In Proceedings  of  the  52nd  Hawaii  international  conference  on  system  sciences (pp.  812–821). 
ScholarSpace/AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.098 
Yang, Y., Asaad, Y., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2017). Examining the impact of gamification on intention of 
engagement  and  brand  attitude  in  the  marketing  context. Computers  in  Human  Behavior,  73,  459–
469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.066 

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

Zichermann, G., & Cunningham, C. (2011). Gamification by design: Implementing game mechanics in

web and mobile apps. O’Reilly Media.

Zichermann, G., & Linder, J. (2013). The gamification revolution: How leaders leverage game

mechanics to crush the competition. McGraw-Hill.