The Impact of Esports on the Development of 21st Century Skills and Academic Performance for Youths Volume 62- Issue 1

James Kwan*

• University of Newcastle, Australia

Received: May 14, 2025; Published: May 26, 2025

*Corresponding author: James Kwan, University of Newcastle, Australia

DOI: 10.26717/BJSTR.2025.62.009694

Abstract PDF

Esports, a rapidly growing industry valued at billions globally, has become a significant social and educational phenomenon. The study reviewed existing literature to examine how participation in Esports fosters critical 21st-century skills—specifically cognitive and metacognitive abilities, cooperation and collaboration, communication, and personal and social responsibility—while also assessing its mixed effects on academic outcomes. The paper discussed adult learning theories underpinning skill acquisition in Esports, the categorization and definitions of Esports, and empirical evidence from diverse methodologies. It highlighted the educational and professional implications of integrating Esports into school curricula, workplace training, and government policies, emphasizing the potential for Esports to enhance motivation, social connectedness, and career readiness. Limitations of current research and directions for future studies focusing on stakeholder perspectives and longitudinal impacts were also addressed. This comprehensive review underscored the transformative role of Esports in youth development and education in the digital age.

Keywords: Esports; 21^st Century Skills; Academic Performance

Electronic sports (Esports), or video games, have been a burgeoning phenomenon over the past decade and become ubiquitous among young adults in the United States and globally. For instance, a study conducted by Pew Research reported that 72% of male and 49% of female young adults, ages 18 to 29, engaged in Esports on a computer, game console, or cellphone (Perrin [1]). Crawford, et al. [2] noted that Esports is becoming “an example of a wider social process whereby social reality is increasingly being encountered (and sold) as a set of designed and curated experiences” (p. 941). Moreover, with the Covid-19 pandemic concerns like social distancing from traditional sports during uncertain times, Esports has become a popular alternative for many sports enthusiasts to improve social connectedness (Kim, et al. [3-5]). According to a report by Statista, the global Esports market is valued at just over US$2.8 billion in 2024 and is projected to generate US$16.7 billion in 2033, representing a compound annual growth rate of almost 22 percent during this period (Clement [6]). The largest share of Esports market revenue came from sponsorships and advertising. Currently, Asia and North America represent the largest Esports markets in revenue, with China alone accounting for almost one-fifth of the market. In a separate report by rate Tencent, et al. [7], Southeast Asia is expected to grow at a healthy compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 20.8% (2019 – 2024) to reach US$72.5 million in 2024.

Research Motivation and Context

There is a dearth of research on Esports and its impact on youth development (Bhavana, et al. [8-12]). Prior studies reported that Esports enhance creativity and innovation (Snelson, et al. [13]), critical thinking, problem-solving and decision-making (Eseryel, et al. [14- 17]), cognitive and metacognition (Ding, et al. [18-20]), communication (Abramov, et al. [21-23]), collaboration (Bawa, et al. [24-26]), information and communication technology (Himang, et al. [27-29]), and personal and social responsibility (Castillo, et al. [30-32]). Many of these skills fall within the 21st-century skills, attracting at least six theoretical frameworks offering different terminologies and perspectives towards the types of 21st-century skills (Zhong, et al. [10,11]). Discussion of these frameworks is beyond the scope of this paper. For academic performance, the empirical evidence on the impact of Esports on academic performance among youths is mixed (Drummond, et al. [33,34]). This literature review aims to provide a comprehensive discussion of esports and its impact on the development of 21st-century skills and academic performance for youths aged between 18 and 25 years. The literature review will highlight various implications for practice, and the paper will conclude with future directions for further research.

Research Objective and Research Questions

The review focuses on the youth aged between 16 and 25, who are significant in the Esports industry. Specifically, the study seeks to examine the impact of Esports participation on developing 21st-century skills and youths’ academic performance. Thus, the research questions for the proposed study are as follows:

• RQ1: How does Esports impact the development of 21st-century skills among youths?

• RQ2: What are the potential impacts of Esports on the academic performance among youths?

Due to the complexity and inconsistency found in the six theoretical frameworks for 21st-century skills, the proposed study employs four of the ten skills provided in the KSAVE model established by Binkley, et al. [35]:

1. Cognitive, Metacognition;

2. Cooperation/collaboration;

3. Communication;

4. Personal and social responsibility/behavior.

These four skills have been widely researched by Esports scholars (see Section 3.2). The appendix summarizes the ten skills spelt out in the KSAVE model.

Research Contribution

The research contribution for the proposed study is threefold. First, there is a dearth of empirical evidence that students who engage in Esports develop many future career-ready 21st-century skills, which have far-reaching effects on their career and personality development. However, these skills are usually acquired outside the classroom (Galarneau, et al. [36]). Students have consistently expressed their love for Esports, with 84% indicating a desire to include Esports as a form of future learning in school and have opportunities to participate in Esports tournaments (Duran [37]). As different types of Esports promote different skills for problem-solving and socially responsible leadership development in the individual, team, and societal domains (Dugan, et al. [38-40]), it is hopeful that the results gathered from the proposed study provide further insights for universities to consider to enhance their curriculum development by incorporating Esports as part of students’ classroom learning (Chu, et al. [41]). Recent studies reported that Esports can be a powerful tool to support students with autism spectrum disorder in initiating and sustaining social contact (Nielsen, et al. [42,43]). Universities may develop an Esports program as part of the special education for these students to promote an inclusive educational environment.

The emergence of online learning during the Covid-19 pandemic has sparked intense interest in pedagogical innovation among educators and instructors (Zhong, et al. [10]). The findings from the proposed study may provide significant ramifications for instructors to explore the use of Esports in their teaching and assessment practices. For instance, online instructors may incorporate online multiplayer games where students can use their voices to actively engage their classmates in group discussion, information sharing, and collaborative learning (Stone, et al. [43]). Educators and curriculum developers may convert a traditional classroom learning format course to an online or hybrid one where game-based or task-oriented learning may appeal more to students (Hallinger, et al. [44,45]). Another lure of Esports for instructors is to leverage social networks and online learning communities to promote digital literacies and online prosocial behaviours and foster informal communication and learning, collaboration, and community building among students (Cho, et al. [46-48]). With the surge in new learning and teaching technologies, Esports may provide an innovative, engaging, and collaborative learning approach for educators to promote game-based learning that improves student learning motivation and self-efficacy (Ebner, et al. [49-51]), but also enhance instructors’ teaching competence and contribute to their professional development (Jabbari, et al. [52]). The final contribution of the proposed study relates to partnering opportunities between universities and employers for curriculum development and student career pathways. As Esports is closely associated with the development of ICT literacy, students who are actively engaged in Esports may explore careers in computer engineering, web development, data analytics, sales and digital marketing, multimedia communication, and technopreneurship (Anderson, et al. [22,53,54] Bryne, 2020). With support from the government, universities may reach out to various organizations to seek assistance in developing highly relevant curricula for these career pathways. Further, to promote awareness of Esports, nationally and internationally, schools may send their students to participate in competitive Esports.

Paper Coverage

The paper comprises four sections. Section one provides an overview of the global Esports market and its potential growth. It also discusses the research motivation, context and objective, research questions and significance of research. Section two presents literature on the impact of Esports on the development of 21st-century skills and academic performance among youths. Section three discusses the implications for practice and the limitations of the paper. Section four concludes with the research’s limitations and highlights directions for future research.

Definition and Categorization of Esports

The word Esports has several spellings (Pacetti-Donelson [55]). Winer [56] noted that “depening on the source, country, and context, it might be written in any of the following ways: esports, eSports, Esports, E-Sports, e-sport, Cybersport, Virtualsports, and more” (para. 1). Likewise, the definition of Esport is complex and varies according to individual researchers, which may incorporate business, culture, and technology (Jin [57]). Several researchers emphasize the involvement of competition where students play video games as athletes (e.g. Block, et al. [57-59]). In the context of this paper, student-athletes are excluded. Thus the definition provided by Hamari, et al. [60] is employed, where they define Esport as “a form of sports where electronic systems facilitate the primary aspects of the sport; the input of players and teams as well as the output of the Esports system are mediated by human-computer interfaces” (p. 213). Table 1 presents various definitions of Esports by researchers over the last two decades. Recent studies noted that gaming activities can be categorised as Esports if they fulfil the following attributes:

1. Structure (e.g., rules),

2. Organisation (e.g., rules, adherence to rules, and coordination by teams or leagues), and

3. Competitiveness (e.g., having winners and losers) (Funk, et al. [61,62]).

Table 1: Selected Esports Definitions by Year (Source: Delello, et al. [9]).

Based on this definition, Esports are broadly divided into nine genres:
1. First-person shooters (FPS) and third-person shooters (TPS),
2. Real-time strategy (RTS) games,
3. Multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA) games,
4. Sports simulation games,
5. Sandbox games,
6. Massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs),
7. racing games,
8. Card and board games, and
9. Fighting games (Maryville University, [63]).
The features of each of these esports genres (Alexander, et al. [63- 66]) are presented in Table 2 [67-76].

Table 2: Features of Esports by Genre (Source: Zhong, et al. [11]).

Adult Learning Theories

Adult learning theories provide a multifaceted lens through which we can understand how individuals engage and develop skills in various contexts, including Esports. At the heart of these theories are experiential learning, social learning, and community dynamics, which considerably influence commitment dynamics and skills acquisition in competitive play environments.

Experiential Learning: The experimental learning theory, mainly articulated by Kolb [77], postulates that learning occurs through the transformation of experience into knowledge through a cyclical process that involves concrete experience, reflexive observation, abstract conceptualization and active experimentation. This framework finds a significant application within the Esports domain, in which players get involved in competitive environments that mimic real-life scenarios, thus improving both the development of individual skills and the dynamics of the team.The integration of experimental learning in Esports training is supported by a systematic framework that emphasizes multifaceted learning of learning (Chang, et al. [78]). As Baxter, et al. [79] argued, the competitive game reinforces cognitive skills. It cultivates emotional and social skills, describing the need for a holistic educational approach to developing postgraduate attributes through games. The commitment to Esports inherently promotes critical thinking, problem-solving and adaptability, an observation corroborated by Zhong, et al. [10], who conducted a systematic review that reveals that participation in Esports encourages essential 21st-century skills among youth.

Seaman, et al. [80] underlined the importance of practice as a mechanism to refine technical skills and game strategies. While players meet several times in various game scenarios, they improve their tactical decision-making and reactions through muscle memory and cognitive commitment. Studies show that the immersive nature of the competitive game promotes technical competence, critical thinking, and problem-solving capacities because players must analyze their performance and adapt their strategies to succeed against adversaries (Jenny, et al. [81,82]). Collaboration and teamwork are essential to ensure optimal performance and commitment in Esports. Ho, et al. [83] argued that applying experimental learning based on the game promotes an integral understanding of the dynamics of the sustainable team, directly impacting the cohesion of the team and the execution of the strategy. Successful teams often embody the principles of experimental learning as they continually evaluate their strategy and collaboration results, which leads to continuous development and adaptation in their game.

Social Learning Theory: The social learning theory, proposed by Bandura [84], postulated that individuals learn in a social context by observation, imitation and modeling. In Esports, the common aspects of the game - online and offline - face a rich environment for this type of learning to occur. Players often engage in a collaboration game, where peer observation can lead to acquiring new techniques and strategies (Reyes [85]). Team-based games, which prevail in Esports, serve as mature environments to use social learning theory. Hesketh [86] emphasized the success factors that support learning through the show, suggesting that the observation of elite players can significantly improve the understanding of one of the games and strategies of the game. This is aligned with the findings of Bopp, et al. [87], who advocated the role game as a pedagogical tool, using experimental learning to prepare students for careers in the Esports industry by promoting collaborative learning and critical commitment.

The role of the community in Esports extends beyond the development of skills; It is essential for the performance and commitment of the player. Hwang, et al. [88] discussed how educational games incorporating social elements lead to shared experiences, improving collective learning among participants. The shared objectives and camaraderie within the Esports communities create an atmosphere of support that motivates players to improve collectively. This commitment, identified by Wenzler, et al. [89], deepens even more in serious games, encouraging players to transfer skills learned in the game to the contexts of the real world. In recent years, technology has revolutionized how social learning occurs within Esports. Asad, et al. [90] presented virtual reality as a pedagogical tool that improves experimental learning, which allows immersive environments where players can practice skills in a simulated context. This technological change enriches the learning experience and aligns with the principles of social learning by facilitating collaboration in virtual spaces. Scavarelli, et al. [91] highlighted the importance of augmented reality in creating interactive social learning environments that promote commitment and acquisition of skills among players.

Community Dynamics: Community dynamics in Esports have been fed by the integration of various communication technologies, such as voice chat and transmission platforms, which serve as conduits for real-time feedback and problem-solving discussions. This immediacy of communication is aligned with Vygotsky’s [92] concept of the proximal development zone, whereby students progress through guided interactions provided by more connoisseurs. In this context, Esports participants can participate in the “scaffolding”, a pedagogical approach that promotes learning through structured support during challenging game scenarios. As players navigate the intricate mechanics of the game or the strategy for competitive matches, community support allows them to overcome obstacles and refine their skills more efficiently than lonely practice would allow. In addition, community dynamics extend beyond the development of individual skills to influence broader cultural phenomena within Esports. Participation in game communities encourages social ties and can contribute to uniting different cultures, as players of various origins join under shared interests. Consequently, these dynamics promote an inclusive atmosphere where learning occurs wherever there are interactions between players. In addition, the role of communities, such as streaming platforms and game forums, allows players to share information and ask for advice. This community dynamic improves individual skills and strengthens community ties while players collectively sail their learning trips. Gholami, et al. [93] illustrated the impact of community dynamics on the player’s participation. Their research revealed that the collective objectives of the team, collaboration and interdependence encourage a sense of belonging among players, which is crucial for sustained involvement in competitive contexts. The sensation of camaraderie cultivated in equipment based on equipment not only improves the development of skills through shared objectives but also promotes a culture of continuous improvement. Committed players are more likely to actively participate in team practice and strategies collectively and attend community events. This environment aligns well with the principles of adult learning, emphasizing the value of the community as a learning facilitator, where players are encouraged to learn not only from their successes but also from failures and challenges found on the way.

As the Esports panorama continues to evolve, understanding how these community dynamics align with adult learning theories becomes a criticism. Recognizing the interaction between social environments and learning methodologies underlines the importance of promoting collaborative spaces, supporting commitment and improving players’ skills at all levels. This perspective deepens our understanding of Esports and reinforces the applicability of established adult learning theories in innovative and mediated contexts digitally. Integrating adult learning theories in Esports has remarkable challenges and promising opportunities to improve engagement, skill development and community dynamics. One of the main challenges is the variability in players’ demography, which can significantly influence the learning experiences of adult players. For example, Fancourt, et al. [94] argued that the various age groups, educational training and previous experiences of games between adult players can lead to different motivations and learning needs. This variability complicates the implementation of a single-size approach to Esports training programs, as adult students can display varied levels of engagement depending on their interests and prior knowledge.

Youth Development

The proposed study examines four 21st-century skills well documented in prior literature: cognitive, metacognition, cooperation/ collaboration, communication, personal and social responsibility/ behaviour (refer to Table 3) [95-121].

Table 3: Reviewed studies on Esports related to 21^st-century skills (N = 37).

Cognitive, Metacognition: There has been a growing body of literature examining the effect of Esports on cognitive skills (Bisoglio, et al. [122-125]). As successful gaming performance requires a plethora of cognitive tasks such as stimulus-response mappings in visual attention (Castel, et al. [33,126,127]), multiple object tracking (Green, et al. [128]), task-switching (Kowal, et al. [99]), inhibitory responses (Deleuze, et al. [129,130]), and eye-hand coordination (Griffith, et al. [131]), several studies reported a positive effect of Esports training on cognitive ability (Bediou, et al. [132-134]). Somewhat counterintuitively, Sala, et al. [101] conducted three meta-analyses evaluating the extent of Esports training on cognitive ability. They concluded that “playing video games has negligible effects on cognitive ability” (p. 3). Simon, et al. [135] cautioned against some of the conclusions drawn in Esports research as there is a lack of consensus on whether Esports engagement is associated with different cognitive skills and, if so, which cognitive ability is directly associated with Esports. Thus, it is evident that further methodologically robust research is critical to illuminate the apparent neuromodulating effects of Esports.

Cooperation/Collaboration: The popularity of Esports has drawn scholars’ attention to combining social network analysis and cooperation (Mora-Cantallops, et al. [109,113]). Recent studies suggested that human behaviour and interaction in a real-time decision- making environment are ubiquitous in real-world activities and social networks (Friedman, et al. [136,137]). For instance, Hawkins, et al. [137] conducted a study to examine the efficiency of real-time decision-making and traditional staged environments using the Battle of the Exes, a version of a two-player and asymmetric coordination game. They found that players permitted to interact and cooperate continuously within rounds achieved better outcomes than those forced to make simultaneous decisions. Their findings supported earlier studies where social networks significantly influenced cooperative behavior (Friedman, et al. [136,138-140]). Other studies that involved interaction networks of human populations using repeated games found that the population structure may or may not affect the cooperative behaviour as theoretically indicated (Grujić, et al. [141,142]) as these interaction networks may employ different criteria such as reinforcement learning (Horita, et al. [143]) and moody conditioning (Grujić, et al. [141]) instead of the commonly used imitation- based criterion (Suzuki, et al. [113]).

The advent and the rise of First Person Shooters (FPA) and Multiplayer Online Battle Arena (MOBA) games such as League of Legends and Defence of the Ancients provide a fertile ground for Esports scholars to examine the correlation of network measures with players cooperative behaviour (Mora-Canallops, et al. [144,145]). More recently, Mora-Cantallops, et al. [144] examined team performance and cooperation among League of Legends professional players based on a 453,386 kill assists over 7,582 matches dataset. Based on the density-performance and centralization-performance hypotheses, they found that team efficiency and cooperation are positively associated with the intensity of their ongoing interaction, while increased centralization characterized by higher individualization negatively affects team performance. The findings reported by Mora-Canallops, et al. [144] only examined professional players and did not consider students who played League of Legends and other MOBA games. In addition, they only considered kills and assists and did not consider other cooperative interactions such as healing, stunning, slowing, and other spatio-temporal variables (Drachen, et al. [146]). The proposed study intends to extend the study conducted by Mora-Canallops, et al. [144] by examining other cooperative interactions from a broader range of MOBA games among youths who may not be professional players.

Communication: Esports are inherently competitive and often command high communication to manifest the game’s narrative and ludic potential, especially in team settings (Steuer [147]). The emergence of MOBA games, massively multiplayer online games (MMOG), and massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORG) suggest the importance of understanding the social demands – the degrees of implicit and explicit awareness of and response to the presence of other players (Bank, et al. [148,149]). Implicit awareness takes the form of non-specific and non-directive stimulus induced by the physical or virtual presence of others (Zajonc, et al. [150,151]). Explicit awareness is characterized by the conscious recognition of verbal and non-verbal cues from others, which include controlled avatar movements (purposeful cues) and gendered speech (unconscious cues) (Moore, et al. [152]). Implicit response to others involves social facilitation effects that raise game performance via increased stimulus (Bowman, et al. [153]). Explicit response may vary widely based on the extant game studies literature and typically falls within the normative social behaviour domain that includes performing deliberate avatar gestures and contemplating whether or not to converse (Kowert [154]).

Prior studies examined the importance of communication in engaging Esports (Bank, et al. [115,116,155]). Socializing with others via digital communication channels is a crucial motivation for engaging in Esports as players develop meaningful communication, share experiences, and achieve satisfaction through teamwork (Yee [156]). Such gratifications would only be achieved with other players’ commitment and positive physical and virtual presence (Quandt, et al. [157]). Conversely, when players do not comply with the co-existence rules and act in an individualistic, self-centred manner, such toxic behaviour or disinhibition may provoke anger or frustration among other players, leading to a bad taste in their mouths (Suler [158]). The influence of toxic behavior on Esports players’ performance has been documented in prior studies, and all these studies found that toxicity has a negative impact on players’ motivation and performance (Blackburn, et al. [155,159]), and retention of new players (Shores, et al. [160]). A detailed account of these studies is beyond the scope of this paper.

Personal and Social Responsibility/Behavior: A growing body of literature examines the association between Esports and social responsibility and behavior (Greitemeyer, et al. [119,161,162]). Specifically, the virtual gaming environment has received a fair share of criticism as it is notorious for causing destructive behavior amongst the players, such as verbal abuse and sexual harassment (Fox, et al. [163-165]). On the contrary, players developed lasting friendships and camaraderie through Esports, resulting in improved personal well-being and greater life satisfaction (Grieve, et al. [166,167]) and a reduction in anti-social behaviors (Dolgov, et al. [168,169]). For instance, Grizzard, et al. [162] examined the association between digital world immoral behavior and its real-world effect. They placed the participants into two teams: playing the terrorist (guilt-inducing condition) and playing the soldier (control condition). They found that the “terrorists” experienced a greater sense of guilt and increased the salience of violated moral values, suggesting that the behaviors people commit against others in the digital world can elicit emotional responses much aligned to real-world behavior. Prior studies suggested that most behaviors are characterized by interpersonal functions along two aspects: dominance (assertiveness, forcefulness, firmness, and persistence) and affiliation (kindness, tenderness, and charitableness) (Kiesler, [170,171]). These characteristics are predictive of both prosocial and anti-social behavior. Prior literature reported that dominance is positively associated with prosocial behaviour, such as helpfulness, and anti-social behaviour, such as verbal aggression and pranking (Lee, et al. [172,173]). For affiliation, scholars found that it has a positive relationship with prosocial behaviours (Carlo, et al. [174,175]) but a negative relationship with anti-social behaviours (Graziano, et al. [176,177]). Affiliative people are soft-hearted, compliant, altruistic, and show empathy for others (Anderson, et al. [178,179]). Thus, it is unsurprising to see these individuals possess prosocial behaviors and are less tolerant of anti-social behaviors such as classroom and workplace bullying (Lee, et al. [172,180]). Though the above relationships have been discussed in the context of real- world behaviors, very few studies examine the existence of such relationships in Esports. Hughes, et al. [119] examine these relationships by developing a scale to evaluate social behavior in team-based, multiplayer online games. Using confirmatory factor analysis with a sample size of 104 participants, they reported that dominance positively predicts prosocial and anti-social behaviors, and affiliation positively predicts prosocial behaviors but negatively predicts anti-social behaviors. Their findings support Kiesler’s [170] interpersonal orientation theory. As gaming impacts players’ lives through their digital interactions, and personality plays a critical role in these interactions, there is room for investigating the association of Esports and the two interpersonal orientations.

Academic Performance

The empirical evidence on whether Esports results in better or poorer academic performance is mixed (Drummond, et al. [181,182]). There are several studies reported that Esports has a positive impact on academic performance (Adachi, et al. [183-190]). For instance, Appel [184] employed hierarchical regression to examine the association between Esports and computer knowledge among two hundred participants in Austria. He found that an increase in Esports engagement among these participants reported higher scores on computer knowledge. In the US, Ventura, et al. [190] conducted a study with 252 undergraduates from a small southeastern university, and they found that students who clocked 11-50 hours of engagement in Esports reported higher GPAs than their counterparts who spent 0-10 hours playing video games. Similar findings are also reported in a study conducted by Conception et al. [186]. More recently, Kobek [188] reported that high schools that developed a curriculum incorporating career-ready skills and social-emotional learning through Esports’ lens recorded an improvement in student GPA, attendance, and attitudes towards long-term goals. Contrary to the above empirical findings, numerous scholars reported a negative association between Esports and academic performance (Adžić, et al. [191-194]). In an early seminal study on the association between Esports and academic performance, Anderson, et al. [192] sampled 227 undergraduates from introductory psychology courses at a Midwestern university, and they reported that students who were exposed to violent video games showed a higher level of aggression and delinquency, which led to worsened academic performance. In the UK, Ip, et al. [193] conducted a study to examine the relationship between gaming frequency and academic performance using a sample of 713 undergraduates from Swansea University. The results revealed that frequent gamers who spend more than two hours per day on video games reported lower examination marks than regular (between one to two hours daily), infrequent (less than one hour daily), and nongamers. Their findings are supported by subsequent studies conducted by Jackson, et al. [194] and Jaruratanasirikul, et al. [195] in the US and Thailand, respectively. Paradoxically, several Esports scholars reported no consistent relationship between Esports and academic performance (Dindar, et al. [196-199]) conducted a study in Singapore to examine the relationship between video gaming habits and students’ academic performance. Based on a sample of 333 children aged 8 to 12 years from two primary schools, they found that addiction tendencies were consistently negatively related to academic performance, while no such relationship was reported for either time spent playing games or for video game engagement. Based on the best knowledge of the research, the study conducted by Skoric, et al. [199] was the only study examining the relationship between Esports and academic performance. However, this study focused only on elementary school children aged up to 12 years old and did not examine the relationship between Esports and academic performance for youth aged between 16 and 25. While extant literature examines the association between Esports participation and academic performance as summarised in Table 4, the mixed results may be partly attributable to an under-explored consideration of other moderating factors.

Table 4: Reviewed studies on Esports and academic performance (N = 27).

Hartano, et al. [200] argued that one of these factors is the timing of Esports. Very few studies examining the extent of Esports engagement before and after school on weekdays impact academic performance. Hartono et al. postulated that Esports participation during weekdays may be more disruptive than weekend involvement as students are tight with school work during weekdays and extra-curricular activities after school. Thus, based on 31,014 US adolescents aged between 14 and 18 years, they found that adolescents who engaged in Esports on weekdays reported poorer assessment performance in mathematics, reading, and science compared to those who played video games on weekends. While the findings reported by Hartono et al. provided valuable insights to educators and parents on the timing of the engagement of Esports on students’ academic performance, the study only examines the sample from the US, and the results may not apply to other countries. In addition, the study did not consider the impact of video gaming before versus after school during weekdays on academic performance. Based on these limitations, Drummond, et al. [181] extended Hartono et al.’s study and their earlier study (Drummond, et al. [197]) by examining the association between Esports involvement before and after school on weekdays and academic performance. Based on a sample of 219,113 students in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries who undertook the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) test in 2015, they found that students who engaged actively in Esports before school reported a poorer academic performance compared to their counterparts who played more video games after school. It may be noted that both studies conducted by Hartono, et al. [200,181] only examined adolescents aged 14-18 and 15, respectively, and they only considered academic performance in mathematics, science, and reading. These studies have not considered students aged 18 and above and their performances in other subjects [201-210].

Implications for Practice

The growing integration of Esports into youth development initiatives opens roads for collaboration approaches between schools, government, parents and employers. By taking advantage of the educational potential of Esports, interested parties can create environments that not only improve academic performance, but also prepare young people for the demands of the 21st-century workforce. As research continues to explore this multidimensional relationship, it is essential to identify strategies that maximize the benefits of Esports while mitigating the possible inconveniences associated with excessive screen time and competitive pressures (Watchilla [211]). The evolutionary discourse surrounding Esports serves as a vital framework for understanding how this contemporary modality can effectively promote positive development trajectories among young people. The rapid evolution of esports has prompted researchers to explore its potential to cultivate essential skills of the 21st-century among young people. The integration of games into educational paradigms can be based on several theoretical executives who elucidate how Esports environments facilitate the development of collaboration, communication, critical thinking, and creativity (McGrath [212]).

Supporting Learning in Schools: Schools that integrate Esports in their programming can create ways to develop these critical skills in students in several age groups. The growing recognition of Esports in educational contexts encourages those responsible for formulating policies and educators to consider the structured integration of Esports as a viable pedagogical strategy to promote teamwork, problem-solving and digital literacy (Lee, et al. [213]). Therefore, Esports can be seen as a multifaceted platform that involves students in learning and prepares them for the challenges and demands of an evolving workforce. The integration of Esports in school curricula and extracurricular activities presents substantial opportunities to improve the involvement of students and promote the development of 21st-century skills (Scott, et al. [214,215]). Rothwell, et al. [45] argued that the structured environment of Esports offers a unique platform that promotes teamwork, strategic thought, communication, and vital skills in the modern workforce. By participating in Esport, students are challenged to develop critical skills for the resolution of problems while they browse mechanical game complexes and engage with colleagues in competitive environments. Lee, et al. [213] argued that Esports can fill traditional academic subjects with emerging digital cultures. For example, the integration of Esports in the school curriculum can facilitate lessons in mathematics through statistical analysis and probability, encouraging students to commit themselves to concepts in a more dynamic context. This integration is not simply an accessory. Align educational strategies with the interests of today’s young people, which can lead to better motivation and conservation of information (Bawa, et al. [105]).

The competitive nature of Esports can stimulate a sense of belonging and community among students, which is particularly advantageous for those who can fight with traditional forms of social interaction (Rothwell, et al. [45]). In addition, the schools that adopt Esports in the context of their extracurricular offers have witnessed greater participation of students in school activities. Participation in Esports teams provides a sense of discipline and structure, similar to traditional sports, and includes the fundamental values of sportiness and perseverance (Lee, et al. [213]). This alignment with traditional extracurriculars allows students to interact with their peers and cultivate socio-emotional skills, including resilience and empathy, which play a fundamental role in the general development of youth. Schools are encouraged to develop formalized Esports programs, including training coaches who are not only familiar with games but also include educational pedagogy. This approach positions schools as offices for academic learning and as support environments for holistic development (Rothwell, et al. [45]). In addition, the integration of Esports can improve school relationships with parents and communities since families witness the multiple benefits that games can provide in a structured educational environment. On an administrative level, schools must consider the infrastructure changes to adapt to Esports, such as updating the necessary technology and guaranteeing reliable access to the Internet for all students. This investment facilitates the game and increases the students’ technological skills, equipping them with the skills necessary for success in a digital economy (Galbreath, et al. [213,216]).

In addition, the establishment of Esports Championships can encourage inter-school competition, which not only promotes the spirit and pride of the school but also encourages collaboration between schools and local businesses or sponsors. In sum, integrating Esports into school life can reshape educational experiences, positioning schools as fundamental actors in developing 21st-century students who are academically competent and equipped for future social challenges in the workplace. By recognising and exploiting the potential of Esport, schools can create engaging and enriching environments that resonate with contemporary youth culture while supporting academic performance and personal development (McClellan, et al. [217]).

Supporting Learning at Work: Employers increasingly recognize the unique cultivated skills of employees who participate in Esports, which are relevant to the requirements of modern labor. The digital revolution has transformed traditional career paths, requiring a reassessment of skills that contribute to the effectiveness of the workplace (Andersen, et al. [218]). According to Hedlund, et al. [219], employers are starting to appreciate strategic thinking, teamwork and problem-solving capacities that are perfected in competitive play environments. Participation in Esports often obliges individuals to collaborate in real-time in various teams, manage stress in high issues scenarios, and develop tactical approaches to problem solving - shortcuts that are very transferable to multiple professional contexts. By recognizing the skills that young people cultivate through Esports, employers can align training and development programs to take advantage of this talent pool effectively. Initiatives that provide internships or career paths within the sports industry can encourage participation in young people while preparing them with the practical skills necessary for future success. Collaborations between employers and educational establishments can lead to the creation of study programs that meet the evolutionary needs of the labor market, ultimately taking up the gap between education and employment (Zomer, et al. [220]).

Hoffelner, et al. [221] point out that the skills acquired by Esport, such as communication, adaptability, and digital literacy, are closely aligned with the skills sought by the employers of industries that depend more and more on technology. The collaborative nature of Esports highlights the importance of clear communication between team members, a competence transferable to the dynamics of the team in corporate structures. In addition, the rapidly evolving decision- making required in Esports reflects the rapid adaptability required in work environments subject to rapid change, making these participants more and more attractive to potential employers. The implications of these results extend to how educational institutions and vocational training programs could better align their programs with the skills recognized by employers. By integrating the aspects of Esports into educational practices, schools can provide students with a platform to develop relevant skills in a controlled and structured environment. Researchers noted that promoting these skills thanks to Esports can improve students’ employability after obtaining the diploma by presenting a case for including Esports programs in an educational environment. The potential of Esports to fill the gaps between education and employment is particularly relevant in light of the growing importance of digital skills in almost all areas. Employers who embrace this paradigm shift can contribute to a more inclusive and skilled workforce, recognizing that participation in Esports can illuminate and cultivate various essential skills for the 21st-century labor market. Employers may need to adjust their hiring practices to reflect an appreciation of the skills acquired by the game. The traditional emphasis on standardized qualifications and tests may not fully encapsulate the capacities of people who demonstrate Esports control. Instead, holistic assessments that assess the Esports experience of a candidate alongside traditional measures could be more indicative of potential workplace performance. This is essential because industries seek to expand their talent basins to include various horizons and experiences, particularly those with innovative thought and problem-solving capacities.

Government: The rapid integration of exports in the panorama of youth development requires a fundamental examination of the government and politicians’ role in promoting these initiatives within the educational systems. Since the popularity of Esports continues to rise, it is evident that the government should support adequate funding and resources to support the incorporation of Esports programs in schools. Harvey, et al. [222] underlined the need to establish a picture that recognises exports as a legitimate educational tool, stating that it can lead to an improvement in the involvement of students, teamwork and critical thinking skills. This recognition is essential, as it positions exports not only as a recreational activity but as a path to improve the skills of the 21st-century, which are increasingly required in academic and professional environments. Zhong, et al. [11] argued that government involvement can take on multiple forms, including developing policies that encourage schools to integrate exports into their curricula and extracurricular offers. This could include financial incentives for institutions that adopt Esports programs and subsidies for research on the pedagogical benefits of games in education. By institutionalizing support for Esport, the government can guarantee that students have fair access to resources capable of strengthening their academic services, simultaneously providing critical skills such as collaboration, communication and digital literacy. In addition to financial support, political implications include establishing standards and curricula relating to Esport.

This initiative provides for the creation of guidelines that guarantee quality and educational safety in competitive game environments, facing concerns relating to playing addiction and the potential for negative social results if not managed correctly. The government could guide the school districts in developing complete Esports programs that emphasize positive commitment, healthy competition and the importance of balance, resonating with the holistic development of students, as indicated by Harvey, et al. [222]. Government organizations can support a holistic approach that recognizes the importance of digital literacy and prepares students for the complexity of modern employment by investing in research and educational executives who integrate Esports (Zomer, et al. [220]). In addition, governments can promote partnerships with educational institutions and Esports organizations to promote safe game practices and ensure young people engage with healthy and constructive technology (Zhao, et al. [223]).

Parents: Parent involvement plays a crucial role in navigation in the complex scenario of eSports and its effects on youth development, particularly concerning 21st-century skills and academic performance. As Esports continue to grow in popularity, parents usually find themselves fighting their game perceptions and their implications for their children. Research by Svensson, et al. [224] emphasizes the need for parents to adopt a balanced and informed perspective on sports, which can significantly influence their children’s attitudes and behaviors in this context. Parents who favour and support Esports can provide substantial benefits to their children’s involvement in this activity. According to Svensson, et al. [224], the understanding of the parents of Esports extends beyond the mere recognition of their existence; It involves a comprehensive involvement with the content of the games, the skills that can be developed through the game and the possible social interactions that Esports make it easier. This knowledge can help parents mitigate risks often associated with excessive games, such as social isolation and lower academic performance, while reinforcing positive aspects, including teamwork, critical thinking and digital literacy. Parents’ active participation in their children’s Esports activities can reinforce positive behaviors and increase development results. In particular, parents can help establish healthy gaming habits, such as setting limits on screen time and encouraging balanced lifestyle choices that include physical activity and academic responsibilities. When parents demonstrate a support attitude, participating in game sessions, discussing strategies, or even participating in Esports events, they deepen their connection with their children and model involvement in a structured and supportive manner (Svensson, et al. [224]). This involvement helps contextualize gaming experiences in broader life skills and educational structures.

On the other hand, negative parental perceptions about Esports can lead to restrictive measures that could inadvertently decrease the potential benefits of Esports participation. Svensson, et al. [224] have observed that parents with a more critical view of electronic games usually focus only on the harmful effects of gaming, such as dependence or academic negligence. This limited perspective can make it challenging to communicate openly about Esports and prevent adolescents from sharing their experiences or discussing the skills they acquire through gameplay. Consequently, promoting open dialogue about Esports can make children feel validated in their interests and receive guidance from their parents. To improve the positive results associated with Esports, educational initiatives can provide parents with knowledge and resources related to Esports’ benefits and challenges. Schools and community organizations could play a vital role by delivering workshops or informative sessions that describe the skills developed through Esports, such as critical thinking, problem- solving and collaboration. These educational efforts can help parents better understand how Esports can contribute to their children’s personal and academic development, promoting an environment that encourages healthy involvement (Trotter, et al. [225,226]). In addition, an effective strategy to integrate parents’ support for Esports involvement is establishing partnerships between schools, parents and the Esports community. Collaborative initiatives can facilitate shared understanding and promote best practices to balance games with academic responsibilities. By adopting a proactive posture based on informed engagement and collaboration, parents can significantly influence their children’s ability to take advantage of Esports’ potential as a tool for developing 21st-century essential skills and achieving academic success.

Limitations

The findings of this review need to be interpreted in the light of some limitations. First, the review only discusses four 21st-century skills and has not covered the other six essential skills indicated in the KSAVE model or other skills documented in the different frameworks. Second, the findings gathered from the literature are predominantly from the Esports participants but not from the other stakeholders such as the schools, government, parents, and employers. Third, the review for the association between Esports and academic performance are all quantitative studies, and most of the studies examining Esports and 21st-century skills are also primarily quantitative studies, with a few studies on qualitative (e.g. Fanfarelli, [114,116,120]) and mixed methods (Kleinman et al. [17,20,117]).

Esports have gained global attention over the last decade and attracted millions of youths to engage in Esports during and after school. It significantly impacts youth development, and the International Olympic Committee plans to include Esports in the 2028 Olympic Games (Donaldson [227]). The paper reviewed the literature on the impact of Esports on the development of 21st-century skills and academic performance among youths. For future studies, educational scholars may consider examining Esports’ impact on developing 21st-century skills and academic performance among youths from the perspectives of schools, including teachers, government, parents, and employers. For instance, further studies should be conducted, paying attention to how schools incorporate Esports in the school curriculum that aligns with the students’ learning objectives and also producing graduates with relevant 21st-century skills that are required by employers, recruiting qualified personnel teaching Esports, securing funding to support Esports development, and including the provision of facilities for Esports programs. Research may also be conducted with teachers, parents, and employers on how Esports can contribute to the student’s learning outcome, skills development, and potential career development. Mixed methods that include semi-structured or focused group interviews may be conducted with these stakeholders to gain a deeper understanding of the impact of Esports on youth development and academic performance. In addition, longitudinal studies may also be conducted to evaluate the long-term impact of incorporating Esports in the curriculum in universities and how it impacts skills development, learning interest, and engagement in classroom and online learning.

While the implications of Esports for youth development are far-reaching, it is clear that a multifaceted approach involving collaboration between schools, government, parents, and employers is essential. By adopting Esports as a constructive means to acquire 21st-century skills and improve school performance, stakeholders can collectively promote a generation of young people who are not only technologically followers but also equipped with the critical skills necessary to navigate an increasingly complex world. This proactive approach is crucial for tapping the potential advantages of Esports, leading to more positive results in the development of young people who are more ready to strive in the 21st-century [228-235].

1. The six frameworks are the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Countries Framework (Ananiadou, et al. [228]), Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21, 2009), Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills (Binkley, et al. [35]), En Gauge 21st Century Skills (Lemke, et al. [233]), National Educational Technology Standards Framework developed by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) in 2007, and EU 21st Century Skills and Competency Framework (European Parliament and the Council of the European Union [230]).
2. The KSAVE model identified 10 skills and group them into four categories, which each skill clearly defined and evaluated from three dimensions: knowledge, skills, and attitudes, values and ethics. The four categories and their respective skills in each category are:
1) Ways of thinking (creativity and innovation; critical thinking, problem solving, decision making; cognitive, metacognition.
2) Ways of working (communication; cooperation/collaboration).
3) Tools for working (information literacy; ICT literacy).
4) Living in the world (citizenship, life and career; personal and social responsibility/behavior, including culture awareness and competence).

1. Perrin A (2017) 5 facts about Americans and video games. Pew Research Center.
2. Crawford G, Muriel D, Conway S (2019) A feel for the game: Exploring gaming ‘experience’ through the case of sports-themed video games. Convergence (London) 25(5-6): 937-952.
3. Kim YH, Nauright J, Suveatwatanakul C (2020) The rise of Esports and potential for Post-COVID continued growth. Sport in Society 23(11): 1861-1871.
4. O’Shea M, Duffy S (2020) With everyone stuck indoors, esports are poised for time in the sun.
5. Shan D, Xu J, Liu T, Zhang Y, Dai Z, et al. (2023) Subjective attitudes moderate the social connectedness in esports gaming during COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study. Frontiers in Public Health.
6. Clement J (2025) Esports market size worldwide from 2023 to 2033. Statista.
7. Tecent, Newzoo (2021) Games and Esports: Bona fide sports. Esports market outlook in Southeast Asia.
8. Bhavana BS (2023) A study on impact of esports on youth with special reference to Hyderabad region. Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research 10(8): 90-110.
9. Delello JA, McWhorter RR, Roberts P, Dockery HS, De Giuseppe T, et al. (2021) The rise of esports: Insights into the perceived benefits and risks for college students. International Journal of eSports Research 1(5): 1-19.
10. Zhong Y, Guo K, Su J, Chu SKW (2022) The impact of esports participation on the development of 21st-century skills in youth: A systematic review. Computers and Education 191: 1-20.
11. Zhong Y, Guo K, Chu SKW (2024) Affordances and constraints of integrating esports into higher education from the perspectives of students and teachers: An ecological systems approach. Education and Information Technologies 29(13): 16777-16811.
12. Zhong Y, Guo K, Fryer LK, Chu SKW, Deng H (2025) More than just fun: Investigating students’ perceptions towards the potential of leveraging esports for promoting the acquisition of 21st century skills. Education and Information Technologies 30(1): 1089-1221.
13. Snelson C, Wertz CI, Onstott K, Bader J (2017) Using world of Warcraft to teach research methods in online doctoral education: A student–instructor duo ethnography. Qualitative Report 22(5): 1439–1456.
14. Eseryel D, Ge X, Ifenthaler D, Law V (2011) Dynamic modeling as a cognitive regulation scaffold for developing complex problem-solving skills in an educational massively multiplayer online game environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research 45(3): 265-286.
15. Eseryel D, Law V, Ifenthaler D, Ge X, Miller R (2014) An investigation of the interrelationships between motivation, engagement, and complex problem solving in game-based learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 17(1): 42-53.
16. Khatib F, Cooper S, Tyka MD, Xu K, Makedon I, et al. (2011). Algorithm discovery by protein folding game players. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108(47): 18949-18953.
17. Voulgari I, Komis V (2010) Elven Elder LVL59 LFP/RB. Please PM me’: Immersion, collaborative tasks and problem-solving in massively multiplayer online games. Learning, Media and Technology 35(2): 171-202.
18. Ding Y, Hu X, Li J, Ye J, Wang F, et al. (2018) What makes a champion: The behavioral and neural correlates of expertise in multiplayer online battle arena games. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 34(8): 682-694.
19. Hagiwara G, Akiyama D, Furukado R, Takeshita S (2020) A study on psychological training of esports using digital games: Focusing on rhythm game. Journal of Human Sport and Exercise 15(3): 495-503.
20. Kleinman E, Gayle C, Seif El-Nasr M (2021) Because I’m bad at the game!” A microanalytic study of self regulated learning in League of Legends. Frontiers in Psychology 12.
21. Simon Abramov, Alexander Korotin, Andrey Somov, Evgeny Burnaev, Anton Stepanov, et al. (2021) Analysis of video game players’ emotions and team performance: An esports tournament case study. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics 26(8): 3597-3606.
22. Chien YC (2019) the language of massively multiplayer online gamers: A study of vocabulary in Minecraft gameplay. TESL-EJ 23(3): 1-16.
23. Vosburg D (2017) The effects of group dynamics on language learning and use in an MMOG. Calico Journal 34(1): 58-74.
24. Bawa P (2020) Game on!: Investigating digital game-based versus gamified learning in higher education. International Journal of Game-Based Learning 10(3): 16-46.
25. Gerber HR, Sweeney K, Pasquini E (2019) Using API data to understand learning in League of Legends: A mixed methods study. Educational Media International 56(2): 93-115.
26. Zeng Y, Anna S, Emilio F (2021) The Influence of Social Ties on Performance in Team-Based Online Games. IEEE Transactions on Games 13(4): 358-367.
27. Himang MM, Himang CM, Ceniza AM, Ocampo L (2021) Using an extended technology acceptance model for online strategic video games: A case of multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA). International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction 17(1): 32-58.
28. Marta RF, Fernando J, Sampurna A, Jarata JRB, Syarnubi KL (2021) Interactivity in e-sport future learning from the choices and attributes perspectives of online news. Review of International Geographical Education Online 11(4): 1192–1202.
29. Sanz-Martos S, Martínez-Martínez S, Creus A (2018) Talking about games: Gamers’ digital communication spaces as the object of study. Catalan Journal of Communication & Cultural Studies 10(2): 231-245.
30. Castillo RP (2019) Exploring the differential effects of social and individualistic gameplay motivations on bridging social capital for users of a massively multiplayer online game. Computers in Human Behavior 91: 263-270.
31. Choi C, Hums MA, Bum CH (2018) Impact of the family environment on juvenile mental health: Esports online game addiction and delinquency. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15(12): 28-50.
32. Ripamonti LA, Granato M, Trubian M, Knutas A, Gadia D, et al. (2018) Multi-agent simulations for the evaluation of Looting Systems design in MMOG and MOBA games. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 83: 124-148.
33. Castel AD, Pratt J, Drummond E (2005) The effects of action video game experience on the time course of inhibition of return and the efficiency of visual search. Acta Psychologica 119(2): 217-230.
34. Wright J (2011) The effects of video game play on academic performance. Modern Psychological Studies 17(37): 44 37.
35. Binkley M, Erstad O, Herman J, Raizen S, Ripley M, et al. (2012) Defining twenty-first century skills. In: P Griffin, B McGaw, E Care (Eds.,), Assessment and teaching of 21^st-century skills. Springer Netherlands, p. 17-66.
36. Galarneau L, Zibit M (2007) Online games for 21^st-century skills. In: D Gibson, C Aldrich, M Prensky (Eds.,), Games and simulations in online learning: Research and development frameworks. IGI Global, p. 59-88.
37. Duran HB (2021) The impact of esports in education. Sportfive
38. Dugan JP, Bohle CW, Woelker LR, Cooney MA (2014) The role of social perspective-taking in developing students’ leadership capacities. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice 51(1): 1-15.
39. Karagianni D, Jude Montgomery A (2018) Developing leadership skills among adolescents and young adults: A review of leadership programmes. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth 23(1): 86-98.
40. Liu T, Israel M (2022) Uncovering students’ problem-solving processes in game-based learning environments. Computers & Education 182: 104462.
41. Chu SKW, Reynolds RB, Tavares NJ, Notari M, Lee CWY (2021) 21st-century skills development through inquiry-based learning from theory to practice. Springer.
42. Nielsen RKL, Hanghøj T, Boller M, Mollerup P (2021) Teaching esports to young students with autism: Exploring pedagogical possibilities and challenges. The 16th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (FDG), p. 1-8.
43. Stone BG, Mills KA, Saggers B (2019) Online multiplayer games for the social interactions of children with autism spectrum disorder: A resource for inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education 23(2): 209-228.
44. Hallinger P, Bridges EM (2017) A systematic review of research on the use of problem-based learning in the preparation and development of school leaders. Educational Administration Quarterly 53(2): 255-288.
45. Rothwell G, Shaffer M (2019) Esports in K-12 and post-secondary schools. Education Sciences 9(2): 1-10.
46. Cho A, Tsaasan AM, Steinkuehler C (2019) The building blocks of an educational esports league: Lessons from Year One in Orange County high schools. Proceedings of the 14^th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games 1.
47. Gleason B, Von Gillern S (2018) Digital citizenship with social media: Participatory practices of teaching and learning in secondary education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 21(1): 200-212.
48. Zheng D, Newgarden K, Young MF (2012) Multimodal analysis of language learning in World of Warcraft play: Languaging as values-realizing. ReCALL 24(3): 339-360
49. Ebner M, Holzinger A (2007) Successful implementation of user-centered game based learning in higher education: An example from civil engineering. Computers & Education 49(3): 873-890.
50. Sung HY, Hwang GJ (2013) A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education 63: 43-51.
51. Taub M, Sawyer R, Smith A, Rowe J, Azevedo R, et al. (2020) The agency effect: The impact of student agency on learning, emotions, and problem-solving behaviors in a game-based learning environment. Computers & Education 147: 103781.
52. Jabbari N, Eslami ZR (2019) Second language learning in the context of massively multiplayer online games: A scoping review. ReCALL 31(1): 92-113.
53. Anderson CG, Tsaasan AM, Reitman J, Lee JS, Wu M, et al. (2018) Understanding esports as a STEM career ready curriculum in the wild. In 2018 10^th international conference on virtual worlds and Games for serious applications (VS-Games), p. 1–6.
54. Azman H, Farhana Dollsaid N (2018) Applying massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs) in EFL teaching. Arab World English Journal 9(4): 3-18.
55. Pacetti-Donelson V (2019) Esports, or esports, or e-sports, or eSports: Words Matter for More Reasons than You Think.
56. Winer F (2019) Esports: How the term was coined and what is the correct way to write it?. Digitalist Magazine.
57. Jin DY (2010) ESports and television business in the digital economy. In: D Jin (Edt.)., Korea’s online gaming empire. MIT Press, p. 59-79.
58. Block S, Haack F (2021) ESports: a new industry. Globalization and its socio-economic consequences 2020. SHS Web of Conferences, p. 92.
59. Jenny SE, Manning RD, Keiper MC, Olrich TW (2016) Virtual(ly) athletes: Where eSports fit within the definition of “sport”. Quest 69: 1-18.
60. Hamari J, Sjoblom M (2017) What is eSports and why do people watch it? Internet Research 27(2): 211-232.
61. Funk DC, Pizzo AD, Baker BJ (2018) eSport management: Embracing eSport education and research opportunities. Sport Management Review 21(1): 7-13.
62. Savas D, Murat SH, Cilem B, Gunseli D (2020) E-sports education and development in a global world. Ambient Science 7: 237-242.
63. (2022) Maryville University. Different types of esports.
64. Alexander P (2020) Esports: The basics of the fighting-game genre. Dummies.
65. Lin H, Sun CT (2015) Massively multiplayer online role playing games (MMORPG s). The International Encyclopedia of Digital Communication and Society, p. 1-7.
66. Steel T (2022) 10 best AAA sandbox games. CBR.
67. Hemphill D (2005) Cybersport. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 32(2): 195-207.
68. Weiss T (2008) Cultural influences on hedonic adoption behavior: Propositions regarding the adoption of competitive video and computer online gaming. In Proceedings of the SIG- DIGIT workshop.
69. Cranmer EE, Han DID, van Gisbergen M, Jung T (2021) Esports matrix: Structuring the esports agenda. Computers in Human Behavior 117: 1-13.
70. Wagner MG (2006) On the scientific relevance of eSports. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Internet Computing. Las Vegas, NV: CSREA Press, pp. 437-442.
71. Zang L, Wu J, Li Y (2007) Research on current situation of E-sports in Urumi, Xinjiang. International Journal of Sports Science and Engineering 2(1): 57-61.
72. Witkowski E (2012) On the Digital Playing Field: How We “Do Sport” With Networked Computer Games. Games and Culture 7(5): 349-374.
73. Whalen SJ (2013) Cyberathletes’ lived experience of video game tournaments. PhD dissertation, University of Tennessee, MIT Press.
74. Bányai F, Griffiths M, Demetrovics Z, Kiraly O (2019) The mediating effect of motivations between psychiatric distress and gaming disorder among esport gamers and recreational gamers. Comprehensive Psychiatry 94: 152117.
75. Seo Y (2013) Electronic sports: A new marketing landscape of the experience economy. Journal of Marketing Management 29(13-14): 1542–1560.
76. Taylor N (2016) Play to the camera: Video ethnography, spectatorship and e-sports. Convergence 22: 115-130.
77. Kolb DA (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall.
78. Chang YK, Chen K, Li Z (2024) Systematic framework for esports training: Informing eSports Training with the Learning Sciences. Simulation & Gaming 55(1): 82-108.
79. Baxter G, Hainey T, Williams A (2024) Developing Graduate Attributes Through Competitive Gameplay and Learning Theories. In Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on Games Based Learning. Academic Conferences and publishing limited.
80. Seaman J, Brown M, Quay J (2017) The evolution of experiential learning theory: Tracing lines of research in the JEE. Journal of Experiential Education 40(4): NP1-NP21.
81. Jenny S, Gawrysiak J, Besombes N (2021) Esports.edu: An Inventory and Analysis of Global Higher Education Esports Academic Programming and Curricula. International Journal of Esports 1(1): 1-47.
82. Mukhalalati BA, Taylor A (2019) Adult learning theories in context: a quick guide for healthcare professional educators. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development 6: 2382120519840332.
83. Ho SJ, Hsu YS, Lai CH, Chen FH, Yang MH (2022) Applying game-based experiential learning to comprehensive sustainable development-based education. Sustainability 14(3): 1172.
84. Bandura A (1977) Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.
85. Reyes D (2022) The Cognitive, Behavioral, Affective, and Physiological Components of Social Cognition in Esports and Education.
86. Hesketh JM (2022) Learning Team-Based Esport Games: Success Factors in Learning from Spectating. Doctoral dissertation. University of York.
87. Bopp T, Karadakis K (2023) Preparing Students for Careers in the Esport Industry: Engaging with Role-Play as a Pedagogical Experiential Learning Tool. Sports Innovation Journal 4(SI): 4-17.
88. Hwang MI, Helser S (2022) Cybersecurity educational games: a theoretical framework. Information & Computer Security 30(2): 225-242.
89. Wenzler I, de Rooij S (2025). Transfer of Learning into Action: Serious Gaming in the Business Context. In Transferring Gaming and Simulation Experience to the Real World. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, pp. 187-209.
90. Asad MM, Naz A, Churi P, Tahanzadeh MM (2021) Virtual reality as pedagogical tool to enhance experiential learning: a systematic literature review. Education Research International 1: 7061623.
91. Scavarelli A, Arya A, Teather RJ (2021) Virtual reality and augmented reality in social learning spaces: a literature review. Virtual Reality 25(1): 257-277.
92. Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
93. Gholami N, Chime PJ (2024) E-sport in physical education: A systematic review. Health Research 16(2): 229-251.
94. Fancourt D, Aughterson H, Finn S, Walker E, Steptoe A (2021) How leisure activities affect health: a narrative review and multi-level theoretical framework of mechanisms of action. The Lancet Psychiatry 8(4): 329-339.
95. Holm SK, Haikio T, Olli K, Kaakinen JK (2021) Eye movements during dynamic scene viewing are affected by visual attention skills and events of the scene: Evidence from first-person shooter gameplay videos. Journal of Eye Movement Research 14(2).
96. Khalid MFM, Kameyama W (2010) Real-life classroom scenario of m-learning improvements using features of Massive Multiplay Online Games and Instructional Design. International Journal of Advanced Media and Communication 4(3): 203-218.
97. Kong JSL, Kwok RCW, Fang Y (2012) The effects of peer intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on MMOG game-based collaborative learning. Information & Management 49(1): 1-9.
98. Kow YM (2018) Digital introspection within learning-on-my-own rhetoric among computer gamers. Mind, Culture and Activity 25(1): 40-52.
99. Kowal M, Toth AJ, Exton C, Campbell MJ (2018) Different cognitive abilities displayed by action video gamers and non-gamers. Computers in Human Behavior 88: 255-262.
100. Large AM, Bediou B, Cekic S, Hart Y, Bavelier D, et al. (2019) Cognitive and behavioral correlates of achievement in a complex multi-player video game. Media and Communication 7(4): 198-212.
101. Sala G, Tatlidil KS, Gobet F (2018) Video game training does not enhance cognitive ability: A comprehensive meta-analytic investigation. Psychological Bulletin 144(2): 111-139.
102. Smith S, Chan S (2017) Collaborative and competitive video games for teaching computing in higher education. Journal of Science Education and Technology 26(4): 438-457.
103. Toth AJ, Kowal M, Campbell MJ (2019) The color-word stroop task does not differentiate cognitive inhibition ability among esports gamers of varying expertise. Frontiers in Psychology 10: 2852.
104. Ying MH, Yang KT (2013) A game-based learning system using the ARCS model and fuzzy logic. Journal of Software 8(9): 2155-2162.
105. Bawa P, Watson SL, Watson W (2018) Motivation is a game: Massively multiplayer online games as agents of motivation in higher education. Computers & Education 123: 174-194.
106. Ching K, Forti E, Rawley E (2021) Extemporaneous coordination in specialist teams: The familiarity complementarity. Organization Science 32(1): 1-17.
107. Falkenthal E, Byrne AM (2021) Distributed leadership in collegiate esports. Simulation & Gaming 52(2): 185-203.
108. Gerber HR (2017) eSports and streaming: Twitch literacies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 61(3): 343-345.
109. Mora-Cantallops M, Sicilia MA (2019) Team efficiency and network structure: The case of professional League of Legends. Social Networks 58: 105-115.
110. Mysirlaki S, Paraskeva F (2012) Leadership in MMOGs: A field of research on virtual teams. Electronic Journal of e-Learning 10(2): 223-234.
111. Sapienza A, Goyal P, Ferrara E (2019) Deep neural networks for optimal team composition. Frontiers in Big Data 2: 14.
112. Sapienza A, Zeng Y, Bessi A, Lerman K, Ferrara E (2018) Individual performance in team-based online games. Royal Society Open Science 5: 180329.
113. Suzuki R, Ito M, Kodera S, Nishimoto K, Arita T (2018) An online experimental framework for cooperative relationships with a real-time decision-making and rewarding environment. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 6: 74.
114. Wong MYC, Chung PK, Ou K, Leung KM (2021) Perception of Hong Kong teenagers and young adults on esports participation: A qualitative study using theory of planned behavior. Frontiers in Psychology 12: 1-12.
115. Banks J, Carr CT (2019) Experiences of social demand in a simulated gaming environment. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication 20(1): 27-34.
116. Fanfarelli JR (2018) Expertise in Professional Overwatch Play. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations 10(1): 1-22.
117. Zhao J (2016) L2 languaging in a massively multiplayer online game: An exploration of learner variations. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching 6(4):1-17.
118. Dowsett A, Jackson M (2019) The effect of violence and competition within video games on aggression. Computers in Human Behavior 99: 22-27.
119. Hughes CM, Griffin BJ, Worthington EL, (2017) A measure of social behavior in team-based, multiplayer online games: The Sociality in Multiplayer Online Games (SMOG) scale. Computers in Human Behavior 69: 386-395.
120. McCreery MP, Vallett DB, Clark C (2015) Social interaction in a virtual environment: Examining socio-spatial interactivity and social presence using behavioral analytics. Comput. Human Behav 51: 203-206.
121. McCreery MP, Schrader PG, Krach SK (2011) Navigating massively multiplayer online games: Evaluating 21^st-century skills for learning within virtual environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research 44(4): 473-493.
122. Bisoglio J, Michaels TI, Mervis JE, Ashinoff BK (2014) Cognitive enhancement through action video game training: Great expectations require greater evidence. Frontiers in Psychology 5: 136.
123. Green CS, Bavelier D (2015) Action video game training for cognitive enhancement. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 4: 103-108.
124. Lee YH, Heeter C (2017) The effects of cognitive capacity and gaming expertise on attention and comprehension. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 33(5): 473-485.
125. Powers KL, Brooks PJ, Aldrich NJ, Palladino MA, Alfieri L (2013) Effects of video-game play on information processing: A meta-analytic investigation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 20(6): 1055-1079.
126. Green CS, Bavelier D (2003) Action video game modifies visual selective attention. Nature 423(6939): 534-537.
127. Wu S, Spence I (2013) Playing shooter and driving videogames improves top-down guidance in visual search. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 75(4): 673-686.
128. Green CS, Bavelier D (2006) Enumeration versus multiple object tracking: The case of action video game players. Cognition 101(1): 217-245.
129. Deleuze J, Christiaens M, Nuyens F, Billieux J (2017) Shoot at first sight! First person shooter players display reduced reaction time and compromised inhibitory control in comparison to other video game players. Computers in Human Behavior 72: 570-576
130. Oishi K, Maeshima T (2004) Autonomic nervous system activities during motor imagery in elite athletes. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology 21(3): 170-179.
131. Wood R, Griffiths M, Parke A (2007) Experiences of time loss among videogame players:
132. Bediou B, Adams DM, Mayer RE, Tipton E, Green CS, et al. (2018) Meta-analysis of action video game impact on perceptual, attentional, and cognitive skills. Psychological Bulletin 144(1): 77–110.
133. Orozco J, Self E, Orozco J, Self E (2013) Action video game players can perform visual search faster, but show the same attentional capture. Journal of Vision 13(9): 163.
134. Wang P, Liu HH, Zhu XT, Meng T, Li HJ, et al. (2016) Action video game training for healthy adults: A meta-analytic study. Frontiers in Psychology 7: 1-13.
135. Simons DJ, Boot WR, Charness N, Gathercole SE, Chabris CF, et al. (2016) Do “brain-training” programs work? Psychological Science in the Public Interest 17(3): 103-186.
136. Friedman D, Oprea R (2012) A continuous dilemma. Am Econ Rev 102: 337-363.
137. Hawkins RXD, Goldstone RL (2016) The formation of social conventions in real-time environments. PLoS ONE 11.
138. Nowak MA (2006) Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science 314: 1560-1563.
139. Nowak MA, May RM (1992) Evolutionary games and spatial chaos. Nature 359: 826-829.
140. Pinheiro FL, Pacheco JM, Santos FC (2012) From local to global dilemmas in social networks. PLoS ONE 7.
141. Grujić J, Gracia-Lázaro C, Milinski M, Semmann D, Traulsen A, et al. (2014) A comparative analysis of spatial prisoner’s dilemma experiment, conditional cooperation and payoff irrelevance Sci Rep 4: 4615.
142. Rand DG, Nowak MA, Fowler JH, Christakis NA (2014) Static network structure can stabilize human cooperation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111: 17093-17098.
143. Horita Y, Takezawa M, Inukai K, Kita T, Masuda N (2017) Reinforcement learning accounts for moody conditional cooperation behavior: experimental results. Sci Rep 7.
144. Mora-Cantallops M, Sicilia MÁ (2018) MOBA games: a literature review. Entertain Comput 26: 128-138.
145. Pirker J, Rattinger A, Drachen A, Sifa R (2018) Analyzing player networks in Destiny. Entertain. Comput 25: 71-83.
146. Drachen A, Yancey M, Maguire J, Chu D, Wang IY, et al. (2014) Skill-based differences in spatio-temporal team behaviour in defence of the ancients 2 (DotA 2). In: Games Media Entertainment (GEM) 2014 IEEE. IEEE, p. 1-8.
147. Steuer JS (1992) Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of Communication 42: 73-93.
148. Banks J, Carr CT (2018) Toward a relational matrix model of avatar-mediated interactions. Psychology of Popular Media Culture 8(3): 287-295.
149. Bowman ND (2018) The demanding nature of video game play. In N.D. Bowman (Ed.), Video games: A medium that demands our attention. New York, NY: Routledge, p.1-24
150. Zajonc RB (1968) Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 9(2): 1-27.
151. Zanbaka C, Ulinski A, Goolkasian P, Hodges LF (2004) Effects of virtual human presence on task performance. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Reality and Telexistence, Seoul, Korea, pp. 174-181.
152. Moore RJ, Ducheneaut N, Nickell E (2007) Doing virtually nothing: Awareness and accountability in massively multiplayer online worlds. Computer Supported Cooperative Work.
153. Bowman ND, Weber R, Tamborini R, Sherry JL (2013) Facilitating game play: How others affect performance at and enjoyment of video games. Media Psychology 16: 39-64.
154. Kowert R (2014) Video games and social competence. New York, NY: Routledge 1.
155. Neto JA, Yokoyama KM, Becker K (2017) Studying toxic behavior influence and player chat in an online video game. ACM, Leipzig, Germany, p. 26-33.
156. Yee N (2006) Motivations for play in online games. CyberPsychology & Behavior 9: 772-775.
157. Quandt T, Kröger S (2013) Multiplayer: The social aspects of digital gaming. New York, NY: Routledge 3.
158. Suler J (2004) The Online Disinhibition Effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior 7(3): 321-326.
159. Blackburn J, Kwak H (2014) STFU NOOB!. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web - WWW 14: 877-888.
160. Shores KB, He Y, Swanenburg KL, Kraut R, Riedl J (2014) The Identification of Deviance and its Impact on Retention in a Multiplayer Game. Proceedings of the 17^th ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing - CSCW 14(2014): 1356-1365.
161. Greitemeyer T, Mügge DO (2014) Video games do affect social outcomes: A meta-analytic review of the effects of violent and prosocial video game play. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(5): 578-589.
162. Grizzard M, Tamborini R, Lewis RJ, Wang L, Prabhu S (2014) Being bad in a video game can make us morally sensitive. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 17(8): 499-504.
163. Fox J, Tang WY (2014) Sexism in online video games: The role of conformity to masculine norms and social dominance orientation. Computers in Human Behavior 33: 314-320.
164. Fox J, Tang WY (2015) Women’s experiences with harassment in online video games: Rumination, organizational responsiveness, withdrawal, and coping strategies. In 65^th annual conference of the International Communication Association, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
165. Tang WY, Fox J (2016) Men’s harassment behavior in online video games: Personality traits and game factors. Aggressive Behavior 42(6): 513-521
166. Grieve R, Indian M, Witteveen K, Tolan GA, Marrington J (2013) Face-to face or Facebook: Can social connectedness be derived online? Computer in Human Behavior 29(3): 604-609.
167. Pace T, Bardzell S, Bardzell J (2010) The rogue in the lovely black dress: Intimacy in world of warcraft. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, pp. 233-e242
168. Dolgov I, Graves WJ, Nearents MR, Schwark JD, Volkman CB (2014) Effects of cooperative gaming and avatar customization on subsequent spontaneous helping behavior. Computers in Human Behavior 33: 49-55.
169. Whitaker JL, Bushman BJ (2012) Remain calm. Be kind.” effects of relaxing video games on aggressive and prosocial behavior. Social Psychological and Personality Science 3(1): 88-92.
170. Kiesler DJ (1983) The 1982 Interpersonal Circle: A taxonomy for complementarity in human transactions. Psychological Review 90(3): 185-214.
171. Trapnell PD, Wiggins JS (1990) Extension of the interpersonal adjective scales to include the Big Five dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59(4): 781-790.
172. Lee K, Ashton MC, Shin KH (2005) Personality correlates of workplace antisocial behavior. Applied Psychology 54(1): 81-98.
173. Parkins IS, Fishbein HD, Ritchey PN (2006) The influence of personality on workplace bullying and discrimination. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 36(10): 2554-2577.
174. Carlo G, Okun MA, Knight GP, de Guzman MRT (2005) The interplay of traits and motives on volunteering: Agreeableness, extraversion and prosocial value motivation. Personality and Individual Differences 38(6): 1293-1305.
175. Graziano WG, Habashi MM, Sheese BE, Tobin RM (2007) Agreeableness, empathy, and helping: A person × situation perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93(4): 583-599.
176. Graziano WG, Eisenberg N (1997) Agreeableness; a dimension of personality. Handbook of personality psychology.
177. Miller JD, Lynam D (2001) Structural models of personality and their relation to antisocial behavior: A meta-analytic review. Criminology 39(4): 765-798.
178. Anderson C, John OP, Keltner D, Kring AM (2001) Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81(1): 116-132.
179. Graziano WG, Tobin RM (2009) Agreeableness. Handbook of individual differences in social behavior. New York, NY: Guildford Press.
180. Tani F, Greenman PS, Schneider BH, Fregoso M (2003) Bullying and the Big Five: A study of childhood personality and participant roles in bullying incidents. School Psychology International 24(2): 131-146.
181. Drummond A, Sauer JD (2020) Timesplitters: Playing video games before (but not after) school on weekdays is associated with poorer adolescent academic performance. A test on competing theoretical accounts. Computers & Education 144: 1-12.
182. Ku CH, Kwak M, Yurov KM, Yurova YV (2014) A study of the influence of gaming behavior on academic performance of IT college students. Twentieth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Savannah.
183. Adachi PJC, Willoughby T (2013) Do video games promote positive youth development? Journal of Adolescent Research 28(2): 155-165.
184. Appel M (2012) Are Heavy Users of Computer Games and Social Media More Computer Literate? Computers & Education 59(4): 1339-1349.
185. (2022) Clarity Innovations. Leagues of learning. The rising tide of Esports in K-12 education.
186. Concepcion L, Nales-Torres M, Rodriguez-Zubiaurre A (2016) The relationship between video game use, deviant behavior, and academic achievement among a nationally representative sample of high school seniors in the United States. American Journal of Educational Research 4(16): 1157-1163.
187. Hwang J, Kim J (2022) Exploring college students’ perceptions of Esports and Esports academic programs. Human Kenetics Journal 17(1): 29-39.
188. Kobek P (2019) Teaching esports in high school actually raises GPA, says Microsoft-funded program. The Gamer.
189. Smyth J (2007) Beyond self-selection in video game play: An experimental examination of the consequences of massively multiplayer online role-playing game play. CyberPsychology and Behavior 10(5): 717-721.
190. Ventura M, Shute V, Kim YJ (2012) Video Gameplay, Personality and Academic Performance. Computers & Education 58(4): 1260-1266.
191. Adžić SAM (2021) The impact of video games on students’ educational outcomes. Entertainment Computing, pp. 1875-9521.
192. Anderson C, Dill K (2000) Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behavior in the laboratory and in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78(4): 772-790.
193. Ip B, Jacobs G, Watkins A (2008) Gaming frequency and academic performance. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 24(4): 355-373.
194. Jackson L, Zhao Y, Kolenic III A, Fitzgerald H, Harold R, et al. (2008) Race, gender, and information technology use: The new digital divide. CyberPsychology and Behavior 11(4): 437-442.
195. Jaruratanasirikul S, Wongwaitaweewong K, Sangsupawanich P (2009) Electronic game play and school performance of adolescents in southern Thailand. CyberPsychology and Behavior 12(5): 509-512.
196. Dindar M (2018) An empirical study on gender, video game play, academic success and complex problem solving skills. Computers & Education 125: 39-52.
197. Drummond A, Sauer JD (2014) Video-games do not negatively impact adolescent academic performance in science, mathematics or reading. PLoS One 9(4): e87943.
198. Ferguson CJ (2015) Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children’s and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science 10(5): 646-666.
199. Skoric M, Teo L, Neo R (2009) Children and video games: Addiction, engagement, and scholastic achievement. CyberPsychology and Behavior12(5): 567-572.
200. Hartanto A, Toh WX, Yang H (2018) Context counts: The different implications of weekday and weekend video gaming for academic performance in mathematics, reading, and science. Computers & Education 120: 51-63.
201. PlayVS (Spring 2024) Esports Benefits.
202. Borgonovi F (2016) Video gaming and gender differences in digital and printed reading performance among 15-year-olds students in 26 countries. Journal of Adolescence 48: 45–61.
203. Chan PA, Rabinowitz T (2006) A cross-sectional analysis of video games and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms in adolescents. Annals of General Psychiatry 5(1): 16.
204. Furio D, Gonzalez Gancedo S, Juan MC, Segui I, Rando N (2013). Evaluation of Learning Outcomes Using an Educational Iphone Game Vs. Traditional Game, Computers & Education 64: 1-23.
205. Gnambs T, Stasielowicz L, Wolter I, Appel M (2020) Do computer games jeopardize educational outcomes? A prospective study on gaming times and academic achievement. Psychology of Popular Media 9(1): 69-82.
206. Gómez-Gonzalvo F, Devís-Devís J, Molina-Alventosa P (2020) Video game usage time in adolescents’ academic performance. Comunicar: Media Education Research Journal 28 (65): 87-96.
207. Hellstrom C, Nilsson KW, Leppert J, Aslund C (2012) Influences of Motives to Play and Time Spent Gaming on the Negative Consequences of Adolescent Online Computer Gaming. Computers in Human Behavior 28(4): 1379-1387.
208. Swing EL, Gentile DA, Anderson CA, Walsh DA (2010) Television and video game exposure and the development of attention problems. Pediatrics 126(2): 214-221.
209. Wack E, Tantleff-Dunn S (2009). Relationships between electronic game play, obesity, and psychosocial functioning in young men. CyberPsychology and Behavior 12(2): 241-244.
210. Williams J (2006) Why kids need to be bored: A case study of self-reflection and academic performance. Research in Middle Level Education Online 29(5):1-17.
211. Watchilla ZPL (2024) The Impact of Participating in an Esports Extracurricular Activity on Academic Achievement and Attendance of High School Students. Doctoral dissertation, Wilmington University (Delaware).
212. McGrath K (2019) Leveraging eSports in higher education. Understanding esports: An introduction to the global phenomenon, Lexington Books.
213. Lee JS, Wu M, Lee D, Fleming L, Ruben L, et al. (2020) Designing an interest-based integrated curriculum around esports. International Journal of Designs for Learning 11(3): 78-95.
214. Scott MJ, Summerley R, Besombes N, Connolly C, Gawrysiak J, et al. (2021). Foundations for esports curricula in higher education. In Proceedings of the 2021 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, p. 27-55.
215. Steinkuehler C, Anderson CG, Reitman JG, Lee JS, Wu M, et al. (2023) Enriched esports: the design and four-year examination of a school-affiliated competitive videogame program for youth. Journal of Interactive Learning Research 34(1): 59-119.
216. Galbreath J (1999) Preparing the 21st-century worker: The link between computer-based technology and future skill sets. Educational Technology 39(6): 14-22.
217. McClellan GS, Arnett RS, Hueber CM (2023) Esports in higher education: Fostering successful student-athletes and successful programs. Routledge.
218. Andersen R, Scholz TM, Simonsen CR (2023) Level up: Unleashing the potential of esports for transerable skill delevopment in the digital working world. ICERI2023 Proceedings.
219. (2021) Esports business management. In: Hedlund DP, Fried G, Smith III RC (Eds.,). Human Kinetics Publishers.
220. Zomer C, Magee L, Third A (2021) Benefits of Recreational Gaming and eSports for Young People: Literature Review. Sydney: Western Sydney University.
221. Hoffelner C, Nägele C, Düggeli A (2025) Play for the Future: A Cross-Sectional Study on the Role of Video Game Skills in Student Career Planning. Simulation & Gaming 10468781251328894.
222. (2021) Esports research and its integration in education. In: Harvey MM, Marlatt R (Eds.,). IGI Global.
223. Zhao G, Cheng Y, Liu X, Meng W (2022) Sustaining eSports Industry and Regulatory Focus: Empirical Evidence From Chinese Universities. Front Psychology 13: 1-11.
224. Svensson J, Leis O, Trotter MG (2024) Parental support in esports through the lens of the theory of planned behaviour. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living 6: 1366122.
225. Trotter MG, Coulter TJ, Davis PA, Poulus DR, Polman R (2022) Examining the impact of school esports program participation on student health and psychological development. Frontiers in Psychology 12: 807341.
226. Wimmer S, Denk N, Pfeiffer A, Fleischhacker M (2021) On the use of esports in educational settings. How can esports serve to increase interest in traditional school subjects and improve the ability to use 21st-century skills? In INTED2021. IATED, pp. 5782-5787.
227. Donaldson L (2022) Esports Intended to be in 2028 Olympics.
228. Ananiadou K, Claro M (2009) In 21^st-century skills and Competences for new millennium learners in OECD Countries (OECD education working papers No. 41). OECD.
229. Byrne AM (2020) Using esports to teach bystander leadership and collaboration for students in STEM. About Campus 25(1): 24-27.
230. European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Recommendation of the European Parliament and the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competencies for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union 394: 10–18.
231. Griffith JL, Voloschin P, Gibb GD, Bailey JR (1983) Differences in eye-hand motor coordination of video-game users and non-users. Perceptual and Motor Skills 57(1): 155-158.
232. Kwak H, Blackburn J (2014) Linguistic Analysis of Toxic Behavior in an Online Video Game. EGG workshop Cmc, pp. 209-217.
233. Lemke C (2002) enGauge 21^st-century skills: Digital literacies for a digital age. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
234. (2009) Partnership for 21^st-century Skills. P21 framework definitions.
235. An empirical study. Cyber Psychology and Behavior 10(1): 38-44.