The main limitation of this exploratory study is the sample size that limits the generalizability of the findings. Nevertheless, this approach is particularly useful in behavioral research, as it allow

The gap

Consensus across the literature

Supporting evidence — 3 representative gaps

• Enhancing adaptation and learning in educational environments (SENSE project): a case series study (2026) · doi

  The main limitation of this exploratory study is the sample size that limits the generalizability of the findings. Nevertheless, this approach is particularly useful in behavioral research, as it allows functional relationships to be established between environmental conditions and the behaviors under investigation (124). The base- line data collection phase allowed us to establish existing levels/ patterns of the behaviors of interest, enabling us to appreciate changes during the intervention phase and, overall, provided preliminary objective data on the feasibility of the planned inter- vention, which was necessary to propose its application to a larger number of students in a public school. The study has other methodological limitations that must be considered when interpreting the results. First, data collection was carried out mainly by teachers, with the potential risk of observa- tional bias. A further limitation concerns the absence of direct feedback from children regarding their enjoyment of using the MSE: assessments were based exclusively on indirect behavioral indicators, such as the presence/absence of signs of frustration or avoidance behaviors during their stay in the room. Other important variables were not controlled for, but could impact student behav- ior: the type of classroom activities undertaken after using MSE, and

  Keywords: behaviors limitation behavioral collection phase absence using main exploratory sample size limits generalizability ndings nevertheless
• Gamification enhances student intrinsic motivation, perceptions of autonomy and relatedness, but minimal impact on competency: a meta-analysis and systematic review (2024) · doi

  This study has certain limitations that must be acknowledged when interpreting its results. First, although the search string used in the study was broad in scope, enabling us to cap- ture as many empirical studies as possible, important information was missing in many of the studies (e.g., insufficient statistical data). Missing information and unclear reporting of findings are common problems encountered in meta-analyses and research synthesis stud- ies (Karabulut‐Ilgu et al., 2018), and our study also had to contend with these challenges. Second, the fact that self-reports were the most commonly used measurement approach in the studies may have affected the objectivity of the data gathered in this meta-analysis to examine the effect of gamification on intrinsic motivation (Paulhus & Vazire, 2007). Future studies could adopt more objective approaches to collecting data such as the observation of actual behavior. For example, free-choice behavior can be recorded in a manner that is “typically unobtrusive” (Deci et  al., 1999, p. 656), whereby participants assume that the Gamification enhances student intrinsic motivation,…1 3790 L. Li et al. experimenter is not aware of whether they persist in performing an activity during the free- choice period and thus decide whether to persist based on their own motivation. Third, the coding and analysis of the moderating variables were based on information that was explicitly reported in the original articles. Thus, when information regarding a variable was not reported explicitly in the original article, we coded that information as not available. This may have led to minor differences between our recording of the variables reported in a study and the variables actually observed in the study.

  Keywords: information motivation variables reported used missing meta gamification intrinsic behavior free choice whether persist thus
• Effect of Motivation to Learn and Environmental Factors on University Students' Study Habits (2026) · doi

  Despite the results achieved, several limitations of the study must be considered. First, the cross-sectional and non-experimental design prevents causal inference. Although regression analysis allows for the estimation of statistical predictive rela- tionships, the directionality between environmental conditions, motivation to learn, and study habits cannot be established. Therefore, it is not possible to determine whether favourable environments improve motivation and habits, whether motivated students structure their environments more effectively, or whether reciprocal effects occur over time. Longitudinal and experimental designs would therefore be necessary to clarify these temporal and causal dynamics. Second, the study relied exclusively on self-report measures, which may introduce common method variance and biases related to social desirability or subjective percep- tion. While self-report instruments are widely used in research on motivation and study habits, they may inflate associations between variables measured within the same response format. In this regard, future research should incorporate multi-method ap- proaches, including behavioural indicators (e.g., recorded study time, environmental monitoring measures), observational assessments, or academic performance records, to triangulate findings and reduce potential measurement bias. Third, the model explained 16% of the variance in study habits, indicating that other unmeasured variables likely contribute to their development. Factors such as aca- demic self-efficacy, personality traits, cognitive strategies, institutional support, or socioeconomic conditions could further explain the variability in study behaviour. Expanding the explanatory model would allow for a more comprehensive understand- ing of the multilevel determinants of academic self-regulation. Finally, the sample was drawn from a single higher education institution, which limits the generalisability of the findings. Institutional culture, disciplinary distribution, and socioeconomic context can influence both environmental conditions and motiva- tional profiles. Future studies should replicate the model across different universities, academic fields, and educational modalities to test the robustness and intercontextual stability of the observed relationships.

  Keywords: habits self environmental conditions motivation whether academic model experimental causal environments time report measures variance