The Double-Edged Sword of Competition: Fueling Student Success or Causing Stress

[MarisaBluestone]

Monopoly has sold more than 275 million copies since it was introduced. It's a beloved classic, teaching us about saving, investing, and—let’s be honest—how life can sometimes be unfair. But let’s face it, there are some people you just can’t play with. They storm off in frustration, quit entirely, or just don’t cope well with losing. This dynamic exists in all kinds of games, and it’s becoming more common in education as we increasingly gamify learning.

As gamification levels up in education, competition is finding its way into digital learning platforms everywhere. While leaderboards, badges, and challenges can light a fire under some students, they can extinguish the motivation of others. The truth is, one-size-fits-all competition models don’t work for everyone. Fortunately, personalized competition systems, like relative ranking, can help ease the pressure on less competitive students and ensure everyone stays in play.

The Inconsistent Impact of Gamification on Student Performance

Research shows mixed results when it comes to the effect of gamification on academic performance. For instance, a study by Barata et al. (2013) found that while gamification increased student engagement in a university course, there was no significant improvement in overall academic performance. Some studies demonstrate improved grades and higher engagement, while others show no significant impact—or even negative outcomes. Why the disconnect? It’s all about how the game is played—or more specifically, how competition is used and in what context.

Platforms like Achieve have integrated features like leaderboards and adaptive quizzes to boost engagement. The relative ranking feature was designed to reduce the pressure of direct competition, ensuring that all students remain engaged regardless of their rank. Feedback from users highlights that these competitive elements work best when paired with tools that encourage deeper learning, such as assessments and feedback loops. While you can find these combined resources in Achieve, not all ed tech offers them.

Elements like leaderboards can boost motivation for top performers by giving them clear feedback on their success. But for lower-ranked students, these same leaderboards can backfire, leading to demotivation or anxiety.  "Leaderboards can be a bit of a double-edged sword. For students who rank high, the public recognition can really boost their motivation. But for those who land lower on the list, it can sometimes feel discouraging or stressful. That's where using anonymity or pseudonyms can help—they allow students to engage without the pressure of direct competition," notes Hilary Duplantis, Learning Research Specialist with Macmillan Learning. 

How We React to Competition

In general, students have positive attitudes towards gamification, feeling it helps them stay motivated, focused and confident. However, not all competition is created equal. 

There are different types of competitive environments, and they affect students in different ways. Structured competition, like those found in some classroom settings, can drive students to achieve better results. But if poorly managed, they may promote surface learning—where students focus on ranking higher rather than truly understanding the material.

Then there’s spontaneous, informal competition, which can spark engagement but also come with its own risks, like increased anxiety. Individual personalities matter, too: Introverts often thrive in competitive settings, while extroverts may be less motivated by rankings and prefer collaboration and rewards like badges.

Interestingly, competition tends to yield better results in STEM subjects like math and science, because these subjects often have clearer, objective measures of success, which may appeal more to students who thrive on competitive challenges. However, there are flags. "Leaderboards in math can heighten anxiety by amplifying social comparison stress and reinforcing fixed mindsets. For students who view math skills as innate, low rankings may solidify negative beliefs. Constant ranking can be especially discouraging in a cumulative subject like math, where the fear of falling behind is pervasive,” warns Duplantis. However, even in the humanities, competition can boost engagement when applied thoughtfully.

The Importance of Balancing Competition and Cooperation

So, how can educators harness the benefits of competition without leaving some students behind? The key lies in balance. When competition includes elements of cooperation, it fosters a sense of community and shared goals.  

“Designing an effective leaderboard means promoting both competition with elements of cooperation, ensuring students don’t feel too overwhelmed by competition but are still encouraged to improve,” recommends Duplantis. This approach motivates students to work together while still pushing themselves individually, leading to stronger engagement and better learning outcomes.

For competitive students, rankings-based systems can inspire them to set goals and work harder. But without balance, competition can become counterproductive, leading to stress and burnout. Students may focus on beating their peers rather than mastering the content. Worse, low-ranked students may feel disheartened, leading to lower self-esteem and a decline in performance.

How to Level Up: Using Games to Foster Learning

If you're an educator looking to incorporate competition into your classroom, here are three key tips:

• Balance Competition with Cooperation: Incorporating cooperative elements into competitive environments encourages friendly competition without alienating less competitive students. Gamified systems that blend both competition and teamwork can help engage a broader range of students. “On top of balancing competition with cooperation, also consider combining different types of gamification elements, such as leaderboards and badges, as there is potential for a stronger positive effect than any single element in isolation,” suggests Duplantis.
  
  
• Use Relative Rankings: Shift away from absolute ranking systems (where everyone sees exactly where they stand compared to all their peers). Instead, use relative rankings—which show students their progress in relation to nearby peers—to reduce the negative effects of social comparison. Here, students are ranked based on their performance relative to a smaller group of peers or to their past performance rather than being compared to the entire class. This can help ease the competitive pressure and maintain student motivation, particularly for those not at the top of the leaderboard.
  
  
• Keep competition low-stakes. Avoid tying rankings or competitive elements directly to grades, and instead focus on using them to encourage learning. This reduces the pressure students feel to outperform one another, letting them focus on mastering the material. Tools like iClicker allow for low-stakes, real-time competition through class polls and quizzes, keeping engagement high without adding stress

As we continue to explore the role of competition in education, the challenge will be finding that sweet spot—where students are motivated to push themselves and work together without feeling crushed by the pressure to outperform their peers. The reality is, we have a love-hate relationship with games and competition. We enjoy the thrill of winning, but we also stress over the idea of losing the competition.

“Future gamification should embrace holistic and adaptive design, integrating personalized, data-driven elements that respond to individual learner profiles while deeply understanding students' motivations, preferences, and unique learning journeys,” Duplantis said. With adaptive platforms like Achieve and iClicker, educators are starting to find that balance. The road ahead is promising, and with continued research and innovation, competition can be used as a powerful force for learning.

Learn more about game design: Lessons from Game Design: Turning Learning into Engaging Experiences and read more research from our learning science team: Do Emojis Have a Place in the College Classroom?
Boosting Non-Cognitive Outcomes in the Classroom: 5 Practical Steps for Educators