- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Effect of competitive environment on students’ performance on physics conceptual questions: An eyetracking study

Shaona Zhou1,2,*,†, Qiuye Li1,3,†,‡, Yi Zhong1, Sihang Liang1, Yongxuan Li1, Yifeng Ou1, and Xianqiu Wu1,2,†,§

  • 1Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Quantum Engineering and Quantum Materials, National Demonstration Center for Experimental Physics Education, School of Physics, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, People’s Republic of China
  • 2National Research Center for Educational Materials (Elementary and Middle School Physics Materials Research), Guangdong Basic Research Center of Excellence for Structure and Fundamental Interactions of Matter, Key Laboratory of Atomic and Subatomic Structure and Quantum Control (Ministry of Education), South China Normal University, Guangzhou, People’s Republic of China
  • 3Department of Physics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA

  • *Contact author: zhou.shaona@m.scnu.edu.cn
  • †Present address: School of Physics, South China Normal University, Higher Education Mega Center, Guangzhou 510006, People’s Republic of China.
  • ‡Contact author: 2019021855@m.scnu.edu.cn
  • §Contact author: xqwu@scnu.edu.cn
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 21, 020135 – Published 24 October, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/y2cj-cvnb

Abstract

Given the widespread presence of competition in educational settings and its complex impact on science learning, how students complete tasks in competitive environments has attracted a wide range of attention. The purpose of this study is to compare students’ performance on physics conceptual questions in noncompetitive and competitive environments, focusing on both task outcomes and cognitive processing during task completion. There were 66 undergraduate students randomly assigned to one of two conditions (a noncompetitive group and a competitive group) to complete physics multiple-choice questions. The results displayed differences in undergraduate students’ outcomes and eye movement behaviors when they completed physics conceptual questions under noncompetitive and competitive conditions. The noncompetitive group outperformed the competitive group in completing physics conceptual questions, while the competitive group spent less fixation time completing physics conceptual questions than the noncompetitive group. Additionally, the noncompetitive group displayed a larger number of revisits to the entire question than the competitive group. In summary, although students in a competitive environment completed physics conceptual questions more quickly, the accuracy was low, which could be described as “haste makes waste.” Eyetracking data suggested that these differences might result from a greater emphasis on speed and reduced cognitive engagement in the competitive group.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (95)

  1. D. R. Clasen and B. B. Brown, The multidimensionality of peer pressure in adolescence, J. Youth Adolesc. 14, 451 (1985).
  2. E. Vanderhoven, A. Raes, H. Montrieux, T. Rotsaert, and T. Schellens, What if pupils can assess their peers anonymously? A quasi-experimental study, Comput. Educ. 81, 123 (2015).
  3. B. D. Bonta, Cooperation and competition in peaceful societies, Psychol. Bull. 121, 299 (1997).
  4. K. Murayama and A. J. Elliot, The competition-performance relation: A meta-analytic review and test of the opposing processes model of competition and performance, Psychol. Bull. 138, 1035 (2012).
  5. K. Murayama and A. J. Elliot, Further clarifying the competition–performance relation: Reply to D. W. Johnson et al. (2012), Psychol. Bull. 138, 1079 (2012).
  6. D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson, Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills, 7th ed. (Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA, 2000).
  7. D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson, An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning, Educ. Res. 38, 365 (2009).
  8. D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson, Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research (Interaction Book Company, Edina, MI, 1989).
  9. H. R. Tenenbaum, N. E. Winstone, P. J. Leman, and R. E. Avery, How effective is peer interaction in facilitating learning? A meta-analysis, J. Educ. Psychol. 112, 1303 (2020).
  10. E. L. Deci, R. Koestner, and R. M. Ryan, A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation, Psychol. Bull. 125, 627 (1999).
  11. C. Ames, Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation, J. Educ. Psychol. 84, 261 (1992).
  12. C. H. Chen, V. Law, and W.-Y. Chen, The effects of peer competition-based science learning game on secondary students’ performance, achievement goals, and perceived ability, Interact. Learn. Environ. 26, 235 (2018).
  13. T. W. Malone and M. R. Lepper, Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning, in Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction, edited by R. E. Snow and M. J. Farr (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1987), pp. 223–253, 10.4324/9781003163244-10.
  14. Z. Qin and J. R. T. Johnson, Cooperative versus competitive efforts and problem solving, Rev. Educ. Res. 65, 129 (1995).
  15. F. Y. Yu, Promoting student learning and development in computer-based cooperative learning, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education/International Conference on Computer-Assisted Instruction (ICCE/ICCAI) (Taiwan, 2000), https://eric.ed.gov/?ff1=subComputer+Uses+in+Education&di=ED454818.
  16. I. C. Whittemore, The influence of competition on performance: An experimental study, J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 19, 236 (1924).
  17. J. D. Angrist, The perils of peer effects, Labour Econ. 30, 98 (2014).
  18. M. A. Burke and T. R. Sass, Classroom peer effects and student achievement, J. Labor Econ. 31, 51 (2013).
  19. J. Feld and U. Zölitz, Understanding peer effects: On the nature, estimation, and channels of peer effects, J. Labor Econ. 35, 387 (2017).
  20. F. Lu and M. Anderson, Peer effects in microenvironments: The benefits of homogeneous classroom groups, J. Labor Econ. 33, 91 (2015).
  21. R. Murphy and F. Weinhardt, Top of the class: The importance of ordinal rank, Res. Econ. Stud. 87, 2777 (2020).
  22. B. Clark, Effects of competition in the conceptual physics classroom, Master’s thesis, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, 2018.
  23. P. C. Agommuoh and P. A. Ekeoha, Competitive and reciprocal peer tutoring learning methods: Ways of improving secondary school physics students’ achievement in Abia state, Rivers State Univ. J. Educ. 26, 1 (2023), https://rsujoe.com.ng/index.php/joe/article/view/172?utm.
  24. T. Romanello, Collaborative competition? A great way to teach and motivate, Phys. Teach., 43, 76 (2005).
  25. U. Gneezy, M. Niederle, and A. Rustichini, Performance in competitive environments: Gender differences, Q. J. Econ. 118, 1049 (2003).
  26. U. Gneezy, K. L. Leonard, and J. Rustichini, Gender differences in competition: Evidence from a matrilineal and a patriarchal society, Econometrica 77, 1637 (2009).
  27. U. Gneezy and A. Rustichini, Gender and competition at a young age, Am. Econ. Rev. 94, 377 (2004).
  28. L. Bursztyn, G. Egorov, and R. Jensen, Cool to be smart or smart to be cool? Understanding peer pressure in education, Rev. Econ. Stud. 86, 1487 (2017).
  29. L. Bursztyn and R. Jensen, How does peer pressure affect educational investments?, Q. J. Econ. 130, 1329 (2015).
  30. W. W. F. Lau and A. H. K. Yuen, Exploring the effects of gender and learning styles on computer programming performance: Implications for programming pedagogy, Br. J. Educ. Technol. 40, 696 (2009).
  31. K. M. Y. Law, S. Geng, and T. Li, Student enrollment, motivation and learning performance in a blended learning environment: The mediating effects of social, teaching, and cognitive presence, Comput. Educ. 136, 1 (2019).
  32. K. M. Y. Law, F. E. Sandnes, H. Jian, and Y. Huang, A comparative study of learning motivation among engineering students in South East Asia and beyond, Int. J. Eng. Educ. 25, 144 (2009), https://ntut.elsevierpure.com/en/publications/a-comparative-study-of-learning-motivation-among-engineering-stud?utm.
  33. R. M. Ryan and E. L. Deci, Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being, Am. Psychol. 55, 68 (2000).
  34. D. H. Schunk and B. J. Zimmerman, Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 2007).
  35. R. M. Ryan and J. Reeve, Intrinsic motivation, psychological needs, and competition: A self-determination theory analysis, in The Oxford Handbook of the Psychology of Competition, edited by M. S. Bernstein and R. S. Mayer (Oxford University Press, New York, 2021), pp. 240–264.
  36. Z. Sun, T. Bai, W. Yu, J. Zhou, M. Zhang, and M. Shen, Attentional bias in competitive situations: Winner does not take all, Front. Psychol. 6, 1469 (2015).
  37. P. T. Wong, L. C. Wong, and C. Scott, Beyond stress and coping: The positive psychology of transformation, in Multicultural Perspectives on Stress and Coping, edited by P. T. P. Wong and L. C. J. Wong (Springer, Boston, MA, 2006).
  38. G. R. VandenBos, Competition, in APA Dictionary of Psychology (American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, 2007), p. 204.
  39. J. R. Posselt and L. S. Ketchen, Competition, anxiety, and depression in the college classroom: Variations by student identity and field of study, J. Coll. Stud. Dev. 57, 973 (2016).
  40. P. John, T. M. Buerck, and P. Elliott, Learning environment and learning styles: Nontraditional student environment and success in an internet-based versus a lecture-based computer science course, Learn. Environ. Res. 6, 137 (2003).
  41. P. I. Ogbuehi and B. J. Fraser, Learning environment, attitudes and conceptual development associated with innovative strategies in middle-school mathematics, Learn. Environ. Res. 10, 101 (2007).
  42. C. C. A. Chan, C. Pearson, and L. Entrekin, Examining the effects of internal and external team learning on team performance, Team Perform. Manag. 9, 174 (2003).
  43. Y. Lee and P. A. Ertmer, Examining the effect of small group discussions and question prompts on vicarious learning outcomes, J. Res. Tech. Educ. 39, 66 (2006).
  44. A. Rassuli and J. P. Manzer, Teach to learn: Multivariate analysis of perception of success in team learning, J. Educ. Bus. 81, 21 (2005).
  45. J. E. Fisher, Competition and gaming: An experimental study, Simul. Gaming 7, 321 (1976).
  46. J. M. Tauer and J. M. Harackiewicz, The effects of cooperation and competition on intrinsic motivation and performance, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 86, 849 (2004).
  47. L. X. He, Q. Zhang, and C. K. Wang, The relationship between competition-cooperation and academic achievement: A mediator role of academic self-concept, Psychol. Explor. 31, 172 (2011).
  48. N. E. Cagiltay, E. Ozcelik, and N. S. Ozcelik, The effect of competition on learning in games, Comput. Educ. 87, 35 (2015).
  49. D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson, Learning Together and Alone: Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Learning, 4th ed. (Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA, 1994).
  50. C. Ames and J. Archer, Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes, J. Educ. Psychol. 80, 260 (1988).
  51. A. Kohn, No Contest: The Case Against Competition, 2nd ed. (Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA, 1992).
  52. H. F. Ladd and E. B. Fiske, Does competition improve teaching and learning? Evidence from New Zealand, Educ. Eval. Policy Anal. 25, 97 (2003).
  53. J. C. Burguillo, Using game-theory and competition-based learning to stimulate student motivation and performance, Comput. Educ. 55, 566 (2010).
  54. S. Olitsky, The role of fictive kinship relationships in mediating classroom competition and supporting reciprocal mentoring, Cult. Stud. Sci. Educ. 6, 883 (2011).
  55. J. Harackiewicz, K. Barron, and A. Elliot, Rethinking achievement goals: When are they adaptive for college students and why?, Educ. Psychol. 33, 1 (1998).
  56. J. G. Nicholls, Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance, Psychol. Rev. 91, 328 (1984).
  57. C. S. Dweck, Motivational processes affecting learning, Am. Psychol. 41, 1040 (1986).
  58. A. J. Elliot and C. S. Hulleman, Achievement goals, in Handbook of Competence and Motivation: Theory and Application, edited by A. J. Elliot, C. S. Dweck, and D. S. Yeager (The Guilford Press, New York, 2017), pp. 43–60.
  59. C. Senko, Achievement goal theory: A story of early promises, eventual discords, and future possibilities, in Handbook of Motivation at School, edited by K. Wentzel and D. Miele (Routledge, New York, 2016), Vol. 2, pp. 75–95.
  60. E. S. Elliott and C. S. Dweck, Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54, 5 (1988).
  61. H. Song, R. Gao, Q. Zhang, and Y. Li, The nonlinear effect of time pressure on innovation performance: New insights from a meta-analysis and an empirical study, Front. Psychol. 13, 1049174 (2023).
  62. B. A. Greene and R. B. Miller, Influences on achievement: Goals, perceived ability, and cognitive engagement, Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 21, 181 (1996).
  63. M. Vansteenkiste, J. Simons, W. Lens, K. M. Sheldon, and E. L. Deci, Motivating learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy supportive contexts, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 87, 246 (2004).
  64. B. A. Greene, R. B. Miller, H. M. Crowson, B. L. Duke, and K. L. Akey, Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation, Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 29, 462 (2004).
  65. M. V. Covington, Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: An integrative review, Annu. Rev. Psychol. 51, 171 (2000).
  66. C. Ames, Achievement attributions and self-instructions under competitive and individualistic goal structure, J. Educ. Psychol. 76, 478 (1984).
  67. S. Lam, P. Yim, J. S. F. Law, and R. W. Y. Cheung, The effects of competition on achievement motivation in Chinese classrooms, Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 74, 281 (2004).
  68. S. Becker, L. Knippertz, S. Ruzika, and J. Kuhn, Persistence, context, and visual strategy of graph understanding: Gaze patterns reveal student difficulties in interpreting graphs, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19, 020142 (2023).
  69. S. Becker, S. Küchemann, P. Klein, A. Lichtenberger, and J. Kuhn, Gaze patterns enhance response prediction: More than correct or incorrect, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 18, 020107 (2022).
  70. P. Klein, S. Becker, S. Küchemann, and J. Kuhn, Test of understanding graphs in kinematics: Item objectives confirmed by clustering eye movement transitions, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 013102 (2021).
  71. M. A. Just and P. A. Carpenter, A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension, Psychol. Rev. 87, 329 (1980).
  72. K. Rayner, Eye movements and information processing: 20 years of research, Psychol. Bull. 124, 372 (1998).
  73. M. Opfermann, A. Schmeck, and H. E. Fischer, Multiple representations in physics and science education—Why should we use them?, Educ. Res. 47, 1 (2017).
  74. J. Scheid, A. Müller, R. Hettmannsperger, and W. Schnotz, Improving learners’ representational coherence ability with experiment-related representational activity tasks, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 010142 (2019).
  75. B. Ibrahim and L. Ding, Sequential and simultaneous synthesis problem solving: A comparison of students’ gaze transitions, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010126 (2021).
  76. M. Kekule and J. Viiri, Students’ approaches to solving R-FCI tasks observed by eye-tracking method, Sci. Educ. 9, 117 (2018).
  77. P. Klein, J. Viiri, S. Mozaffari, A. Dengel, and J. Kuhn, Instruction-based clinical eye-tracking study on the visual interpretation of divergence: How do students look at vector field plots?, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 010116 (2018).
  78. C. J. Wu and C. Y. Liu, Eye-movement study of high- and low-prior-knowledge students’ scientific argumentations with multiple representations, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010125 (2021).
  79. K. P. Chien, C. Y. Tsai, H. L. Chen, W. H. Chang, and S. Chen, Learning differences and eye fixation patterns in virtual and physical science laboratories, Comput. Educ. 82, 191 (2015).
  80. G. L. Chiou, C. Y. Hsu, and M.-J. Tsai, Exploring how students interact with guidance in a physics simulation: Evidence from eye-movement and log data analyses, Interact. Learn. Environ. 30, 484 (2019).
  81. Q. Li, S. Xu, Y. Chen, C. Lu, and S. Zhou, Detecting preservice teachers’ visual attention under prediction and nonprediction conditions with eye-tracking technology, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 18, 010134 (2022).
  82. T. V. Gog, F. Paas, and J. J. G. Merriënboer, Uncovering expertise-related differences in troubleshooting performance, Appl. Cognit. Psychol. 19, 205 (2010).
  83. M. J. Tsai, H. T. Hou, M. L. Lai, W. Y. Liu, and F. Y. Yang, Visual attention for solving multiple-choice science problem: An eye-tracking analysis, Comput. Educ. 58, 375 (2012).
  84. A. Susac, M. Planinic, A. Bubic, K. Jelicic, L. Ivanjek, K. M. Cvenic, and M. Palmovic, Effect of students’ investigative experiments on students’ recognition of interference and diffraction patterns: An eye-tracking study, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010110 (2021).
  85. Hyönä, The use of eye movements in the study of multimedia learning, Learn. Instr. 20, 172 (2010).
  86. L. Mason, M. C. Tornatora, and P. Pluchino, Do fourth graders integrate text and picture in processing and learning from an illustrated science text? Evidence from eye-movement patterns, Comput. Educ. 60, 95 (2013).
  87. D. Hestenes, M. Wells, and G. Swackhamer, Force concept inventory, Phys. Teach. 30, 141 (1992).
  88. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/y2cj-cvnb for the Chinese and English versions of the four physics conceptual questions.
  89. R. B. Williams and C. A. Clippinger, Aggression, competition and computer games: Computer and human opponents, Comput. Hum. Behav. 18, 495 (2002).
  90. J. C. S. Ho, Y. S. Hung, and L. Y. Y. Kwan, The impact of peer competition and collaboration on gamified learning performance in educational settings: A meta-analytical study, Educ. Inf. Technol. 27, 3833 (2022).
  91. J. ter Vrugte, T. de Jong, S. Vandercruysse, P. Wouters, H. van Oostendorp, and J. Elen, How competition and heterogeneous collaboration interact in prevocational game-based mathematics education, Comput. Educ. 89, 42 (2015).
  92. S. Vandercruysse, M. Vandewaetere, F. Cornillie, and G. Clarebout, Competition and students’ perceptions in a game-based language learning environment, Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 61, 927 (2013).
  93. R. Radach and A. Kennedy, Theoretical perspectives on eye movements in reading: Past controversies, current issues, and an agenda for future research, Eur. J. Cognit. Psychol. 16, 3 (2004).
  94. K. Rayner, A. Pollatsek, J. Ashby, and C. Clifton, Psychology of Reading, 2nd ed. (Psychology Press, New York, 2012).
  95. A. Efklides, Metacognitive and self-regulated learning model, Educ. Psychol. 46, 6 (2011).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 21, 020135– Published 24 October, 2025
  • Received 27 December 2024
  • Accepted 9 September 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation