Why It Works

The research evidence for TTRPG-based literacy instruction, and the cognitive mechanisms that explain it.


The Research Base

Research on TTRPGs in education is growing. While most studies are small-scale and qualitative, findings are remarkably consistent across contexts. Here’s what the evidence shows.

Engagement and Motivation

Students voluntarily do more work. Glazer (2015) found that students working with The Importance of Being Earnest through TTRPG design “voluntarily did more work than they were required to” (p. 162) — a clear indicator of intrinsic motivation that traditional instruction struggles to match.

Reluctant readers become engaged. Kaylor (2017) documented a participant who entered high school with “poor reading skills and little interest in improving them.” After discovering D&D in ninth grade, “his love of the game motivated him to read the rulebooks, which in turn improved his ability to read” (p. 22).

Attendance and participation increase. Hergenrader’s (2011) college-level implementation documented perfect attendance and high participation, even among students typically hesitant to share (cited in Kaylor, 2017).

Benefits cross demographic lines. Prager’s (2020) analysis of TTRPG implementations across North America and Asia found engagement increases “across lines of race, class, and gender” (p. 4).

Literacy Development

Reading comprehension improves through authentic purpose. Cook, Gremo, and Morgan (2017) observed middle school students demonstrating sophisticated comprehension of narrative causality — what they termed “narrative anticipation” — as students made strategic decisions informed by their knowledge of the original text’s patterns.

Writing quality improves through character investment. Daniau (2016) notes that roleplaying games “nurture creative writing skills” because players are motivated to develop their characters and explain their actions (p. 432). The intrinsic motivation leads to greater investment in the writing process.

Listening skills develop through gameplay necessity. Kaylor (2017) found that TTRPGs helped participants improve listening skills, with one participant explaining: “Listening goes a long way towards making you a viable party member, really” (p. 24).

Academic discourse emerges naturally. The argumentative discourse that emerges during gameplay — where players must justify decisions and persuade others — develops the same skills required for academic argumentation (Cook et al., 2016).

Social-Emotional Benefits

Collaboration becomes authentic. Campbell and Madsen (2021) describe how TTRPGs create a “more holistic and social literacy experience” where students collectively interpret texts, negotiate meanings, and build shared understanding (p. 99).

Risk-taking increases in safe spaces. The magic circle of play creates psychological safety for interpretive risk-taking. Students can make bold claims about character motivation, test controversial readings, and “fail” without academic consequence.


The Cognitive Mechanisms

Narrative Transportation

Green and Brock (2000) describe narrative transportation — a deep cognitive investment in story worlds that activates both affective and analytical processing simultaneously. This dual processing creates learning pathways unavailable in conventional text interaction.

Traditional instruction positions students as external observers of narrative. TTRPGs transform them into active participants within narrative systems. This shift fundamentally alters cognitive engagement patterns.

Three Dimensions of Narrative Competence

Research reveals that TTRPGs develop three interrelated dimensions:

Dimension How TTRPGs Develop It
Structural understanding Explicit rule-governed narrative practices make story structure visible
Perspective-taking Character embodiment requires managing both character knowledge and player meta-awareness
Narrative problem-solving Collaborative storytelling requires real-time adaptation to multiple creative inputs

Zalka (2016) documented players actively negotiating multiple character perspectives simultaneously — managing both their character’s limited knowledge and their meta-awareness of narrative possibilities. This cognitive navigation has implications beyond narrative comprehension.

The Oral-Literate Hybrid

Walter Ong (1982) described how oral and literate traditions create different cognitive approaches:

  • Oral traditions emphasize memory, formulaic expression, social learning, and performance
  • Literate traditions prioritize analysis, abstraction, and individual study

TTRPGs uniquely blend these traditions. Players reference written rulebooks one moment and engage in impromptu dialogue the next, developing multiple cognitive skills simultaneously.

Campbell and Madsen (2021) describe this as opportunities for students to “find ‘what is real by making believe’” (p. 98). The improvisational, performative aspects (oral tradition) occur alongside interaction with rulebooks and character sheets (literate tradition).

Intrinsic Motivation Theory

Ryan and Deci (2000) identify three factors that foster intrinsic motivation:

Factor How TTRPGs Address It
Autonomy Players choose their characters’ actions
Competence Players experience growing mastery of mechanics and narrative
Relatedness Collaborative storytelling creates connection to peers

Games provide continuous feedback loops — through dice rolls, narrative consequences, and group responses — that motivate persistence through challenges.

Flow States

The immediate feedback loop in TTRPGs creates what Csikszentmihalyi (1990) calls flow — a state of optimal engagement where challenges match skills and feedback is immediate (cited in McGonigal, 2011). In educational settings, flow states are associated with deeper learning and greater persistence.


What This Means for Narrative Crossroads

Narrative Crossroads is designed to activate these mechanisms:

Mechanism NC Design Element
Narrative transportation Threshold moments place students inside character decisions
Structural understanding The three skills (Confrontation, Comprehension, Connection) make character analysis explicit
Perspective-taking Character Frame worksheet requires textual evidence for character interpretation
Oral-literate blend Gameplay (oral) combines with worksheets and reflection (literate)
Intrinsic motivation Dice mechanics create investment; student choice drives engagement
Flow Immediate feedback through dice results and GM narration

The framework isn’t gamification — adding points to traditional instruction. It’s a different pathway to the same learning objectives, one that activates cognitive mechanisms traditional instruction often misses.


Limitations of the Evidence

Intellectual honesty requires acknowledging what we don’t yet know:

  • Most studies are small-scale — single classrooms or small groups
  • Few controlled comparisons — difficult to isolate TTRPG effects from teacher effects
  • Limited longitudinal data — we don’t know if benefits persist over time
  • Self-selection concerns — students who choose TTRPGs may differ from those who don’t

See Research Gaps for more on what the field needs.


Sources

  • Campbell, A. J., & Madsen, K. (2021). Supporting student literacy through tabletop roleplaying games. Ohio Journal of English Language Arts, 61(1), 97-103.
  • Cook, M. P., Gremo, M., & Morgan, R. (2017). Playing around with literature: Tabletop roleplaying games in middle school ELA. Voices from the Middle, 24(3), 62-69.
  • Daniau, S. (2016). The transformative potential of role-playing games. Simulation & Gaming, 47(4), 423-444.
  • Glazer, E. (2015). Playing with literature. The English Journal, 105(2), 128-133.
  • Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701-721.
  • Kaylor, B. (2017). Reading, writing, and role-playing (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina).
  • Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and Literacy. Methuen.
  • Prager, A. (2020). Making the case for TTRPGs in education. TTRPG Education Network.
  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
  • Zalka, C. V. (2016). Interactive storytelling: A method for teaching moral development through games (Doctoral thesis).

See also: Annotated Bibliography