Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Context and Interaction When Learning With Augmented 360° Photos

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN 2023)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1904))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 324 Accesses

Abstract

360° photos can be used to place learners into different environments augmented with additional information in the form of virtual overlays. This way, more information can be provided than usually, resembling context-based augmented reality (AR). Both contextuality and interactivity are important aspects when it comes to AR- and 360° photo-based learning environments. To find out more about the specific impact context and interaction with the learning material have in an augmented 360° photo environment, we conducted an experimental 2 × 2 between-subjects design with the factors context (visible vs. non visible) and interaction (learner vs. system control) with N = 138 participants. We examined variables concerning immersion, motivation and learning outcome. Concerning immersion, we found a large positive main effect of learner control. Concerning motivation, we found positive main effects of context visibility and learner control. For a subfactor of motivation, satisfaction, we found an interaction effect showing a disadvantage of non-visible context and system control in comparison to all other conditions. We found no effects on learning outcome. We discuss the limitations and implications of the study considering the theoretical background.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ranieri, M., Luzzi, D., Cuomo, S., Bruni, I.: If and how do 360° videos fit into education settings? Results from a scoping review of empirical research. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 38, 1199–1219 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ulrich, F., Helms, N.H., Frandsen, U.P., Rafn, A.V.: Learning effectiveness of 360° video: experiences from a controlled experiment in healthcare education. Interact. Learn. Environ. 29, 98–111 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1579234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kosko, K.W., Ferdig, R.E., Zolfaghari, M.: Preservice teachers’ professional noticing when viewing standard and 360 video. J. Teach. Educ. 72, 284–297 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487120939544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Arvaniti, P.A., Fokides, E.: Evaluating the effectiveness of 360 videos when teaching primary school subjects related to environmental education. JPR. 4, 203–222 (2020). https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.2020063461

  5. Pirker, J., Dengel, A.: The potential of 360° virtual reality videos and real VR for education—a literature review. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 41, 76–89 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2021.3067999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Arents, V., de Groot, P.C.M., Struben, V.M.D., van Stralen, K.J.: Use of 360° virtual reality video in medical obstetrical education: a quasi-experimental design. BMC Med. Educ. 21, 202 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02628-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Eiris, R., Gheisari, M., Esmaeili, B.: PARS: using augmented 360-degree panoramas of reality for construction safety training. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 15, 2452 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15112452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Choi, K., Yoon, Y.-J., Song, O.-Y., Choi, S.-M.: Interactive and immersive learning using 360° virtual reality contents on mobile platforms. Mob. Inf. Syst. 1–12 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/2306031

  9. Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., Kishino, F.: Augmented reality: a class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. In: SPIE 2351: Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies, pp. 282–292. Boston, MA, USA (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Krüger, J.M., Buchholz, A., Bodemer, D.: Augmented reality in education: three unique characteristics from a user’s perspective. In: Chang, M., So, H.-J., Wong, L.-H., Yu, F.-Y., Shih, J.L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computers in Education, pp. 412–422. Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education, Taiwan (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Torres, A., et al.: A 360 video editor framework for interactive training. In: 2020 IEEE 8th International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), pp. 1–7. IEEE, Vancouver, BC, Canada (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Harun, N.Z., Mahadzir, S.Y.: 360° virtual tour of the traditional malay house as an effort for cultural heritage preservation. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 764, 012010 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/764/1/012010

  13. Scheiter, K.: The learner control principle in multimedia learning. In: Fiorella, L., Mayer, R.E. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, pp. 418–429. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2021)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Dengel, A., Mägdefrau, J.: Immersive learning explored: subjective and objective factors influencing learning outcomes in immersive educational virtual environments. In: Lee, M.J.W., et al. (eds.) 2018 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE), pp. 608–615 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Makransky, G., Petersen, G.B.: The cognitive affective model of immersive learning (CAMIL): a theoretical research-based model of learning in immersive virtual reality. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 33, 937–958 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09586-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Witmer, B.G., Singer, M.J.: Measuring presence in virtual environments: a presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 7, 225–240 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1162/105474698565686

  17. Slater, M., Wilbur, S.: A framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE): speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 6, 603–616 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.6.603

  18. Georgiou, Y., Kyza, E.A.: The development and validation of the ARI questionnaire: an instrument for measuring immersion in location-based augmented reality settings. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. St. 98, 24–37 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.09.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dengel, A.: What is immersive learning? In: Dengel, A., et al. (eds.) 2022 8th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN), pp. 1–5 (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Makransky, G.: The immersion principle in multimedia learning. In: Fiorella, L., Mayer, R.E. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, pp. 296–303. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2021)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Cheng, M.-T., She, H.-C., Annetta, L.A.: Game immersion experience: its hierarchical structure and impact on game-based science learning. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 31, 232–253 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Georgiou, Y., Kyza, E.A.: Investigating immersion in relation to students’ learning during a collaborative location-based augmented reality activity. In: Smith, B.K., Borge, M., Mercier, E., Lim, K.Y. (eds.) 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 2017, vol. 1, pp. 423–430. International Society of the Learning Sciences, Philadelphia, PA (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Georgiou, Y., Kyza, E.A.: Relations between student motivation, immersion and learning outcomes in location-based augmented reality settings. Comput. Hum. Behav. 89, 173–181 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Georgiou, Y., Kyza, E.A.: A design-based approach to augmented reality location-based activities: investigating immersion in relation to student learning. In: Proceedings of the 16th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning, pp. 1–8. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mayer, R.E.: 18 Immersion principle. In: Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Beck, D., Morgado, L., Shea, P.: Finding the gaps about uses of immersive learning environments: a survey of surveys. JUCS – J. Univ. Comput. Sci. 26(8), 1043–1073 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3897/jucs.2020.055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Eccles, J.S., Wigfield, A.: Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 53, 109–132 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Schrader, C., Kalyuga, S., Plass, J.L.: Motivation and affect in multimedia learning. In: Mayer, R.E., Fiorella, L. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. pp. 121–131. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Keller, J.M.: Motivational Design for Learning and Performance. Springer, Boston (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Garzón, J., Pavón, J., Baldiris, S.: Systematic review and meta-analysis of augmented reality in educational settings. Virtual Reality 23, 447–459 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-019-00379-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Akçayır, M., Akçayır, G.: Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: a systematic review of the literature. Educ. Res. Rev. 20, 1–11 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Domagk, S., Schwartz, R.N., Plass, J.L.: Interactivity in multimedia learning: an integrated model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26, 1024–1033 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mayer, R.E.: Incorporating motivation into multimedia learning. Learn. Instr. 29, 171–173 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.04.00

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J.E., van Merriënboer, J.J.G., Aubteen Darabi, A.: A motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: optimizing learner involvement in instruction. ETR&D. 53, 25–34 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504795

  35. Loorbach, N., Peters, O., Karreman, J., Steehouder, M.: Validation of the instructional materials motivation survey (IMMS) in a self-directed instructional setting aimed at working with technology. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 46, 204–218 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12138

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Maren Wodara for material creation and data collection in collaboration with co-author Mariam Koch as part of their bachelor’s theses.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany

    Jule M. Krüger, Mariam Koch & Daniel Bodemer

Authors
  1. Jule M. Krüger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mariam Koch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel Bodemer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jule M. Krüger .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Queen Mary University of London, London, UK

    Marie-Luce Bourguet

  2. University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

    Jule M. Krüger

  3. University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

    Daniela Pedrosa

  4. Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

    Andreas Dengel

  5. British Telecom Research Labs, Ipswich, UK

    Anasol Peña-Rios

  6. University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA

    Jonathon Richter

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Krüger, J.M., Koch, M., Bodemer, D. (2024). The Role of Context and Interaction When Learning With Augmented 360° Photos. In: Bourguet, ML., Krüger, J.M., Pedrosa, D., Dengel, A., Peña-Rios, A., Richter, J. (eds) Immersive Learning Research Network. iLRN 2023. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1904. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47328-9_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47328-9_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-47327-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-47328-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation