Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 76, Issue 5, pp 7301–7319 | Cite as

The effects of stereoscopic 3D on knowledge retention within a serious gaming environment

  • Mina Tawadrous
  • David Rojas
  • Bill KapralosEmail author
  • Andrew Hogue
  • Adam Dubrowski


We present the results of an experiment that investigated the effects of stereoscopic 3D viewing on knowledge retention with respect to a spatial interactive task within a serious game that was designed for fire safety training. Participants were trained to identify the safe distance to remain from a (virtual) fire in both stereoscopic 3D and non-stereoscopic 3D contexts. After a 24 h period, they were then tested to determine whether they retained the information that they were taught. Contrary to prior work that suggests stereoscopic 3D has an impact on knowledge retention, our results indicate no significant difference between knowledge retention in a stereoscopic 3D versus a non-stereoscopic 3D interactive environment. Although greater work remains to be done and no firm conclusions can be made regarding the use of stereoscopic 3D, our results have shown that stereoscopic 3D does not always lead to greater performance. Our results have implications for designers of serious games; the discussion and decision to use stereoscopic 3D should be incorporated early in the design phase and there should be some consideration placed on individualized calibration of stereoscopic 3D settings.


Stereoscopic 3D Knowledge retention Serious games 



The financial support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), in support of the Interactive and Multi-Modal Experience Research Syndicate (IMMERSe) project, the Canadian Network of Centres of Excellence (NCE) in support of the Graphics, Animation, and New Media (GRAND) initiative, and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) is gratefully acknowledged.


  1. 1.
    Adamo-Villani N, Wright K. SMILE: an immersive learning game for deaf and hearing children. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH 2007 - Educators. 5-9 August, 2007, San Diego, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Akerstrom RA, Todd JT (1988) The perception of stereoscopic transparency. Percept Psychophys 44(5):421–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bastanlar Y, Canturk D, Karacan H (2007) Effects of color-multiplex stereoscopic view on memory and navigation. In: Proceedings of the 3DTV Conference, 7-9 May 2007, Kos, Greece. pp. 1-4Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bennett A, Coxon M, Mania K (2010) The effect of stereo and context on memory and awareness states in immersive virtual environments. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization, 24-25 July, 2010, Los Angeles, CA., USA. pp. 135–140Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cooper J, Feldman J, Meldin D (1979) Comparing stereoscopic performance of children using the Titmus, TNO, and Randot stereo tests. J Am Optom Assoc 50(7):821Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corti K (2006) Game-based learning; a serious business application. PIXELearning, CoventryGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Drascic D (1991) Skill acquisition and task performance in teleoperation using monoscopic and stereoscopic video remote viewing. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2-6 September, 1991, San Francisco, CA. USA. pp. 1367–1371Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fisch SM (2004) Characteristics of effective materials for informal education: a cross-media comparison of television, magazines, and interactive media. In: Rabinowitz M, Blumberg FC, Everson E (Eds.) The impact of media and technology on instruction. Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fisch SM (2005) Making educational computer games educational. In: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children. pp. 56–61Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fisk T, Hill D (2010) 3D simulation brings immersive dimension to operator training. Technical Report ARC Insight No. 2010-06MP Dedham, MA. USA. 4 February, 2010Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Galimore JJ, Brown ME (1993) Visualization of 3-D computer-aided design objects. Int J Hum Comput Interact 5(4):361–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hays RT (2005) The effectiveness of instructional games: a literature review and discussion. Technical Report No. 2005-004.November 2005, United States Naval Air Warfare, Training Systems DivisionGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Henn JS, Lemole GM, Ferreira MAT, Gonzalez LF, Schornak M, Preul MC, Spetzler RF (2002) Interactive stereoscopic virtual reality: a new tool for neurosurgical education. J Neurosurg 96(1):144–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hollander A, Kollin HRJ, Moss W (2012) Attack of the S. mutans!: a stereoscopic-3D multiplayer direct-manipulation behavior-modification serious game for improving oral health in pre-teens. In: Proceedings of the SPIE 7863 Stereoscopic Displays and Applications Conference XXII, 23-25 January, 2012, Burlingame, CA. USA. pp. 828816–828816-7Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huboan GS, Wheeler PN, Shirah GW, Brandt M (1999) The relative contributions of stereo, lighting, and background scenes in promoting 3D depth visualization. ACM Trans Comput Hum Interact 6(3):214–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jones JA, Swan JE, Singh G, Kolstad E, Ellis SR (2008) The effects of virtual reality, augmented reality, and motion parallax on ego- centric depth perception. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization. 9-10 August, 2008, Los Angeles, CA, USA. pp. 9–14Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    LaViola J, Litwiller T (2012) Evaluating the benefits of 3D stereo in modern video games. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 7-12 May, 2012, Vancouver, Canada. pp. 2345–2354Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Markopoulos P, Bekker M (2003) Interaction design and children. Interact Comput 15(2):141–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mather G (2006) Foundations perception. Taylor and Francis Group, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mayer RE (2005) Multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Norman G, Dore K, Grierson L (2012) The minimal relationship between simulation fidelity and transfer of learning. Med Educ 46(7):636–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pawlik T, Leach S (2011) Key topics in surgical research and methodology. Ann Surg 253(4):846–847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reitinger B, BORNIK A, Beichel R, Schmalstieg D (2006) Liver surgery planning using virtual reality. IEEE Comput Graph 26(6):36–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schertenleib S. PlayStation 3: Making stereoscopic 3D games. Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Research & Development Division Research & Development Division. Accessed: 30 Dec 2014
  25. 25.
    Schiefele J, Dorr KU, Olbert M, Kubbat W (1999) Stereoscopic projection screens and virtual cockpit simulation for pilot training. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Immersive Projection Technology Workshop, 10-11 May, 1999, Stuttgart, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schnell T, Lemos K (2002) Terrain sampling density and texture requirements for synthetic vision systems. Final Report to the Iowa Space Grant Consortium, 15 December, 2002, Iowa City, IA, USAGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shute VJ, Ventura M, Bauer M, Zapata- Rivera D (2009) Melding the power of serious games and embedded assessment to monitor and foster learning. In: Ritterfeld U, Cody M, Vorderer P (Eds.) Serious games. Mechanisms and effects. Routledge PublishersGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tai YC, Gowrisankaran S, Yang S, Sheedy JE, Hayes JR, Younkin AC, Corriveau PJ (2013) Depth perception from stationary and moving stereoscopic three-dimensional images. In: Proceedings of the SPIE 8648, Stereoscopic Displays and Applications XXIV, 3-7 February, 2013, Burlingame, CA. USAGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tavanti M, Lind M (2001) 2D vs 3D, implications on spatial memory. In: Proceedings of the IEEE INFOVIS 2001 Symposium on Information Visualization, 22-23 October, 2001, San Diego, CA. USA. pp. 139–145Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tawadrous M, Kevan S, Kapralos B, Hogue A. A serious game for incidence response education and training. Int J Tech Knowl Soc 8(4): 177-184Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tawadrous M, Hogue A, Kapralos B, Collins K (2013) An interactive in-game approach to user adjustment of stereoscopic 3D settings. In: Proceedings of the SPIE 8648, Stereoscopic Displays and Applications XXIV, 3-7 February, 2013, Burlingame, CA. USAGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tendick F, Downs M, Goktekin T, Cavusoglu MC, Feygin D, Wu X, Eyal R, Hegarty M, Way LW (2000) A virtual environment testbed for training laparoscopic surgical skills. Presence: Teleop Virt 9(3):236–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    UCSF (2012) Medical education: Potential contributions of stereoscopic 3D. School of Medicine, Office of Educational Technology, University of California San Francisco. San Francisco, CA. USAGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vasilyev N, Novotny P, Martine J, Loyola H, Salgo I, HOWE R, del Nido P (2008) Stereoscopic vision display technology in real-time three-dimensional echocardiography-guided intracardiac beating-heart surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 135(6):1334–1341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Willemsen P, Gooch A, Thompson WB, Creem-Regehr SH (2008) Effects of stereo viewing conditions on distance perception in virtual environments. Presence-Teleop Virt 17(1):91–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yeh Y-Y, Silverstein LD (1992) Spatial judgments with monoscopic and stereoscopic presentation of perspective displays. Hum Factors 34(5):583–600Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zerebecki C, Stanfield B, Hogue A, Kapralos B, CollinsK (2013) S3D depth-axis interaction for video games: performance and engagement. In: Proceedings of the SPIE 8648, Stereoscopic Displays and Applications XXIV, 3-7 February, 2013, Burlingame, CA. USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mina Tawadrous
    • 1
  • David Rojas
    • 2
  • Bill Kapralos
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andrew Hogue
    • 1
  • Adam Dubrowski
    • 3
  1. 1.Faculty of Business and Information TechnologyUniversity of Ontario Institute of TechnologyOshawaCanada
  2. 2.Institute of Medical ScienceUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Divisions of Emergency Medicine and Pediatrics, Faculty of MedicineMemorial UniversitySt. John’sCanada

Personalised recommendations