Skip to main content
View expanded cover

International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction

HCII 2020: Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Human and Technology Ecosystems pp 480–498Cite as

Does Immersive VR Increase Learning Gain When Compared to a Non-immersive VR Learning Experience?

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNISA,volume 12206)

Abstract

Currently, computer assisted learning and multimedia form a key part of teaching. Interactivity and feedback are valuable in promoting active as opposed to passive learning. The study is conducted as an assessment of the impact of immersive VR on learning gain compared with a non-immersive video capture of VR, with a primary research question focusing on exploring learning gain and a secondary question exploring user experience, whereby understanding this is paramount to recognizing how to achieve a complete and effective learning experience. The study found immersive VR to significantly increase learning gain whilst two key measures of reported experience; enjoyment and concentration, also appeared significantly higher for the immersive VR learners. The study suggests extensive avenues for further research in this growing field, recognizing the need to appeal to a variety of students’ learning preferences. For educators, the relevance of self-directed and student-centered learning to enable active learning in the immersive tool is highlighted. Findings of such VR-based studies can be applied across several disciplines, including medical education; providing opportunity for users to learn without real-world consequences of error such as in surgical intervention.

Keywords

  • Virtual reality
  • Education
  • Medicine
  • Self-directed learning
  • Active learning

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-50506-6_33
  • Chapter length: 19 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-50506-6
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions
Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.

References

  1. Sutherland, I.: Sketchpad a man-machine graphical communication system. Simulation 2(5), R-3–R-20 (1964)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lanier, J., Biocca, F.: An insider’s view of the future of virtual reality. J. Commun. 42(4), 150–172 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mandal, S.: Brief introduction of virtual reality & its challenges. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 4(4) (2013). https://www.ijser.org/researchpaper/Brief-Introduction-of-Virtual-Reality-its-Challenges.pdf. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  4. Fuchs, H., Bishop, G.: Research Directions in Virtual Environments. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Suh, L.: The effects of virtual reality on consumer learning: an empirical investigation. MIS Q. 29(4), 673 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kovach, S.: Facebook Buys Oculus VR For $2 Billion. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-to-buy-oculus-rift-for-2-billion-2014-3?r=US&IR=T. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  7. Moore, M.: Reality check for VR as projects scrapped. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/reality-check-for-vr-as-projects-scrapped-frsqktxcw. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  8. Serino, S., Cipresso, P., Morganti, F., Riva, G.: The role of egocentric and allocentric abilities in Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review. Ageing Res. Rev. 16, 32–44 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bohil, C., Alicea, B., Biocca, F.: Virtual reality in neuroscience research and therapy. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 12(12), 752–762 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Berntsen, K., Palacios, R., Herranz, E.: Virtual reality and its uses. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality - TEEM 2016 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Zhao, Q.: A survey on virtual reality. Sci. China Ser. F: Inf. Sci. 52(3), 348–400 (2009)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang, D., Zhou, L., Briggs, R., Nunamaker, J.: Instructional video in e-learning: assessing the impact of interactive video on learning effectiveness. Inf. Manag. 43(1), 15–27 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cooper, J., Heron, T., Heward, W.: Applied Behavior Analysis. Pearson/Merrill-Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Nikopoulou-Smyrni, P., Nikopoulos, C.: Evaluating the impact of video-based versus traditional lectures on student learning (2010). http://internationalresearchjournals.org/full-articles/evaluating-the-impact-of-video-based-versus-traditional-lectures-on-student-learning.pdf?view=inline. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  15. Abdullah, J., Mohd-Isa, W., Samsudin, M.: Virtual reality to improve group work skill and self-directed learning in problem-based learning narratives. Virtual Real. 23(4), 461–471 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zimmerman, B., Schunk, D.: Self-regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives, 2nd edn. Routledge, New York (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Keller, J., Suzuki, K.: Learner motivation and E-learning design: a multinationaly validated process. J. Educ. Media 29(3), 229–239 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mount, N., Chambers, C., Weaver, D., Priestnall, G.: Learner immersion engagement in the 3D virtual world: principles emerging from the DELVE project. Innov. Teach. Learn. Inf. Comput. Sci. 8(3), 40–55 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Yee, N.: Motivations for play in online games. CyberPsychol. Behav. 9(6), 772–775 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Barbe, W., Milone, M., Swassing, R.: Teaching Through Modality Strengths. ZanerBloser, Columbus, OH (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Riener, C., Willingham, D.: The myth of learning styles. Change: Mag. High. Learn. 42(5), 32–35 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bellamy, M., Warren, A.: Using Online Practicals to Support Lab Sessions (2011). http://edshare.soton.ac.uk/id/document/243301. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  23. Webster, R.: Declarative knowledge acquisition in immersive virtual learning environments. Interact. Learn. Environ. 24(6), 1319–1333 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bricken, M.: Virtual reality learning environments: potentials and challenges. ACM SIGGRAPH Comput. Graph. 25(3), 178–184 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Burdea, G., Coiffet, P.: Virtual reality technology. Wiley, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Choi, H., Johnson, S.: The effect of context-based video instruction on learning and motivation in online courses. Am. J. Distance Educ. 19(4), 215–227 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Shyu, H.: Using video-based anchored instruction to enhance learning: Taiwan’s experience. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 31(1), 57–69 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  28. McGrath, C., Guerin, B., Harte, E., Frearson, M., Manville, C.: Learning gain in higher education. Santa Monica, California and Cambridge UK: RAND (2015). https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR900/RR996/RAND_RR996.pdf. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  29. Hussein, M., Natterdal, C.: The benefits of virtual reality in education a comparison study. Department of Computer Science and Engineering Chalmers University of Technology University of Gothenburg (2015). https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5310/aa72c3946d29ff1c538e82f89425c7f78d8f.pdf?_ga=2.249113359.98483112.1576846678-911970774.1576846678. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  30. West, S.: Innovative virtual reality software developed to enhance fluid dynamics lectures. Imperial College London News. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/189866/innovative-virtual-reality-software-developed-enhance/. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  31. Ota, D., Loftin, B., Saito, T., Lea, R., Keller, J.: Virtual reality in surgical education. Comput. Biol. Med. 25(2), 127–137 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Alfalah, S., Falah, J., Alfalah, T., Elfalah, M., Muhaidat, N., Falah, O.: A comparative study between a virtual reality heart anatomy system and traditional medical teaching modalities. Virtual Real. 23(3), 229–234 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Nicholson, D., Chalk, C., Funnell, W., Daniel, S.: Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomised controlled study of a computer-generated three-dimensional anatomical ear model. Med. Educ. 40(11), 1081–1087 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Shim, K., Park, J., Kim, H., Kim, J., Park, Y., Ryu, H.: Application of virtual reality technology in biology education. J. Biol. Educ. 37(2), 71–74 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Huang, H., Liaw, S., Lai, C.: Exploring learner acceptance of the use of virtual reality in medical education: a case study of desktop and projection-based display systems. Interact. Learn. Environ. 24(1), 3–19 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Fiorella, L., Mayer, R.E.: Learning as a Generative Activity: Eight Learning Strategies that Promote Understanding. Cambridge University Press, New York (2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107707085. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  37. Ghasemi, A., Zahediasl, S.: Normality tests for statistical analysis: a guide for non-statisticians. Int. J. Endocrinol. Metab. 10(2), 486–489 (2012). https://doi.org/10.5812/ijem.3505,lastaccessed2019/12/21

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  38. McKnight, P.E., Najab, J.: Mann‐Whitney U Test- The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. Wiley, Hoboken (2010). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0524. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  39. Christopoulos, A., Conrad, M., Shukla, M.: Increasing student engagement through virtual interactions: how? Virtual Real. 22(4), 353–369 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Schunk, D., DiBenedetto, M.: Self-Efficacy: Education Aspects. Int. Encyclopedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 515–521 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Bandura, A.: Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 84(2), 191–215 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mayer, R.: Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, pp. 43–71 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., Kalyuga, S.: Cognitive Load Theory. Springer, New York (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  44. Fokides, E., Tsolakidis, C.: Virtual reality in education: a theoretical approach for road safety training to students. Eur. J. Open Distance Learn. (EURODL) II (2008). http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2008/Fokides_Tsolakidis.htm. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  45. Mayer, R.E.: Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press, New York (2009). http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811678. Accessed 21 Dec 2019

  46. Mayer, R., Griffith, E., Jurkowitz, I., Rothman, D.: Increased interestingness of extraneous details in a multimedia science presentation leads to decreased learning. J. Exper. Psychol.: Appl. 14(4), 329–339 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Schiefele, U.: Situational and individual interest. In: Wentzel, K.R., Wigfield, A. (eds.) Handbook of Motivation in School, 1st edn. Taylor and Francis, New York (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Abdelkhalek, N., Hussein, A., Gibbs, T., Hamdy, H.: Using team-based learning to prepare medical students for future problem-based learning. Med. Teach. 32(2), 123–129 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge and thank the students who participated in the research experience. A special thanks to our supervisors Irene Kalkanis, Thomas Hurkxkens, Nitesh Bhatia and their colleagues in the Digital Learning Hub for their support and guidance throughout the project in addition to the Matar Fluid Group for their development of the learning tools used.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK

    Khadija Mahmoud, Isaac Harris, Husam Yassin, Thomas J. Hurkxkens, Omar K. Matar, Nitesh Bhatia & Irene Kalkanis

Authors
  1. Khadija Mahmoud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Isaac Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Husam Yassin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas J. Hurkxkens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Omar K. Matar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nitesh Bhatia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Irene Kalkanis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Khadija Mahmoud , Isaac Harris , Husam Yassin or Irene Kalkanis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Cyprus University of Technology, Limassol, Cyprus

    Panayiotis Zaphiris

  2. Cyprus University of Technology, Limassol, Cyprus

    Andri Ioannou

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Mahmoud, K. et al. (2020). Does Immersive VR Increase Learning Gain When Compared to a Non-immersive VR Learning Experience?. In: Zaphiris, P., Ioannou, A. (eds) Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Human and Technology Ecosystems. HCII 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12206. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50506-6_33

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50506-6_33

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-50505-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-50506-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)