Extended Reality (XR) technology -such as virtual and augmented reality -is now widely used in Human Computer Interaction (HCI), social science and psychology experimentation. However, these experiments are predominantly deployed in-lab with a co-present researcher. Remote experiments, without co-present researchers, have not flourished, despite the success of remote approaches for non-XR investigations. This paper summarises findings from a 30-item survey of 46 XR researchers to understand perceived limitations and benefits of remote XR experimentation. Our thematic analysis identifies concerns common with non-XR remote research, such as participant recruitment, as well as XR-specific issues, including safety and hardware variability. We identify potential positive affordances of XR technology, including leveraging data collection functionalities builtin to HMDs (e.g. hand, gaze tracking) and the portability and reproducibility of an experimental setting. We suggest that XR technology could be conceptualised as an interactive technology and a capable data-collection device suited for remote experimentation. CCS CONCEPTS• Human-centered computing → Mixed / augmented reality; Virtual reality.

Immersive virtual environments (IVEs) are increasingly being explored as potential educational tools. However, it is unclear which aspects of IVEs contribute to learning, including hardware modalities and learner responses (e.g. motivation, usability, cognitive load and presence). One IVE hardware modality particularly backed by theory is embodied controls, with their potential for leveraging embodied cognition for enhanced learning outcomes. This paper explores if embodied controls can be leveraged to enhance learning in an IVE by comparing language learning outcomes from an IVE using embodied controls, and a non-embodied control. It explores two words classes -verbs and nouns -to examine if there is a difference in learning outcome for embodied controls with actions (verbs) and object interactions (nouns). This paper also explores co-variables often linked with IVE learning (motivation, presence, cognitive load) to understand why learning gain occurs. It finds that leveraging embodied controls provides better learning outcomes, with no impact on cognitive load. It also finds that the benefit does not correlate with motivation or presence ratings, suggesting that embodiment-induced motivation or immersion is not the cause of the learning enhancements, and therefore this could be evidence for embodied cognition-based learning in IVEs.

No abstract

The benefits and drawbacks of using immersive virtual reality (IVR) for learning are increasingly being explored, with growing evidence that a major contributor to IVR learning benefits are the sensorimotor-based affordances of the technology. However, to our knowledge, there have been no reviews of sensorimotor-based IVR learning studies for academic or cognitive learning. In order to provide an overview of the field, we present a scoping review based on a comprehensive search that identified 14 documents reporting on experimental sensorimotorfocused learning studies. The review found universally positive learning outcomes for sensorimotor-led approaches across a variety of topics and approaches, although noted multiple areas of difference and potential issues across studies, including differing measures for learning success, potential common confounding factors, a lack of longitudinal investigations, a lack of a common methods for surveying sensorimotor engagement in IVR, and a disconnect between researchers in this area.

No abstract

Modern immersive virtual reality (IVR) often uses embodied controllers for interacting with virtual objects. However, it is not clear how we should conceptualise these interactions. They could be considered either gestures, as there is no interaction with a physical object; or as actions, given that there is object manipulation, even if it is virtual. This distinction is important, as literature has shown that in the physical world, action-enabled and gesture-enabled learning produce distinct cognitive outcomes. This study attempts to understand whether sensorimotor-embodied interactions with objects in IVR can cognitively be considered as actions or gestures. It does this by comparing verb-learning outcomes between two conditions: (1) where participants move the controllers without touching virtual objects (gesture condition); and (2) where participants move the controllers and manipulate virtual objects (action condition). We found that (1) users can have cognitively distinct outcomes in IVR based on whether the interactions are actions or gestures, with actions providing stronger memorisation outcomes; and (2) embodied controller actions in IVR behave more similarly to physical world actions in terms of verb memorization benefits. CCS CONCEPTS• Human-centered computing → Virtual reality; HCI theory, concepts and models; Gestural input; • Applied computing → Interactive learning environments.

No abstract

No abstract