Do students learn better with immersive virtual reality videos than conventional videos? A comparison of media effects with middle school girls.

Abstract

This article presents two studies comparing the effects of educational immersive virtual reality (IVR) versus traditional videos on conceptual knowledge and self-efficacy. Learning was measured through multiple-choice questions assessing conceptual knowledge and open-ended questions assessing knowledge understanding, knowledge application, and knowledge creation, based on Bloom's taxonomy of learning objectives. In Experiment 1, 53 eighth-grade students from an all-girls school learned about humans' impact on the ocean through either 360°videos, using a virtual reality (VR) headset, or through traditional videos, using a computer monitor. Measures were taken before and right after treatment. In Experiment 2, 139 sixth-to-eighth grade students from the same school used the same instructional material and equipment from Experiment 1, and measures were taken four times (before treatment, right after two treatment sessions, and 5 weeks after treatment). Also, we measured learning agency and investigated its mediation role between condition and self-efficacy. The groups did not differ on the multiple-choice scores assessing conceptual knowledge in Experiment 1. In Experiment 2, participants in the IVR group scored higher for knowledge creation than participants in the desktop group, but not knowledge understanding or knowledge application. The IVR group scored higher on self-efficacy than the desktop group in Experiment 1, but not in Experiment 2. Finally, learning agency mediated the relationship between condition and self-efficacy in Experiment 2, indicating a possible mechanism underlying immersion effects on self-efficacy. Results are discussed in light of cognitive sciences and their implication for learning in immersive virtual reality.

Individual differences in executive function affect learning with immersive virtual reality

“…Many are excited to incorporate this type of technology into classrooms, as it feels futuristic and effective in motivating students to learn (Bailenson, 2018; Blascovich & Bailenson, 2012). This technology can aid in learning by transporting a learner to an environment they would otherwise not be able to be in—like a different country or to the bottom of the ocean—or changing the scale of the world to allow for observations that would otherwise not be able to happen—like sizing the solar system down to allow for the observation of moon phases or sizing up a cell to allow for observation of cell division—or changing the speed at which processes occur—like slowing down space travel to understand special relativity or speeding up climate change (e.g., Barnidge et al, 2021; Madden et al, 2020; Makransky & Mayer, 2022; Parong & Mayer, 2018, 2021a, 2021b; Queiroz et al, 2022; Tarng et al, 2022). As a specific example, IVR can be used so students can learn about ocean acidification by watching carbon dioxide molecules come from car exhaust, how the molecules mix with ocean water, and the impact they have on sea life all while the participant is ‘in’ an underwater reef.…”

A critical evaluation, challenges, and future perspectives of using artificial intelligence and emerging technologies in smart classrooms

“…Chamba-Eras and Aguilar ( 2017 ) state that AR is recommended to compensate various deficiencies that might occur in a smart classroom such as difficulties in doing complicated and dangerous experiments, carrying out actual experiments due to equipment costs, and unavailability of appropriate facilities. Furthermore, the study from Stanford University has shown that students who learn with AR technology demonstrate greater knowledge retention and improved problem-solving skills (Queiroz et al, 2022 ). The importance of Augmented Reality technology in education has led to its implementation in various topics as shown in Table 5 :…”

The Efficacy of Virtual Reality in Climate Change Education Increases with Amount of Body Movement and Message Specificity

“…Although much remains to be discovered about the potential role VR can play in broad climate change education and behaviors, recent media and design comparison studies have shown the benefits of using VR instead of computer monitors in some of the factors identified by van Valkengoed and Steg [14], such as knowledge [21][22][23][24], risk perception [25], involvement with nature [25], positive and negative affect [26], pro-environmental behavior [19,27,28], trust [29], and factors related to learning, such as self-efficacy toward science [22,30,31].…”

“…Recent studies using VR to teach OA have shown that users' movement in VR underlies the media effects on knowledge gains [21] and self-efficacy toward learning [22]. Research from multiple backgrounds has demonstrated that body movement is essential in learning [44][45][46][47][48][49][50], creating social and psychological attachments to the environment [51], and inducing attitude and behavior change [52].…”

“…Markowitz and colleagues [21] suggest that moving in a virtual space meaningful to the learning activity helps participants elaborate and understand the consequences of climate change, leading to learning gains. Moreover, because the brain is constantly making predictions about body movement and the environment [53,54], the motor and visual exploration of the environment in VR can increase the sense of agency (i.e., the feeling of being in control of one's own actions and environmental outcomes [55]), which in turn influences self-efficacy towards learning [22,56]. Because of that and the unique VR affordances, allowing users to walk around and move during the experience, we designed the current study to compare the effects on climate change learning and behavior of having the experience seated versus standing up, being able to walk around.…”