Exploring relationships between students’ interaction and learning with a haptic virtual biomolecular model

Abstract

Twenty students assigned to a haptics (experimental) or no-haptics (control) condition performed a "docking" task where users sought the most favourable position between a ligand and protein molecule, while students' interactions with the model were logged. Improvement in students' understanding of biomolecular binding was previously measured by comparing written responses to a target conceptual question before and after interaction with the model. A log-profiling tool visualized students' movement of the ligand molecule during the docking task. Multivariate parallel coordinate analyses explored any relationships in the entire student data set. The haptics group produced a tighter constellation of collected final docked ligand positions in comparison with no-haptics students, coupled to docking profiles that depicted a more fine-tuned ligand traversal. Students in the no-haptics condition employed double the amount of interactive behaviours concerned with switching between different visual chemical representations offered by the model. In the no-haptics group, this visually intense processing was synonymous with erroneously 'fitting' the ligand closer distances to the protein surface. Students who showed higher learning gains tended to engage fewer visual representational switches, and were from the haptics group, while students with a higher spatial ability also engaged fewer visual representational switches, irrespective of assigned condition. From an information-processing standpoint, visual and haptic coordination may offload the visual pathway by placing less strain on visual working memory. From an embodied cognition perspective, visual and tactile sensorimotor interactions in the macroworld may provide access to constructing knowledge about submicroscopic phenomena. The results have cognitive and practical implications for the use of multimodal virtual reality technologies in educational contexts.

Learning Technology Specification: Principles for Army Training Designers and Developers

“…For example, when complexity of the training is essential, it is more efficient to have a large cognitive load spread across modalities than it is to have one overloaded modality (Moreno & Mayer, 2007). Haptic simulators have taken advantage of this quality, finding that incorporating tactile learning enhances both physical skill performance and spatial knowledge as compared to non-haptic simulations (San Diego et al, 2012, Shönborn, Bivall, & Tibell, 2011.…”

“…When training highly technical skills or teaching topics in which students may not take an interest, engagement can be a problem (Watkins & Hufnagel, 2007). To circumvent this, interactive technologies should be used to increase student motivation, which increases learning (Cannon-Bowers & Bowers, 2010;Moreno, 2006;Shönborn et al, 2011). Immersive, interactive technology, such as SLEs and computer games enable personalized and more meaningful experiences, and may lead to increased engagement, learning, and transfer (Cannon-Bowers & Bowers, 2010;Mikropoulos & Natsis, 2009).…”

“…• Interactive technologies can help maintain student engagement when training highly technical skills or teaching less interesting topics (Cannon-Bowers & Bowers, 2010;Moreno, 2006;Shönborn, 2011). …”

“…• Consider trainees' backgrounds and expected interest in course material when selecting technology (Cannon-Bowers & Bowers, 2010;Moreno, 2006;Shönborn, 2011;Watkins & Hufnagel, 2007).…”

Interactive Visualization for Learning and Teaching Nanoscience and Nanotechnology

“…Multisensory information offered by modern interactive visualizations could thus stimulate learners' integration of their embodied knowledge into the learning of abstract and complex nano-related concepts [e.g. Höst et al, 2013;Schönborn et al, 2011].…”