The adoption of immersive virtual reality (I-VR) as a pedagogical method in education has challenged the conceptual definition of what constitutes a learning environment. High fidelity graphics and immersive content using head-mounted-displays (HMD) have allowed students to explore complex subjects in a way that traditional teaching methods cannot. Despite this, research focusing on learning outcomes, intervention characteristics, and assessment measures associated with I-VR use has been sparse. To explore this, the current systematic review examined experimental studies published since 2013, where quantitative learning outcomes using HMD based I-VR were compared with less immersive pedagogical methods such as desktop computers and slideshows. A literature search yielded 29 publications that were deemed suitable for inclusion. Included papers were quality assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI). Most studies found a significant advantage of utilising I-VR in education, whilst a smaller number found no significant differences in attainment level regardless of whether I-VR or non-immersive methods were utilised. Only two studies found clear detrimental effects of using I-VR. However, most studies used short interventions, did not examine information retention, and were focused mainly on the teaching of scientific topics such as biology or physics. In addition, the MERSQI showed that the methods used to evaluate learning outcomes are often inadequate and this may affect the interpretation of I-VR’s utility. The review highlights that a rigorous methodological approach through the identification of appropriate assessment measures, intervention characteristics, and learning outcomes is essential to understanding the potential of I-VR as a pedagogical method.

/pdf/immersive-virtual-reality-as-a-pedagogical-tool-in-education-41iq83f5d1.pdf

Immersive virtual reality as a pedagogical tool in education: a systematic literature review of quantitative learning outcomes and experimental design

The latest technical and interaction advancements that took place in the Virtual Reality (VR) field have marked a new era, not only for VR, but also for VR locomotion. Although the latest advancements in VR locomotion have raised the interest of both researchers and users in analyzing and experiencing current VR locomotion techniques, the field of research on VR locomotion, in its new era, is still uncharted. In this work, VR locomotion is explored through a systematic literature review investigating empirical studies of VR locomotion techniques from 2014–2017. The review analyzes the VR locomotion techniques that have been studied, their interaction-related characteristics and the research topics that were addressed in these studies. Thirty-six articles were identified as relevant to the literature review, and the analysis of the articles resulted in 73 instances of 11 VR locomotion techniques, such as real-walking, walking-in-place, point and teleport, joystick-based locomotion, and more. Results showed that since the VR revival, the focus of VR locomotion research has been on VR technology and various technological aspects, overshadowing the investigation of user experience. From an interaction perspective, the majority of the utilized and studied VR locomotion techniques were found to be based on physical interaction, exploiting physical motion cues for navigation in VR environments. A significant contribution of the literature review lies in the proposed typology for VR locomotion, introducing four distinct VR locomotion types: motion-based, room scale-based, controller-based and teleportation-based locomotion.

The New Era of Virtual Reality Locomotion: A Systematic Literature Review of Techniques and a Proposed Typology

The latest technical and interaction advancements within the virtual reality (VR) field have marked a new era, not only for VR, but also for VR locomotion. In this era, well-established, prevalent VR locomotion techniques are mostly used as points of comparison for benchmarking of new VR locomotion designs. At the same time, there is the need for more exploratory, comparative studies of contemporary VR locomotion techniques, so that their distinguished interaction aspects can be documented and guide the design process of new techniques. This article presents a comparative, empirical evaluation study of contemporary and prevalent VR locomotion techniques, examining the user experience (UX) they offer. First, the prevalent VR locomotion techniques are identified based on literature, i.e., walking-in-place, controller/joystick, and teleportation. Twenty-six adults are enrolled in the study and perform a game-like task using the techniques. The study follows a mixed methods approach, utilising the System Usability Scale survey, the Game Experience Questionnaire, and a semistructured interview to assess user experiences. Results indicate that the walking-in-place technique offers the highest immersion but also presents high levels of psychophysical discomfort. Controller/joystick VR locomotion is perceived as easy-to-use due to the users’ familiarity with controllers, whereas teleportation is considered to be effective due to its fast navigation, although its visual ‘jumps’ do break the users’ sense of immersion. Based on the interviews, the users focused on the following interaction dimensions to describe their VR locomotion experiences: (i) immersion and flow, (ii) ease-of-use and mastering, (iii) competence and sense of effectiveness, and (iv) psychophysical discomfort. The study implications for VR locomotion are discussed, along with the study limitations and the future direction for research.

/pdf/vr-locomotion-in-the-new-era-of-virtual-reality-an-empirical-1vj5qu3qeu.pdf

VR Locomotion in the New Era of Virtual Reality: An Empirical Comparison of Prevalent Techniques

Virtual reality (VR) has enjoyed significant popularity in recent years. Where navigation has been a fundamental appeal of 3D applications for decades, facilitating this in VR has been quite a challenge. Over the past decades, various virtual locomotion techniques (VLTs) have been developed that aim to offer natural, usable and efficient ways of navigating VR without inducing VR sickness. Several studies of these techniques have been conducted in order to evaluate their performance in various study conditions and virtual contexts. Taxonomies have also been proposed to either place similar techniques in meaningful categories or decompose them to their underlying design components. In this survey, we aim to aggregate and understand the current state of the art of VR locomotion research and discuss the design implications of VLTs in terms of strengths, weaknesses and applicability.

Virtual Locomotion: A Survey

Recently, the use of extended reality (XR) systems has been on the rise, to tackle various domains such as training, education, safety, etc. With the recent advances in augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR) and mixed reality (MR) technologies and ease of availability of high-end, commercially available hardware, the manufacturing industry has seen a rise in the use of advanced XR technologies to train its workforce. While several research publications exist on applications of XR in manufacturing training, a comprehensive review of recent works and applications is lacking to present a clear progress in using such advance technologies. To this end, we present a review of the current state-of-the-art of use of XR technologies in training personnel in the field of manufacturing. First, we put forth the need of XR in manufacturing. We then present several key application domains where XR is being currently applied, notably in maintenance training and in performing assembly task. We also reviewed the applications of XR in other vocational domains and how they can be leveraged in the manufacturing industry. We finally present some current barriers to XR adoption in manufacturing training and highlight the current limitations that should be considered when looking to develop and apply practical applications of XR.

A Review of Extended Reality (XR) Technologies for Manufacturing Training

As we explore the use of consumer virtual reality technology for training applications, there is a need to evaluate its validity compared to more traditional training formats. In this paper, we present a study that compares the effectiveness of virtual training and physical training for teaching a bimanual assembly task. In a between-subjects experiment, 60 participants were trained to solve three 3D burr puzzles in one of six conditions comprised of virtual and physical training elements. In the four physical conditions, training was delivered via paper- and video-based instructions, with or without the physical puzzles to practice with. In the two virtual conditions, participants learnt to assemble the puzzles in an interactive virtual environment, with or without 3D animations showing the assembly process. After training, we conducted immediate tests in which participants were asked to solve a physical version of the puzzles. We measured performance through success rates and assembly completion testing times. We also measured training times as well as subjective ratings on several aspects of the experience. Our results show that the performance of virtually trained participants was promising. A statistically significant difference was not found between virtual training with animated instructions and the best performing physical condition (in which physical blocks were available during training) for the last and most complex puzzle in terms of success rates and testing times. Performance in retention tests two weeks after training was generally not as good as expected for all experimental conditions. We discuss the implications of the results and highlight the validity of virtual reality systems in training.

/pdf/a-comparison-of-virtual-and-physical-training-transfer-of-2eqpqn9ljj.pdf

A Comparison of Virtual and Physical Training Transfer of Bimanual Assembly Tasks

One potential application for virtual environments (VEs) is the training of spatial knowledge. A critical question is what features the VE should have in order to facilitate this training. Previous research has shown that people rely on environmental features, such as sockets and wall decorations, when learning object locations. The aim of this study is to explore the effect of varied environmental feature fidelity of VEs, the use of self-avatars and the level of immersion on object location learning and recall. Following a between-subjects experimental design, participants were asked to learn the location of three identical objects by navigating one of three environments: a physical laboratory, or low and high detail VE replicas of this laboratory. Participants who experienced the VEs could use either a head-mounted display (HMD) or a desktop computer. Half of the participants learning in the HMD and desktop systems were assigned a virtual body. Participants were then asked to place physical versions of the three objects in the physical laboratory in the same configuration. We tracked participant movement, measured object placement, and administered a questionnaire related to aspects of the experience. HMD learning resulted in statistically significant higher performance than desktop learning. Results indicate that, when learning in low detail VEs, there is no difference in performance between participants using HMD and desktop systems. Overall, providing the participant with a virtual body had a negative impact on performance. Preliminary inspection of navigation data indicates that spatial learning strategies are different in systems with varying levels of immersion.

/pdf/the-effect-of-environmental-features-self-avatar-and-1i0edr9jz3.pdf

The Effect of Environmental Features, Self-Avatar, and Immersion on Object Location Memory in Virtual Environments

We aim to further explore the transfer of spatial knowledge from virtual to real spaces. Based on previous research on spatial memory in immersive virtual reality (VR) we ran a study that looked at the effect of three locomotion techniques (joystick, pointing-and-teleporting and walking-in-place) on object location learning and recall. Participants were asked to learn the location of a virtual object in a virtual environment (VE). After a short period of time they were asked to recall the location by placing a real version of the object in the real-world equivalent environment. Results indicate that the average placement error, or distance between original and recalled object location, is approximately 20cm for all locomotion technique conditions. This result is similar to the outcome of a previous study on spatial memory in VEs that used real walking. We report this unexpected finding and suggest further work on spatial memory in VR by recommending the replication of this study in different environments and using objects with a wider diversity of properties, including varying sizes and shapes.

/pdf/object-location-memory-error-in-virtual-and-real-wlmz14fee5.pdf

Maria Murcia-Lopez

Papers

A Comparison of Virtual and Physical Training Transfer of Bimanual Assembly Tasks

The Effect of Environmental Features, Self-Avatar, and Immersion on Object Location Memory in Virtual Environments

Object location memory error in virtual and real environments