Comparison of Knowledge Change in a Virtual Reality Simulation Across Four Platform Technologies

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH SIMULATION & GAMING Pub Date : 2022-10-07 DOI:10.1177/10468781221131352
Brian Cleveley, Karin Diane Hatheway-Dial, Lori Wahl, J. Peutz
{"title":"Comparison of Knowledge Change in a Virtual Reality Simulation Across Four Platform Technologies","authors":"Brian Cleveley, Karin Diane Hatheway-Dial, Lori Wahl, J. Peutz","doi":"10.1177/10468781221131352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction There has been an increase in the delivery of educational and training content using computer-based simulations across a range of platforms. Minimal studies have compared the effectiveness of multiple digital delivery platforms with one another using the same simulation. Objective This research investigated differences in knowledge change due to the platform used for delivery of a stand-alone learning simulation. Methods A pretest–posttest design was used to evaluate 127 participants. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: desktop, tablet, mobile VR (Google Cardboard), and virtual reality headset. A pretest was given prior to participants’ completion of a learning simulation. Upon completion of the learning simulation, participants completed a posttest. Results This study indicated that all participants improved knowledge scores across the four platforms used to deliver the learning simulation. All participants positively increased their overall scores from the pretest to the posttest. There were no statistically significant differences in knowledge change between the four groups. Conclusion All participants positively increased their overall scores from the pretest to the posttest regardless of platform technology used to deliver the virtual reality learning simulation. This indicates that it is possible to effectively deliver the same learning simulation across different platforms that include a mix of 2D and immersive technologies.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SIMULATION & GAMING","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221131352","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction There has been an increase in the delivery of educational and training content using computer-based simulations across a range of platforms. Minimal studies have compared the effectiveness of multiple digital delivery platforms with one another using the same simulation. Objective This research investigated differences in knowledge change due to the platform used for delivery of a stand-alone learning simulation. Methods A pretest–posttest design was used to evaluate 127 participants. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: desktop, tablet, mobile VR (Google Cardboard), and virtual reality headset. A pretest was given prior to participants’ completion of a learning simulation. Upon completion of the learning simulation, participants completed a posttest. Results This study indicated that all participants improved knowledge scores across the four platforms used to deliver the learning simulation. All participants positively increased their overall scores from the pretest to the posttest. There were no statistically significant differences in knowledge change between the four groups. Conclusion All participants positively increased their overall scores from the pretest to the posttest regardless of platform technology used to deliver the virtual reality learning simulation. This indicates that it is possible to effectively deliver the same learning simulation across different platforms that include a mix of 2D and immersive technologies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跨四种平台技术的虚拟现实仿真知识变化比较
引言使用计算机模拟在一系列平台上提供教育和培训内容的情况有所增加。最少的研究使用相同的模拟将多个数字交付平台的有效性进行了比较。目的本研究调查了由于用于提供独立学习模拟的平台而导致的知识变化的差异。方法采用前测-后测设计对127名参与者进行评估。参与者被随机分配到四种条件中的一种:台式机、平板电脑、移动VR(谷歌纸板)和虚拟现实耳机。在参与者完成学习模拟之前进行预测试。在完成学习模拟后,参与者完成了一项后测。结果本研究表明,所有参与者在用于提供学习模拟的四个平台上都提高了知识得分。从前测到后测,所有参与者的总体得分都呈正增长。四组之间的知识变化没有统计学上的显著差异。结论无论使用何种平台技术进行虚拟现实学习模拟,所有参与者从前测到后测的总分都呈正增长。这表明,有可能在不同的平台上有效地提供相同的学习模拟,这些平台包括2D和沉浸式技术的混合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
SIMULATION & GAMING
SIMULATION & GAMING EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
5.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Simulation & Gaming: An International Journal of Theory, Practice and Research contains articles examining academic and applied issues in the expanding fields of simulation, computerized simulation, gaming, modeling, play, role-play, debriefing, game design, experiential learning, and related methodologies. The broad scope and interdisciplinary nature of Simulation & Gaming are demonstrated by the wide variety of interests and disciplines of its readers, contributors, and editorial board members. Areas include: sociology, decision making, psychology, language training, cognition, learning theory, management, educational technologies, negotiation, peace and conflict studies, economics, international studies, research methodology.
期刊最新文献
Toxicity or Prosociality?: Civic Value and Gaming Citizenship in Competitive Video Game Communities The Importance of Relaxation and Vacation for Healthcare Workers: Playtime! On the Pre-Perception of Gamification and Game-Based Learning in Higher Education Students: A Systematic Mapping Study Change the Rules! Using Social Media Data to Understand Citizen Perceptions of Urban Planning in a City Simulation Game
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1