No abstract

BACKGROUND: Avatars in Virtual Reality (VR) can not only represent humans, but also embody intelligent software agents that communicate with humans, thus enabling a new paradigm of human-machine interaction. OBJECTIVE: The research agenda proposed in this paper by an interdisciplinary team is motivated by the premise that a conversation with a smart agent avatar in VR means more than giving a face and body to a chatbot. Using the concrete communication task of patient education, this research agenda is rather intended to explore which patterns and practices must be constructed visually, verbally, para- and nonverbally between humans and embodied machines in a counselling context so that humans can integrate counselling by an embodied VR smart agent into their thinking and acting in one way or another. METHODS: The scientific literature in different bibliographical databases was reviewed. A qualitative narrative approach was applied for analysis. RESULTS: A research agenda is proposed which investigates how recurring consultations of patients with healthcare professionals are currently conducted and how they could be conducted with an embodied smart agent in immersive VR. CONCLUSIONS: Interdisciplinary teams consisting of linguists, computer scientists, visual designers and health care professionals are required which need to go beyond a technology-centric solution design approach. Linguists’ insights from discourse analysis drive the explorative experiments to identify test and discover what capabilities and attributes the smart agent in VR must have, in order to communicate effectively with a human being.

No abstract

This paper examines the learning success of the Virtual Reality course unit "So small!-So big!" compared to conventional teaching. In the form of a field experiment and three random sample tests, the learning success of 67 subjects was examined. In the analysis of the collected data, the differences between the educational levels and the sexes were examined in addition to the overall comparison. In addition, the individual questions of the random sample tests were checked for anomalies. The analysis showed that the two learning units are to be regarded as equivalent. The subjects achieved short and medium-term learning success with both teaching methods. However, no differences could be found between the two teaching methods; they must be regarded as equivalent. The only exception is the difference between the educational levels in terms of medium-term learning success.

No abstract