Processing presence: how users develop spatial presence through an immersive virtual reality game

Comparing the effectiveness of video and stereoscopic 360° virtual reality‐supported instruction in high school biology courses

“…So far, the most prominent VR solutions that have been explored in the educational context can be classified into two broad categories: (a) high-end immersive VR, which delivers the content via standalone or tethered Head-Mounted Displays (HMDs), with high visual quality view and low latency framerates (Oculus Rift, HTC Vive) and (b) low-end immersive VR, which renders custom-made 360° videos in a spherical view and displays the content in budget-friendly equipment that is compatible with most modern smartphone devices (Google Cardboard, Wave VR box). The first is more appropriate for self-contained experiences (practice-based learning) but the relatively high cost of the hardware equipment and the time required to set up the activities make them relatively prohibitive for the casual learning context (Uz-Bilgin & Thompson, 2021). The second one is preferred when considering the conduct of large-scale interventions (experimental activities or situational training) due to its inconspicuous cost and the ease of deployment (ie, a smartphone paired with a portable VR cardboard) (Wu et al, 2021).…”

“…The literature also highlights the potentials that VR offers in the subject of MB. The most important are: (a) the development of the sense of spatial presence, attributed to the high-fidelity representations, which increases the incentives to explore the scientific phenomena in greater depth (Blikstein et al, 2016), (b) the integration of game-based activities to present and communicate information related to complex structural elements and factual processes, attributed to the ludic and playful nature that such environments inherently have, which increases the retention and transfer of the constructed scientific knowledge (Wang et al, 2019), (c) the augmentation of the experimental activities, attributed to the multimodal interaction that the specialised apparatus offers, which increases the incentives for engagement (Uz-Bilgin & Thompson, 2021), and (d) the conduct of high-end simulated laboratory activities, attributed to the technical capabilities that modern VR platforms offer, which greatly enhance learners' cognitive and problem-solving skills (Wu et al, 2021). Some of the above-mentioned studies (eg, Uz-Bilgin & Thompson, 2021;Wu et al, 2021) have also identified the added-value of stereoscopic 360° VR in MB for the following reasons: (a) the high-representational fidelity (eg, 3D depth, dynamic movements) enables learners to develop spatial awareness and experience the sense of presence; both of these elements have been widely attributed to improving knowledge acquisition and disciplinary understanding, (b) the observational narrative of scientific phenomena or situations enables learners to interpret information in a more diverse and logical way with a lower cognitive/mental effort and (c) instructional activities that take place in such environments enable teachers to communicate abstract concepts that often request that students utilise their critical thinking and analytical skills.…”

“…Researchers (Green et al, 2018; Walker, 2021) attribute this to the limited opportunities learners have for experimentation in laboratory settings. Others (Hodges et al, 2021; Uz‐Bilgin & Thompson, 2021) underline the negative impact that this inadequacy has in narrowing the theory–practice gap which, naturally, translates to decreased learning motivation, interest and knowledge growth. Things get worse when it comes to subjects like Molecular Biology (MB), as learners struggle to understand the fundamental concepts that govern the structure (composition) of cellular molecules or the underlying processes when they interact with other elements.…”

“…To date, various digitally supported instructional methods have been proposed for the enhancement of MB courses, including simulation videos (Musaeus & Musaeus, 2021), interactive storytelling videos (Goodsell et al, 2021) and utilisation of 3D‐printed models coupled with instructional videos (Monkovic et al, 2021). In the same vein, there is a common conviction across educational researchers (Hodges et al, 2021; Morimoto & Ponton, 2021; Uz‐Bilgin & Thompson, 2021) that immersive technologies can provide multiple benefits on both academic performance (knowledge acquisition and advancement) and psychological adjustment (motivation, engagement) which are, collectively, conducive to long‐term memory retention (Gomes et al, 2019). These conclusions are also in line with the recommendations made by Pellas et al (2021) who concurrently advocate over the adoption of Virtual Reality (VR) as a means of supplementing the conventional didactic procedures or as a substitute of the hands‐on activities that learners would otherwise perform in laboratories but are unable to.…”

Authenticity, Interactivity, and Collaboration in Virtual Reality Games: Best Practices and Lessons Learned

“…After playing Cellverse, a majority of user participants remarked that the cellular environment was more complex, dynamic, and densely packed than they expected (Thompson et al, 2020). Viewing and exploring the cellular environment improved players' conceptions of cells; participants' drawings after they completed the game were more complex and included organelles that were not in their initial drawings (Thompson et al, 2020;Uz-Bilgin & Thompson et al, 2021). The appearance of new organelles suggests that playing the game triggered players' memories about organelles they had learned about in the past.…”