Abstract
Advances in virtual reality (VR) technology have resulted in the ability to explore high-resolution immersive environments, which seem particularly useful for training spatial knowledge tasks. However, empirical research on the effectiveness of training in VR, including for spatial knowledge-based tasks, has yielded mixed results. One potential explanation for this discrepancy is that key individual characteristics may account for differences in who benefits most from VR-based training. Previous research has suggested that immersive VR imposes high cognitive load on learners and thus impedes learning, but the amount of cognitive load experienced may be dependent on an individual’s video-game experience (VGE). Therefore, the goal of this experiment was to explore the effects of VGE on learning in VR versus a desktop-based training environment, since VGE has been demonstrated to affect performance in previous spatial navigation studies in virtual environments. In this experiment, 62 participants trained in a virtual scavenger hunt task to learn the locations of different equipment in a submarine’s machinery room. After training, participants’ spatial knowledge was assessed in a drawing task of the room’s layout. The results showed no differences overall for experimental condition (i.e., Desktop or VR) or VGE, but there was a significant interaction between these two variables. The high-VGE participants in the VR condition outperformed low-VGE participants in both the Desktop and VR conditions. This suggests that VR may be particularly useful for training experienced gamers, but both VR and Desktop seem to be equally effective for less experienced gamers in a spatial task.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abich, J., Parker, J., Murphy, J.S., Eudy, M.: A review of the evidence for training effectiveness with virtual reality technology. Virt. Reality 25(4), 919–933 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-020-00498-8
Bailey, S.K., Johnson, C.I., Schroeder, B.L., Marraffino, M.D.: Using virtual reality for training maintenance procedures. In: Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC), vol. 17108, pp. 1–11 (2017)
Boletsis, C.: The new era of virtual reality locomotion: A systematic literature review of techniques and a proposed typology. Multimodal Technol. Interaction 1(4), 24 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3390/mti1040024
Cherep, L.A., et al.: Spatial cognitive implications of teleporting through virtual environments. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 26(3), 480–492 (2020)
Cummings, J.J., Bailenson, J.N.: How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media Psychol. 19(2), 272–309 (2016)
Green, C.S., Bavelier, D.: Effect of action video games on the spatial distribution of visuospatial attention. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 32(6), 1465–1478 (2006)
Han, J., Zheng, Q., Ding, Y.: Lost in virtual reality? Cognitive load in high immersive VR environments. J. Adv. Inform. Technol. 12(4), 302–310 (2021)
Klatzky, R.L., Loomis, J.M., Beall, A.C., Chance, S.S., Golledge, R.G.: Spatial updating of self-position and orientation during real, imagined, and virtual locomotion. Psychol. Sci. 9(4), 293–298 (1998)
Krokos, E., Plaisant, C., Varshney, A.: Virtual memory palaces: Immersion aids recall. Virtual Reality 23(1), 1–15 (2019)
Li, H., Giudice, N.A.: The effects of immersion and body-based rotation on learning multi-level indoor virtual environments. In: M. Tomko, S. Bell, K.-J. Li (Eds.), ACM International Conference Proceedings Series, ISA 2013: Proceedings of the Fifth ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on Indoor Spatial Awareness: November 5, 2013, Orlando, Florida, USA, pp. 8–15. Association for Computing Machinery, New York
Madden, J., Pandita, S., Schuldt, J.P., Kim, B.S., Won, A., Holmes, N.G.: Ready student one: Exploring the predictors of student learning in virtual reality. PloS ONE15(3), e0229788 (2020)
Makransky, G., Petersen, G.B.: The cognitive affective model of immersive learning (CAMIL): A theoretical research-based model of learning in immersive virtual reality. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 33, 937–958 (2021)
Makransky, G., Terkildsen, T.S., Mayer, R.E.: Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning. Learn. Instr. 60, 225–236 (2019)
Mayer, R.E.: Multimedia Learning, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2020)
Moreno, R., Mayer, R.E.: Learning science in virtual reality multimedia environments: Role of methods and media. J. Educ. Psychol. 94(3), 598–610 (2002)
Murias, K., Kwok, K., Castillejo, A.G., Liu, I., Iaria, G.: The effects of video game use on performance in a virtual navigation task. Comput. Hum. Behav. 58, 398–406 (2016)
Parong, J., Mayer, R.E.: Cognitive and affective processes for learning science in immersive virtual reality. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 37(1), 226–241 (2021)
Pollard, K.A., et al.: Level of immersion affects spatial learning in virtual environments: results of a three-condition within-subjects study with long intersession intervals. Virtual Reality 24(4), 783–796 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-019-00411-y
Santos, B.S., et al.: Head-mounted display versus desktop for 3D navigation in virtual reality: A user study. Multimedia Tools Appl. 41(1), 161–181 (2009)
Smith, S.P., Du'Mont, S.: Measuring the effect of gaming experience on virtual environment navigation tasks. In: 2009 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces, pp. 3–10. IEEE
Srivastava, P., Rimzhim, A., Vijay, P., Singh, S., Chandra, S.: Desktop VR is better than non-ambulatory HMD VR for spatial learning. Front. Robot. AI 6, 50 (2019)
Sungur, H., Boduroglu, A.: Action video game players form more detailed representation of objects. Acta Physiol. (Oxf) 139(2), 327–334 (2012)
Ventura, M., Shute, V., Wright, T.J., Zhao, W.: An investigation of the validity of the virtual spatial navigation assessment. Front. Psychol. 4, 852 (2013)
Waller, D.: Individual differences in spatial learning from computer-simulated environments. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 6(4), 307 (2000)
Wraga, M., Creem-Regehr, S.H., Proffitt, D.R.: Spatial updating of virtual displays. Mem. Cognit. 32(3), 399–415 (2004)
Zhao, J., et al.: Desktop versus immersive virtual environments: Effects on spatial learning. Spat. Cogn. Comput. 20(4), 328–363 (2020)
Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge Mr. Marc Prince and Mr. Kevin Cuong for their assistance with testbed development. This work was funded under the Naval Innovative Science and Engineering program established by the National Defense Authorization Act, Section 219. Presentation of this material does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Navy or the Department of Defense (DoD). The opinions of the authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Navy of DoD.
NAWCTSD Public Release 22-ORL001 Distribution Statement A – Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Marraffino, M.D., Johnson, C.I., Garibaldi, A.E. (2022). Virtual Reality is Better Than Desktop for Training a Spatial Knowledge Task, but Not for Everyone. In: Chen, J.Y.C., Fragomeni, G. (eds) Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality: Design and Development. HCII 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13317. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05939-1_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05939-1_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-05938-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-05939-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)