Head-Mounted Display Virtual Reality in Post-secondary Education and Skill Training

Abstract

Background: This review focused on how immersive head-mounted display virtual reality (VR) was used in post-secondary level education and skill training, with the aim to better understand its state of the art as found from the literature. While numerous studies describe the use of immersive VR within a specific educational setting, they are often standalone events not fully detailed regarding their curricular integration. This review aims to analyse these events, with a focus on immersive VR's incorporation into post-secondary education.

Objectives: (O1) Review the existing literature on the use of immersive VR in post-secondary settings, determining where and how it has been used within each educational discipline. This criterion focused on literature featuring the use of immersive VR, due to its influence on a user's perceived levels of presence and imagination. (O2) Identify favorable outcomes from the use of immersive VR when it is compared to other learning methods. (O3) Determine the conceptual rationale (purpose) for each implementation of immersive VR as found throughout the literature. (O4) Identify learning theories and recommendations for the utilization of immersive VR in post-secondary education.

Methods: A literature review was undertaken with searches of Education Research Complete, ERIC, MEDLINE, EMBASE, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, and Web of Science: Core Collection to locate reports on the use of immersive VR in post-secondary curricula.

Results: One hundred and nineteen articles were identified, featuring disciplines across Arts and Humanities, Health Sciences, Military and Aerospace, Science and Technology. Thirty five out of 38 experiments reported to have found a positive outcome for immersive VR, after being compared with a non-immersive platform. Each simulation's purpose included one or more of the following designations: skill training, convenience, engagement, safety, highlighting, interactivity, team building, and suggestion. Recommendations for immersive VR in post-secondary education emphasize experiential learning and social constructivist approaches, including student-created virtual environments that are mainly led by the students themselves under team collaboration.

Conclusion: Immersive VR brings convenient, engaging, and interactive alternatives to traditional classroom settings as well as offers additional capability over traditional methods. There is a diverse assortment of educational disciplines that have each attempted to harness the power of this technological medium.

Introduction

In the year 2012, Palmer Luckey initiated a Kickstarter campaign to fund the Oculus Rift: an affordable head-mounted display (HMD) virtual reality (VR) system that would allow tech-savvy enthusiasts to begin building and experiencing their own virtual environments. Prior to this time, HMD VR technology had often contained head-tracking issues, resulting in inaccurate and poor representations within the virtual world (Robinett and Rolland, 1992). Despite using the most sophisticated HMD graphics processors that were available in the early and late 1990s, realistic image processing of virtual environments would often overburden the system's computation ability, causing the user to experience tracking and latency issues. In other words, the actions of the user from the real world would often fail to translate accurately into the virtual world. Latency issues were brought to acceptable standards in the early 2010s when computer engineers were able to identify and correct the delays associated between a user's actions and the hardware's capability. Since the mid-2010s, an “unprecedented” uptake of HMD VR has been seen in both academic and industry contexts (Elbamby et al., 2018). VR has steadily been adopted into post-secondary educational systems with relative success, because of its ability to retain student learning and interest while saving resources and improving experimental efficiency (Liang and Xiaoming, 2013).

This review focused on immersive VR in post-secondary level education and skill training to gain a better understanding of its potential ability to train users under higher-order thinking conditions, which typically requires advanced judgment skills such as critical thinking and problem solving. Immersive VR is also capable of training users for advanced conditions that simulate hazardous environments or undesirable social situations that may be less appropriate for users below post-secondary educational levels. Although the literature regarding the use of immersive VR within post-secondary educational settings is quite diverse, these events are often standalone and seldom provide details on how immersive VR is adopted into associated curriculums. This review aims to analyse these events, focusing on how immersive VR can be incorporated into post-secondary education.

Rationale

The International Data Corporation (IDC) expects compound annual growth rates of VR to increase by 78.3% for the next 5 years, rising from $16.8 billion in 2019 to $160 billion by 2023 (Nagel, 2019). The fields for this growth are expected to include the education sector, with VR for lab and field work in higher education settings having a 5-year compound annual growth rate of 183.4% (Nagel, 2019). With the increased availability of consumer-level HMD VR hardware on the market, such as the Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, Playstation VR, and mobile phone technology, this newfound accessibility has led to an upshift in immersive VR adoption into academic settings. There has also been an increase in available software that runs on HMD VR, yet research on what is utilized in academic settings is ever changing and upgrading. An update to understand the “how and for what” aspects of virtual technology, affecting performance in academia, has been recommended (Jensen and Konradsen, 2018). This state-of-the-art review observes the disciplines, methods and theories in post-secondary practice that features the use of immersive VR.

Virtual Reality (VR)—Definition and Features

VR is broadly defined as an environment where users can accept and respond to artificial stimuli in a natural way (Zhang, 2014). Other definitions of VR include the human-machine interface that allows users to “project” themselves into a computer generated world, where specific objectives can be achieved (Zhang, 2014). VR is sometimes known as “Ling-jing” technology (Hui-Zhen and Zong-Fa, 2013; Hu and Wang, 2015). Depending on the setup of the human-machine interface, the components of the hardware and the amount of real-world images that are placed into the virtual world; a user's experience will vary between the differing types of mixed reality including augmented reality (AR), augmented virtuality (AV), mirror reality (MR), and virtual reality (VR) (Cochrane, 2016; Tacgin and Arslan, 2017). See Table 1 for a glossary of terms. Note that the proper usage of these terms has not caught up with the rate in which virtual reality concepts have grown (Cochrane, 2016; Tacgin and Arslan, 2017). There are often misconceptions between VR concepts and types. For example, some scientific literature will refer to AR applications as VR and vice versa (Tacgin and Arslan, 2017).

Immersion

One feature of VR is its physical level of immersion, defined by the degree a user associates being within a virtual environment (Rebelo et al., 2012; Parsons, 2015). Immersion is reduced when a user is able to perceive aspects of the real world while experiencing the virtual world. For example, users who can perceive the frame of a projection screen, depicting a virtual environment that simulates being in outer space, may compromise the users' level of immersion. When classifying the level of immersion, based on the human-machine interface, there are three types: full immersion is achievable when the user utilizes a HMD (goggles, VR helmet or headset); semi-immersion is achievable when the user utilizes large projection or liquid crystal display (LCD) screens; and non-immersion is achievable when utilizing typical desktop computer setups with keyboards and mice (Gutiérrez Alonso et al., 2008; Rebelo et al., 2012; Parsons, 2015). Note that the main difference between these levels of immersion is due to the user's field of vision (FOV), where an optimal FOV of 180 degrees horizontal and 60 or more degrees vertical is achievable with the HMD hardware (Rebelo et al., 2012). Reduced perception (seeing, hearing, touching) of the real world tends to result in greater levels of VR immersion (Gutiérrez Alonso et al., 2008; Rebelo et al., 2012).

Interactivity

The second feature of VR is its level of interactivity, defined as the degree of accuracy and responsiveness a user's actions represent when using the input hardware (Rebelo et al., 2012; Parsons, 2015). For example, with the use of physical hardware such as motion-sensing gloves, VR systems will allow users to interact with objects that are located within the virtual environment. Using input hardware to interact with a virtual environment is analogous to using a mouse and keyboard to give commands to a desktop computer. Common VR input devices include motion-sensing gloves, remotes, controllers, Lycra suits, Leap Motion (for barehanded gestures) or photo sensors to transfer the user's real-world actions into the virtual world. The position and motion of the user's hands can be updated in real-time with the use of sensors that allow for up to six degrees of freedom. Some input devices are equipped with features to provide kinaesthetic communication to the user, such as force or haptic feedback response. An example of this force feedback occurs in skill training when an operator's surgical tools become resistant to movement, after colliding with visceral tissues in a virtual patient, during simulated laparoscopic surgery.

Imagination

The third feature of VR is grounded with the user's imagination, defined as the extent of belief a user feels is within a virtual environment, despite knowing he or she is physically situated in another environment (Burdea and Coiffet, 2003; Rebelo et al., 2012). Note that interactivity and immersion have a direct effect on a user's level of imagination, which is dependent on the VR's input devices, graphics, and objectives (Rebelo et al., 2012). These features of immersion, interaction and imagination form the “VR Triangle (Burdea and Coiffet, 2003).” Note that not all VR setups attempt to emphasize all three features (immersion, interaction and imagination) in a virtual environment. For example, a surgical simulator, designed for skill training, requiring force, and haptic feedback controls would place interactivity above immersion and imagination.

Presence is a subjective concept that defines the psychological degree a user understands where it is possible to act within the virtual environment (Rebelo et al., 2012). A user feels present in a virtual environment when he or she feels the experience is derived from the virtual environment, rather than the real world (Rebelo et al., 2012). Deep presence occurs when a user feels both immersion and involvement in the virtual environment (Rebelo et al., 2012). Involvement has been formally defined as the user's attention and effort being placed on a “coherent set of stimuli or meaningful activities and events” (Witmer and Singer, 1994).

The state of presence can be explained with the term fidelity, derived from the Latin word “fidelis,” meaning faithfulness or loyalty. A virtual environment is deemed to be of high fidelity when the user's actions, senses and thought-processes closely or exactly resemble those that would be experienced while in the same situation as in the real world. VR experts have classified fidelity into different parts including functional (Swezey and Llaneras, 1997), physical (Champney et al., 2017) and psychological fidelity (Rehmann et al., 1995). An example of a low fidelity virtual environment would be a driving simulator that uses a gamepad instead of a steering wheel, while the driver's FOV is limited to that of an LCD screen. Whereas, an example of a high fidelity virtual environment would be an airplane simulator that has all the relevant controls and visual layout, exactly matching that of a cockpit from a real-world model, allowing pilots to conduct their skill training in the virtual world to prepare for flying in the real world.

Incentives for Adopting Immersive VR Into Post-secondary Education

One principle underlying the development and evaluation of the VR experience is experiential learning, which is aligned with the constructivist theory of learning. Educational simulation is grounded in the pedagogy of mastery learning (Guskey, 2010; Alaker et al., 2016). Users are generally more motivated to participate in a virtual environment, which can be instantly adjusted to differing levels of challenge, accommodating varying amounts of cognitive ability (Shin and Kim, 2015). VR can safely provide answers to inaccessible and intangible concepts that would otherwise be considered too dangerous or unethical to perform in real life (Grenier et al., 2015). It is a safe, ethical and repeatable system that produces objective measures of performance while providing real-time feedback to users (Alaker et al., 2016). Non-immersive VR has already been adopted in desktop and distributed platforms, allowing users to share a common virtual space, despite the users being physically located in geographically different locations (Hu and Wang, 2015). Immersive VR users have shown a piqued curiosity to learn with the HMD hardware, which often results in enhanced learning enjoyment (Moro et al., 2017).

Immersive VR users commonly feel that they have been projected into a different location (place illusion), while experiencing events that are perceived to be real (plausibility illusion; Sanchez-Vives and Slater, 2005). Sometimes, users will feel their own body is different when represented as an avatar with varying characteristics (embodiment illusion; Spanlang et al., 2014). Whenever a student is listening to an instructor or reading literature in order to better understand a concept, the student is mainly acting as an observer. The student may perhaps have the ability to interact with the learning experience by asking the occasional question or by completing exercises that are printed in the textbook, yet with immersive VR the student acts as both an observer and “the center of the system” (Gonzalez-Franco and Lanier, 2017). Place, plausibility and embodiment illusions are created by computer generated stimuli that may persuade a user's brain to respond as though the illusions were real. When multiple senses are incorporated into the user-to-object interaction within the virtual world such as vision, audition, and tactile/proprioception, a coordination of brain mechanisms are required to process this afferent sensory input and interpret the data coherently (Kilteni et al., 2015). In other words, immersive VR allows a user to learn how they would feel and respond (physiologically, tactfully, and procedurally) when interacting with virtual situations that the brain treats as real.

Obstacles Inhibiting the Adoption of Immersive VR Into Post-secondary Education

One obstacle inhibiting the adoption of immersive VR may involve the ability of educators to schedule immersive VR into their traditional methods of teaching, potentially being unaware about VR technology and how it could be integrated into the curriculum (Cochrane, 2016). It is possible that some universities have concluded that the amount of knowledge or skill gained from using immersive VR is not worth the financial risk. Another possibility is the specific level of detailed knowledge the HMD VR hardware requires in order to use it properly, posing yet another barrier to entry (Gutierrez-Maldonado et al., 2015). Perhaps VR's biggest obstacle to being accepted into post-secondary education systems is its psychometric validation, where stakeholders must carefully judge the degree to which virtual environments offer training in skills that can be obtained in other less expensive or complex modalities, which are free from simulator sickness (Parsons, 2015). There are two obstacles that inhibit the adoption of immersive VR into post-secondary education: (a) Software—There is a lack of applicable content for each discipline and most of what is available is mainly marketed toward self-learners, (b) Hardware—HMDs default to being entertainment systems that were not originally intended for classroom use (Jensen and Konradsen, 2018).

Criticisms of Immersive VR in Post-secondary Education

Immersive VR offers a modern learning channel that caters to multi-sensory learning styles, which sometimes can be more effective than traditional learning methods (Bell and Fogler, 1995; Gutierrez-Maldonado et al., 2015). However, there is meta-analysis literature stating that there is no adequate evidence supporting the consideration of learning-style assessments into general educational practice (Pashler et al., 2008). Perhaps the most convincing argument for adopting immersive VR into post-secondary education systems would be the already existing disciplines that have integrated such simulations into their curriculums, such as full-room and team simulated robot-assisted (da Vinci Surgery) endovascular procedures in surgical education (Rudarakanchana et al., 2015). Unfortunately, medical treatment injuries from these simulated endovascular procedures, due to faulty simulation trainings, have resulted in hundreds of lawsuits due to individual product liability cases (Moglia et al., 2016). The amount of evidence supporting the transfer of user surgical skill from simulation (da Vinci Surgery) applications to real-world settings has sometimes been found to be insufficient (Moglia et al., 2016). In matters of affordability, the incorporation of immersive VR into post-secondary educational systems was initially limited by the cost of the equipment used, yet commercialization of consumer headsets have brought down costs considerably (Gutierrez-Maldonado et al., 2017). Mobile phone technology has reached a level where immersive VR can be readily adapted into HMD format, simply by using low-cost Google Cardboard or Samsung Gear VR headsets (Hussein and Nätterdal, 2015). Although there is little data supporting the use of mobile phone HMD VR technology in post-secondary education, this accessible option is expected to be a “necessary tool in education in the near future” (Hussein and Nätterdal, 2015). Based on a survey that was presented in 2015 by the Educause Center for Analysis and Research (ECAR), 92% of university students within the United States have mobile phones that are capable of accessing enterprise level systems and VR software applications (Cochrane, 2016).

Aim of This Review

This review aims to uncover how post-secondary programs are incorporating immersive VR into post-secondary educational curricula. Its focus involves an interdisciplinary consideration, due to immersive VR's applicability across a wide variety of disciplines. The core assumption is that students optimize learning and practical skill acquisition through experiential learning and hands-on experience, thus a brief summary of each case when immersive VR's positive outcomes will be noted when applicable. The focus on post-secondary level education and its associated goal, skill training, is to gain further understanding of immersive VR's potential ability to train users under higher-order thinking conditions. Specific audiences for this review include: post-secondary education developers, program administrators, curriculum developers, technology research labs (video performance and enhancement labs on academic campuses), and potential instructors who are considering immersive VR as a technological option for experiential learning.

Research Questions

Objectives

Methods

Search Strategies

The initial literature search was performed during October 2017 and then updated in January 2019. Acceptable reports were required to have been published since March of 2013 as this was the date that Oculus Rift Developer Kits became first available. This date focused on the “unprecedented” adoption of HMD VR before the mid-2010s as stated by Elbamby and colleagues. After discussing the research question in consultation with a university librarian, the following bibliographic databases were searched (2013 to present): Education Research Complete (EBSCOhost), ERIC (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), IEEE Xplore (IEEE/IEE), Scopus (Elsevier), Web of Science: Core Collection (Thomson Reuters and Clarivate Analytics). The search strategy included a combination of subject headings and keywords to combine the concepts of HMD Virtual Reality, post-secondary students, education, and training. Refer to Table 2 for the inclusion and exclusion standards of each report.

Each report's screening process was performed by the lead author. All reports that indicated the use of virtual reality, in their title or abstract, were reserved to complete the first pass. For the second pass, all reserved reports from the first pass had their full texts screened again to confirm the context of immersive VR usage. Methodological quality of each report was not formally assessed beyond the study design used.

Determining the Purpose of Immersive VR

For each report, a designated purpose of immersive VR's implementation was applied to rationalize its function, throughout the literature screening process. Each purpose was based on the screening of keywords found from the literature in order of appearance: report title, keywords (index terms), and abstract. In the absence of an abstract, the main text was screened instead. Table 3 shows the keywords used to define immersive VR's purpose in post-secondary education.

Results

The search resulted in a total 1,495 reports being found. After the first pass, 215 reports remained after titles and abstracts were screened, along with duplicates removed. During the second pass of screening, the full texts of 215 reports were screened to further confirm eligibility (see Figure 1). This resulted in a net total of 119 reports being included in this review. It is noteworthy that in the previous search of October 2017, there were 874 reports found with 58 studies deemed eligible after the screening process, resulting in a 105.17% increase in eligible immersive VR literature in post-secondary education in the span of 15-months.

Figure 1

The 119 reports included in this review discussed the use of immersive VR in experimental, proposal, review, or curricular format. Note that some of the reports discussed usage of immersive VR across two or more disciplines, while others may not have included a specific discipline in their description. Table 4 provides a breakdown of the literature by discipline under each of the following headings: Arts and Humanities, Health Sciences, Military and Aerospace, and Science and Technology.

Where Immersive VR Was Implemented

The majority of immersive VR usage was reported from the field of Science and Technology, specifically in the Education discipline (n = 17). Within the same field, the disciplines of Computer Science and Engineering—General constituted second and third-most of immersive VR usage at n = 6 and n = 4, respectively. The field of Health Sciences' most common disciplines were Psychology and Surgical Education—General at n = 16 and n = 9, respectively. Within the same field, Anatomy represented the third most common discipline at n = 4. The field of Arts and Humanities' most common disciplines to report on immersive VR were Music and Design Thinking at n = 3 and n = 3, respectively. Military and Aerospace was the field to include the minority of reported instances of immersive VR usage with Aerospace at n = 1 and Military at n = 2.

Objective 1—How Immersive VR Was Used in Post-secondary Education

Descriptions summarizing the use of immersive VR across each discipline are presented in Table 5. It was found that the field of Science and Technology had the majority of literature featuring the use of immersive VR, which is congruent with the findings Freina and Ott reported in 2015. The greatest distribution of reports in this review were found in Education disciplines, next to Psychology in the field of Health Sciences, unlike Freina and Ott's report from 2015 which had most of the representative disciplines being Computer Science, Engineering, and Mathematics. While this review focused on the use of immersive VR at the post-secondary education level, Freina and Ott's review in 2015 was inclusive to all levels of education, including middle school. This paper's focus on higher level education could explain why disciplines such as of Education and Psychology had the greatest proliferation of immersive VR usage, possibly due to VR's ability to support environments that allow for more control than what would be available in real life, especially when dealing with intangible concepts. Having access to a platform that can subject users to intangible stimuli such as fear, addiction, and violence was found to be a definite incentive for Psychology to adopt immersive VR.

The incentives for immersive VR being incorporated into post-secondary education and skill training may include one or more of the following: the maintenance of ethical principles, overcoming problems concerning time and space, increasing the physical accessibility of environments that are not normally accessible and/or overcoming what would normally be a dangerous situation (Freina and Ott, 2015). Surgical Education's demand for immersive VR can be explained by ethical principles, which allows users to train technical skills without subjecting patients or the users themselves to the possibility of harm (Ziv et al., 2003; Freina and Ott, 2015). This same ethical principle may also explain the demand of immersive VR in other disciplines such as Dentistry, Nursing, Optometry, Paramedicine, Public Health, Rehabilitation, and Veterinary Education. The field of Health Science's main incentive to incorporate immersive VR is assumed to involve concepts of experiential learning, which allows users to learn by interacting with various environments affiliated with their disciplines. Experiential learning principles may explain the demand of immersive VR for the majority of disciplines in Science and Technology as well as Arts and Humanities. The increase of physical accessibility to environments that are not normally accessible would apply toward disciplines such as Astronomy, while VR's ability to overcome dangerous situations would apply to fields such as Military and Aerospace. Some universities (Maryland University College) are acting to ensure they remain on the technological “cutting edge,” allowing students to learn by creating content (Becker et al., 2017).

Objective 2—Favorable Outcomes From the use of Immersive VR

Thirty eight experiments were found in the 119 reports, mostly comparing immersive VR (HMD) with one of the following non-immersive platforms: desktop display screen, 2D video, mobile phone, digital tablet or stereoscopic desktop display screen. Non-VR comparators included live actors, real-world analogs, “traditional methods,” pencil-and-paper or nothing as a control. Of these 38 experiments, 35 reported to have found a positive outcome favoring the use of immersive VR with: 13 showing an increase in user skill or knowledge, 10 showing an increase in user engagement or enjoyment, 8 stating immersive VR had some form of extra capability over traditional methods, and 4 stating both an increase in user skill and engagement.

When favorable outcomes were noted from the reports, only experimental processes were considered, since the absence of a comparator, be that either some form of established non-immersive VR or traditional method, may weaken quality inferences to be made. This review reported only the outcomes from reports that had such comparators in their study design and found that 35 out of the 38 experimental outcomes were positive, showing mainly an increase in user skill, knowledge, engagement, and enjoyment. Some reports found immersive VR to have additional capability over those of traditional methods, such as the ability for users to train on an avatar that was diagnosed with a rare disease, which could not be replicated on a traditional model. Immersive VR should not render traditional methods obsolete, such as pencil-and-paper tests, since those methods are already well-established and free from potential simulator sickness.

This review did not assess the quality of each study's experimental design as found throughout the literature, however a review conducted by Jensen and Konradsen (2018) reported the quality assessment of 21 HMD VR experiments, showing a “below average quality” as outlined by the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument. Jensen and Konradsen identified in 2018 a number of setups where HMD VR is useful for skill training including the training of cognitive skills related to spatial and visual knowledge, psychomotor skills related to head-movement, visual scanning, observational skills, and affective control of emotional response to stressful or difficult situations. Future quality assessments of HMD VR experimentation are warranted as optimal setups in learning and skill training contexts are found, along with continuous improvements to VR hardware and software.

Objective 3—Conceptual Rationale of Immersive VR in Post-secondary Education

This review aimed to understand the literature's reasoning for implementing immersive VR, with the use of a conceptual method to determine each system's rationale. This method, based on keywords found in each report's title, index terms, and abstract, allowed for identification of immersive VR's purpose to further understand its role in each context. The majority of reports had the intention of using immersive VR for the purpose of skill training, followed by the optimization of interactivity between users and objects within the virtual world. Highlighting of objects in both the virtual or real world were other reasons for the implementation of immersive VR, especially when visual markers were provided to users in the form of AR. The use of immersive VR for the purposes of engagement, safety, convenience, team building, and suggestion were also found. These purposes might be able to justify the reasoning of immersive VR in higher education, despite the literature rarely showing pedagogical rationales for its use (Savin-Baden et al., 2010).

Regardless of the sophistication of a virtual system's hardware, the rationale of each report affected how a virtual environment was designed, implemented, and presented in the literature. A conceptual pattern of rationale was found, detailing the purpose of each instance of immersive VR's implementation. Each simulation's goal included one or more of the following purposes: skill training, convenience, engagement, safety, highlighting, interactivity, team building, and suggestion.

Skill Training

This purpose resulted in a virtual environment that focused on the development of knowledge and enhancement of a user's competency in a specific task. An example of this purpose includes the military training room-clearing tasks as reported by Champney et al. (2017). Note that it is possible for the skill training to involve teacher-to-student interaction, such as the virtual environment as outlined in the gesture-operated astronomical virtual space as reported by Tajiri and Setozaki (2016).

Convenience

These virtual environments focused on reducing the difficulties and/or resources required to train the same task in the real world. This purpose included factors such as time, location, and cost. An example of immersive VR being used, with a purpose focused on cost convenience, would be the low cost surgical training system a reported by Mathur (2015). For location convenience, this would feature a VR system designed to either allow multiple users to interact with one another, despite being in different geographic locations, or provide a portable system that allows training for a user at any convenient location. An example of immersive VR being used with a location convenience purpose would be the therapist-to-patient training VR system as reported by Wen et al. (2014). Liang and Xiaoming's report in 2013 discussed the concept of a “self-simulation laboratory,” used to reduce workspace requirements- a concept that expands on location convenience by featuring a multitude of different electronic engineering equipment that can be experienced within a single space. An immersive VR system that focused on time convenience would expand the windows of opportunities available to beyond what a user is normally allowed. Real-world time constraints that restricted a student's hours of lab availability, plus the preparation and clean-up time required, could be circumvented with VR simulation (Lau et al., 2017).

Engagement

This purpose focused on the implementation of virtual environments that encouraged a user's desire to learn the presented material found in the simulation. This purpose included the use of virtual environments that gained a user's interest, yet expanded further by including VR features such as interaction, immersion, and imagination. Purposes of engagement allowed a user to feel involved in the learning process, usually by being offered challenges or interactive elements within the educational virtual environment. An example of immersive VR being designed with a purpose focused on engagement would be the Jaunt VR video program study, which featured scenic views of Nepal, as reported by Lee et al. (2017).

Safety

A virtual environment that focused on safety may have included some or all of the following: (a) The practice of awareness skills necessary to reduce the probability of accidents occurring, (b) The practice of technical or non-technical skills necessary to handle an abnormal operating condition, (c) The ability to interact with virtual objects that would be deemed too dangerous in the real world. Some virtual environments were mentioned to have been programmed to allow for damage to occur within the virtual world, allowing users to safely learn from mistakes that would normally cause real-world machinery to collapse or cause personal injury (Potkonjak et al., 2016). Dangerous motors and gearboxes in mechanical devices were reported to be exposed in the virtual world, allowing users to see working parts in action (Potkonjak et al., 2016). Taljaard stated in 2016 that virtual field trips allow users to visit simulated places, which could be inaccessible or dangerous. For example, geologists could experience a VR field trip that takes place on the top of a volcano (Taljaard, 2016). An example of immersive VR being implemented with a purpose focused on safety would be the Distributed Situation Awareness study, featuring safety awareness training in industrial plant operators, reported by Nazir et al. (2015). Another example would be the virtual environment Jouriles and colleagues presented in 2016, which was used to measure bystander behavior in response to sexual violence.

Highlighting

This purpose focused on virtual environments that emphasized key elements and variables of objects, supplementing users with additional information. Highlighting was inclusive but not limited to AR. It was also capable of providing quantitative feedback to users, based on their performance on specific tasks within the virtual world. An example of immersive VR being implemented, with a purpose focused on highlighting, would be the software editing training markers as reported by Stigall and Sharma (2017). Another example of highlighting, featuring the use of AR, would be the use of Google Glass in art galleries to provide the user with supplementary information, reported by Leue et al. (2015).

Interactivity

Although interaction is the core emphasis for many immersive VR systems, a simulation with interactivity as the main purpose would attempt to make the virtual environment feel as natural as possible. Interactivity also focused on optimizing the user control, arranging the system to respond to user input information both quickly and accurately, granting users a sense of real human-computer interaction (Liang and Xiaoming, 2013). When computer engineers reported an attempt to optimize user control by reducing latency, increasing computer processing speed or improving motion tracking; the main purpose focused on interactivity from a hardware perspective. An increase in interactivity from a software perspective would be accomplished by programming the virtual object to respond appropriately to multiple forms of user input or by increasing user-friendliness. Purposes of interactivity may have included virtual environments that were designed to feature optimal accessibility, such as the virtual multiplayer child-operated puppet story as presented by Liang et al. (2017).

Team Building

A virtual environment that focused on team building may have included some or all of the following: (a) The practice of technical and/or non-technical skills in groups of trainees so that they achieve proficiency in a skill before the real procedure is performed (Rudarakanchana et al., 2015), (b) The promotion of team collaboration during production and planning. An example of immersive VR being implemented with purpose focused on team building would be the team collaboration in game design curriculum as reported by Timcenko et al. (2017).

Suggestion

This purpose was focused on the use of immersive VR to improve a user's attitude toward a community, cultural movement or service. Immersive VR was reported to be capable of stimulating enthusiasm within the learning of students, changing the way they think about certain perspectives (Hui-Zhen and Zong-Fa, 2013). An example of immersive VR being implemented, with a purpose focused on suggestion, would be Real et al. (2017a) study on best-practice communication skills, encouraging patients to receive vaccinations. Another example featuring the use of immersive VR to discourage specific behavior, would be the cue reactivity study as reported by Gupta and Chadha (2015), aimed at discouraging cigarette smoking for users with an addiction problem.

Suh and Prophet (2018) reported a classification of research themes and contexts for immersive VR by using the stimulus-organism-response (S-O-R) framework, where the variables of their found 54 studies were classified to determine relationships. Several factors were found to be related between immersive VR's system features and sensory, perceptual and content stimuli (Suh and Prophet, 2018). Content stimuli included immersive VR topics such as learning and training, psycho- and physiotherapy, virtual tours, interactive simulation, and gaming stimuli (Suh and Prophet, 2018). The 119 reports as identified from the literature in this review is relatable to Suh and Prophet's (2018) reported classification system, especially for the topics identified as content stimuli.

Objective 4—Theories and Recommendations for Incorporating Immersive VR Into Post-secondary Education

This review found two papers recommending a social constructivist approach for how immersive VR could be incorporated into post-secondary education curricula (Haefner et al., 2013; Cochrane, 2016). Social constructivist approaches include proposals on how student-created virtual environments are mainly led by the students themselves, using a team collaborative style. Experiential learning allows the students to use their newly created virtual environments to role-play their actions in simulated scenarios, aiming to achieve mastery over their discipline. This is reminiscent of Gonzalez-Franco and Lanier's (2017) idea on the student acting as “the center of the system,” providing the computer-generated virtual environment triggers the user's learning response as though the virtual stimuli matches that of the real world. The training of student awareness for paramedic clinical practice by using VR 360-degree interactive images, projected by HMD (smartphone), allows for the facilitation of student-created content in authentic simulation (Cochrane et al., 2017). Although Cochrane's recommendations were exemplified in design thinking, journalism, and paramedicine; the method's potential transferability seemed convincingly capable of being used in other disciplines within the fields of Arts and Humanities or Health Sciences. The theory of implementing a virtual event that makes the user feel central to the environment, resulting in an authentic illusion, is a key feature that must be retained when adapting VR learning frameworks from one discipline to another. Haefner and colleagues' recommendations (2013), which mentioned interdisciplinary teamwork, also possessed convincing transferability beyond just the discipline of Engineering. A future study that focuses on a curriculum that is feasible and vastly adaptable to most disciplines would be a definite recommendation for future research. Table 6 summarizes the educational theories associated with the use of immersive VR.

Discussion

This review focused on how immersive VR was used in post-secondary level education and skill training, determining if any new educational perspectives have emerged, with the goal of obtaining an improved understanding of the state of the art as found from the literature. The most important considerations when conducting this method of literature search included: (a) attaining an unbiased selection of papers for review, (b) accepting only the literature that stated the use of fully immersive VR (HMD hardware or similar), (c) limiting the literature by date of publication to no earlier than March of 2013.

Curricular Recommendations

Immersive VR programs could be incorporated into an academic curriculum as either a full-course program or as supplementary material to an already-existing course. Immersive VR for supplementing a large classroom size would possibly be best performed by finding relevant software, in the form of 360-panormic images or videos for mobile phones, depicting environments that resemble lecture materials for users to experience. For example, students of surgical or nursing education could experience 360-operative video, similar to the one used in Harrington and colleagues' surgical study in 2018. Supplementing a small classroom size would possibly allow for relevant software to be experienced on an immersive HMD VR consumer model, similar to the cardiac anatomy setup (Sharecare VR) in Maresky and colleagues study in 2018.

Full-course programs that prefer to feature student-developed immersive VR programs could either be: Simple—Videos adapted into 360-degree format for mobile phone VR by using GoPro cameras with their videos merged into a single equirectangular video by Kolor Video Pro and Giga software (Harrington et al., 2018), or Advanced—Software creation as an immersive VR program for consumer based HMDs, developed by a graphics rendering engine (Timcenko et al., 2017). It is possible for an immersive VR program to be programmed so that it can switch between HMD VR and desktop PC controls, which would allow for users who are sensitive to simulator sickness to have access to a non-immersive alternative. The option to add platform crossover versatility to software would be expected to require more development time.

Cochrane in 2016 summarized a post-secondary educational framework that allowed students to devise and submit their own VR content in order to learn and classify AR projects, featuring disciplines including journalism, paramedicine, and graphic design. For example, paramedicine would feature students using immersive VR (mobile) to conduct pre-practice of a critical care scenario before they entered a simulation room where they performed resuscitation procedures (Cochrane, 2016). Cochrane in 2016 and 2017 summarized six informing pedagogies and their definitions for the application of mobile VR in education: Rhizomatic Learning—“Negotiated ecology of resources,” Social Constructivism—“Collaboration tools for project planning (e.g., Google Docs),” Heutagogy—“Student-generated content: 360 degree camera rig and stitching software,” Authentic learning: situated content—“Shared 360 video (e.g., YouTube 360 via HMD and Google Cardboard), Authentic learning: situated context—“360 degree immersive environment simulation,” Connectivism—“Community Hub (e.g., Google Plus, Facebook, and Twitter).”

The key requirements of a successful practical VR course in interdisciplinary engineering education were found to be as follows: (a) primary emphasis on VR task design while maintaining student creative freedom, (b) clearly defined tasks for each individual group member's role, (c) the use of software platforms that were open source with strong community followings (Haefner et al., 2013). Based on the student group configuration and information from instructor-to-student collaboration, the students were recommended to define each individual group member's role in accordance to their knowledge and interests. In smaller groups, status meetings of the project's development were expected to be easier to organize and yield qualitative, well-structured project results (Haefner et al., 2013). Larger groups that consisted of more than 10 students would require a project manager (student designated) who is proficient in handling conflict management, with less emphasis on sub-task support (Haefner et al., 2013). It was important for the students to provide continuous progress updates, within the status meetings, so that any issues regarding design of the VR project are detected early (Haefner et al., 2013).

Considerations of Virtual System Design

The purpose of a virtual environment will determine how it is designed and implemented. A post-secondary educational virtual environment can be divided into two types: an environment that represents the real world (e.g., historical location) and/or a computer generated 3D object (e.g., interactive control panel; Lee and Wong, 2008). Depending on whether or not the system is designed to be portable and the amount of interaction a user needs to have with the virtual environment will determine its varying HMD hardware and input devices. If the user is expected to interact with the virtual environment and perform actions that are meant to accurately represent those that would be performed in real life; the input hardware is expected to maximize fidelity (e.g., a haptic arm that provides force feedback during surgical simulation). Likewise, if the user is not expected to interact with the virtual environment or the user's actions do not have to accurately represent those that would be performed in real life; the input hardware can be of low fidelity (e.g., using a gamepad to move within the virtual environment instead of walking).

Although low fidelity simulation may initially seem less useful than high fidelity, low fidelity virtual environments are associated with lower hardware costs and allow for acquiring “procedural knowledge” at the expense of “higher-order skills and strategic knowledge (Champney et al., 2017).” It is important to note that high fidelity virtual environments are associated with greater hardware costs and may “overwhelm and distract early procedural learning” (Champney et al., 2017). An example of public-speaking skill development, featuring low amounts of user interaction, would be a virtual environment depicting a large crowd, where the user is tasked with standing on stage to be exposed to this social anxiety stimulus. The use of exposure therapy in VR simulation in this manner would be designed to habituate a user's fear thought-process into a more adapted one, removing the pathological kind that distorts reality and increases escapist tendencies (Bissonnette et al., 2016).

It should be noted that a user's level of technical proficiency should be factored into how virtual objects are intended to be interacted with. A user with a university background in mechanical engineering would most likely have no trouble utilizing complex button-operated input controllers to interact with a virtual object (e.g., Virtual Workshop as reported by Muller et al. (2017). Likewise, a user who is inexperienced with technical hardware would likely benefit with a simpler input device to interact with virtual objects [e.g., Liang et al. (2017) child-operated virtual puppet story with gesture control, detected by Leap Motion].

Limitations of This Review

Limiting the literature search to March of 2013 and onward allowed this review to focus on a specific point when educational perspectives were formed at a time when immersive VR's rate of availability was greater than before. This date limit, however, may have come at a cost as some papers not included may have discussed educational perspectives, formed prior to this date, which may still be in use. By accepting only the literature featuring the use of immersive VR, this review was able to determine educational perspectives that were potentially and optimally invoked by concepts such as experiential learning, immersion, interactivity, and imagination. This consideration also allowed this review to find positive outcomes determined by the literature when immersive VR was compared with non-immersive VR. This review focused on immersive VR's performance in post-secondary educational settings, containing interpretations that may not be adequate for less advanced levels of education. Further defined subtypes of post-secondary education terms, such as Masters or Bachelor, were not used in this review's search method, which may have impacted the ability to find all applicable literature.

Conclusion

This review on the use of immersive VR in post-secondary education and skill training has revealed recommendations and purposes for how it could be implemented into curricula. Common positive outcomes, featuring the use of immersive VR, have shown to promote student engagement and skill acquisition. Immersive VR brings convenient, engaging and interactive alternatives to traditional classroom settings as well as offers additional capability over traditional methods. This review has highlighted detailed reports that have successfully implemented immersive VR into their curricula. There is a diverse assortment of educational disciplines that have each attempted to harness the power of this technological medium. It is expected for immersive VR to become further adopted into academic settings in the future. Will your facility be the next to implement immersive VR?

References

• 1

  AblesA. (2017). Augmented and virtual reality: Discovering their uses in natural science classrooms and beyond, in Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Annual Conference on SIGUCCS (Washington, DC), 61–65. 10.1145/3123458.3123464

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2

  AebersoldM. (2018). Simulation-based learning: no longer a novelty in undergraduate education. Online J. Issues Nurs.23:1. 10.3912/OJIN.Vol23No02PPT39

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  AkbulutA.CatalC.YildizB. (2018). On the effectiveness of virtual reality in the education of software engineering. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ.26, 918–927. 10.1002/cae.21935

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4

  AkçayirM.AkçayirG. (2017). Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: a systematic review of the literature. Educ. Res. Rev.20, 1–11. 10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  AlakerM.WynnG. R.ArulampalamT. (2016). Virtual reality training in laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Surg.29, 85–94. 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.03.034

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  Al-AzawiR.ShakkahM. S. (2018). Embedding augmented and virtual reality in educational learning method: present and future, in Paper presented at the Information and Communication Systems (ICICS), 2018 9th International Conference on (Irbid), 218–222. 10.1109/IACS.2018.8355470

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  AlbabishW.JadeskiL. (2018). Virtual reality to teach human anatomy - an interactive and accessible educational tool. FASEB J.32:1. 10.1007/s10916-017-0723-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  AlfalahS. F. M. (2018). Perceptions toward adopting virtual reality as a teaching aid in information technology. Educ. Inform. Technol.23, 2633–2653. 10.1007/s10639-018-9734-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9

  AlhalabiW. S. (2016). Virtual reality systems enhance students' achievements in engineering education. Behav. Inform. Technol.35, 919–925. 10.1080/0144929X.2016.1212931

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  AndersenS. A. W.FoghsgaardS.Cayé-ThomasenP.SørensenM. S. (2018). The effect of a distributed virtual reality simulation training program on dissection mastoidectomy performance. Otol. Neurotol.39, 1277–1284. 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002031

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11

  BeckerS. A.CumminsM.DavisA.FreemanA.HallC. G.AnanthanarayananV. (2017). NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition, The New Media Consortium, 1–60.

  • Google Scholar

• 12

  BellJ. T.FoglerH. S. (1995). The investigation and application of virtual reality as an educational tool, in Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference (Anaheim, CA), 1718–1728.

  • Google Scholar

• 13

  BenabouK.RakerC. A.WohlrabK. J. (2018). Immersive virtual-reality gaming improves two-handed efficiency on a laparoscopic skills simulator in ob/gyn trainees. J. Minimal. Invas. Gynecol.25:S184. 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.09.431

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  BissonnetteJ.DubéF.ProvencherM. D.SalaM. T. M. (2016). Evolution of music performance anxiety and quality of performance during virtual reality exposure training. Virtual Real.20, 71–81. 10.1007/s10055-016-0283-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15

  BryanS. J.CampbellA.ManginaE. (2018). Scenic spheres - an AR/VR educational game, in Paper Presented at the 2018 IEEE Games, Entertainment, Media Conference (GEM) (Galway), 1–9. 10.1109/GEM.2018.8516456

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16

  BucceroniM. A.LecakesG. D.Lalovic-HandM.MandayamS. (2016). A multi-perspective virtual reality visualization of unmanned aerial systems in the U.S. national airspace, in Paper Presented at the 2016 IEEE Sensors Applications Symposium (SAS) (Catania), 1–4. 10.1109/SAS.2016.7479893

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  BurdeaG. C.CoiffetP. (2003). Virtual Reality Technology.Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • Google Scholar

• 18

  ChampneyR. K.StanneyK. M.MilhamL.CarrollM. B.CohnJ. V. (2017). An examination of virtual environment training fidelity on training effectiveness. Int. J. Learn. Technol.12, 42–65. 10.1504/IJLT.2017.083997

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  ChecaD.AlagueroM.ArnaizM. A.BustilloA. (2016). Briviesca in the 15th c.: a virtual reality environment for teaching purposes, in Paper Presented at the Augmented Reality, Virtual Reality, and Computer Graphics, Pt II (Lecce), 9769, 126–138. 10.1007/978-3-319-40651-0_11

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20

  ChenD.LiuH.RenZ. (2018). Application of wearable device HTC VIVE in upper limb rehabilitation training, in Paper Presented at the 2018 2nd IEEE Advanced Information Management, Communicates, Electronic and Automation Control Conference (IMCEC) (Xían), 1460–1464. 10.1109/IMCEC.2018.8469540

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  ChinN.GupteA.NguyenJ.SukhinS.WangG.MirizioJ. (2017). Using virtual reality for an immersive experience in the water cycle, in Paper Presented at the Undergraduate Research Technology Conference (URTC), 2017 IEEE MIT (Cambridge, MA), 1–4. 10.1109/URTC.2017.8284185

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22

  ChoiriM. M.BasukiA.BagusA. Y.SukaridhotoS.JannahM. (2017). Design and development virtual reality athletic — virtual imagery to train sprinter's concentration, in 2017 International Electronics Symposium on Knowledge Creation and Intelligent Computing (IES-KCIC), Knowledge Creation and Intelligent Computing (IES-KCIC), 2017 International Electronics Symposium On (Surabaya), 161. 10.1109/KCIC.2017.8228580

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  CochraneT. (2016). Mobile VR in education: from the fringe to the mainstream. Int. J. Mobile Blended Learn.8, 44–60. 10.4018/IJMBL.2016100104

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  CochraneT.CookS.AielloS.ChristieD.SinfieldD.SteagallM.AguayoC. (2017). A DBR framework for designing mobile virtual reality learning environments. Austr. J. Educ. Technol.33, 54–68. 10.14742/ajet.3613

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25

  CsikszentmihalyiM. (1990). Flow. the Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York, NY: HarperPerennial.

  • Google Scholar

• 26

  De PaolisL. T.BourdotP.MongelliA. (2017). Augmented reality, virtual reality, and computer graphics, in 4th International Conference, AVR 2017, Ugento, June 12–15, 2017, Proceedings Springer.

  • Google Scholar

• 27

  DedeC. (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science323, 66–69. 10.1126/science.1167311

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28

  dela CruzD. R.MendozaD. M. M. (2018). Design and development of virtual laboratory: a solution to the problem of laboratory setup and management of pneumatic courses in bulacan state university college of engineering, in Paper Presented at the 2018 IEEE Games, Entertainment, Media Conference (GEM) (Galway), 1–23. 10.1109/GEM.2018.8516467

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29

  DolgunsözE.YildirimG.YildirimS. (2018). The effect of virtual reality on EFL writing performance. J. Lang. Linguist. Stud.14, 278–292. Available online at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1175788 (accessed July 31, 2019).

  • Google Scholar

• 30

  DunbarB.Hynes-BruellJ.ShiE.MooG.WisheartB.KolongowskiT.OstadabbasS. (2017). Augmenting human spatial navigation via sensory substitution, in Paper presented at the Undergraduate Research Technology Conference (URTC), 2017 IEEE MIT (Cambridge, MA), 1–4. 10.1109/URTC.2017.8284172

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  ElbambyM. S.PerfectoC.BennisM.DopplerK. (2018). Toward low-latency and ultra-reliable virtual reality. IEEE Netw.32, 78–84. 10.1109/MNET.2018.1700268

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  EnyedyN.DanishJ. A.DeLiemaD. (2015). Constructing liminal blends in a collaborative augmented-reality learning environment. Int. J. Comput. Support. Collabor. Learn.10, 7–34. 10.1007/s11412-015-9207-1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  Ferrandini PriceM.Escribano TortosaD.Nieto Fernandez-PachecoA.Perez AlonsoN.Cerón MadrigalJ. J.Melendreras-RuizR.et al. (2018). Comparative study of a simulated incident with multiple victims and immersive virtual reality. Nurse Educ. Today, 71, 48–53. 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.09.006

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  FominykhM.Prasolova-FørlandE.StilesT. C.KroghA. B.LindeM. (2018). Conceptual framework for therapeutic training with biofeedback in virtual reality: First evaluation of a relaxation simulator. J. Interact. Learn. Res.29, 51–75. Available online at: https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/178528/ (accessed July 31, 2019).

  • Google Scholar

• 35

  FormosaN. J.MorrisonB. W.HillG.StoneD. (2018). Testing the efficacy of a virtual reality-based simulation in enhancing users' knowledge, attitudes, and empathy relating to psychosis. Austr. J. Psychol.70, 57–65. 10.1111/ajpy.12167

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36

  FreinaL.OttM. (2015). A literature review on immersive virtual reality in education: State of the art and perspectives, in eLearning and Software for Education, Bucharest, 1.

  • Google Scholar

• 37

  GallagherA. G.CatesC. U. (2004). Approval of virtual reality training for carotid stenting: What this means for procedural-based medicine. JAMA292, 3024–3026. 10.1001/jama.292.24.3024

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38

  Gonzalez-FrancoM.LanierJ. (2017). Model of illusions and virtual reality. Front. Psychol.8:1125. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01125

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  GrenierS.ForgetH.BouchardS.IsereS.BellevilleS.PotvinO.TalbotM. (2015). Using virtual reality to improve the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) in the treatment of late-life anxiety: preliminary recommendations for future research. Int. Psychogeriatr.27, 1217–1225. 10.1017/S1041610214002300

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 40

  GreunkeL.SadagicA. (2016). Taking immersive VR leap in training of landing signal officers. IEEE Trans. Visual. Comput. Graphics22, 1482–1491. 10.1109/TVCG.2016.2518098

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 41

  GuptaS.ChadhaB. (2015). Virtual reality against addiction, in Paper Presented at the International Conference on Computing, Communication and Automation, Noida, 273–278. 10.1109/CCAA.2015.7148387

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 42

  GuskeyT. R. (2010). Lessons of mastery learning. Educ. Leadership68, 52–57. Available online at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/edp_facpub/14 (accessed July 31, 2019)

  • Google Scholar

• 43

  Gutiérrez AlonsoM. A.VexoF.ThalmannD. (2008). Stepping Into Virtual Reality. London: Springer.

  • Google Scholar

• 44

  Gutierrez-MaldonadoJ.Andres-PueyoA.JarneA.TalarnA.FerrerM.AchoteguiJ. (2017). Virtual Reality for Training Diagnostic Skills in Anorexia Nervosa: A Usability Assessment.Cham: Springer Verlag. 10.1007/978-3-319-57987-0_19

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 45

  Gutierrez-MaldonadoJ.Ferrer-GarciaM.Pla-SanjuaneloJ.Andres-PueyoA.Talarn-CaparrosA. (2015). Virtual reality to train diagnostic skills in eating disorders. comparison of two low cost systems. Ann. Rev. CyberTher. Telemed.13, 75–81. 10.3233/978-1-61499-595-1-75

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 46

  HaefnerP.HaefnerV.OvtcharovaJ. (2013). Teaching methodology for virtual reality practical course in engineering education, in Paper Presented at the 2013 International Conference on Virtual and Augmented Reality in Education (Canary Islands), 25, 251–260. 10.1016/j.procs.2013.11.031

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 47

  HahnJ. F. (2018). Virtual reality learning environments development of multi-user reference support experiences. Inform. Learn. Sci.119, 652–661. 10.1108/ILS-07-2018-0069

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 48

  HarringtonC. M.KavanaghD. O.Wright BallesterG.Wright BallesterA.DickerP.TraynorO.et al. (2018). 360 degrees operative videos: a randomised cross-over study evaluating attentiveness and information retention. J. Surg. Educ.75, 993–1000. 10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.10.010

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 49

  HashimuraS.ShimakawaH.KajiwaraY. (2018). Automatic assessment of student understanding level using virtual reality, in Paper Presented at the 2018 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), Poznan, 1–7.

  • Google Scholar

• 50

  HickmanL.AkdereM. (2017). Exploring virtual reality for developing soft-skills in STEM education, in Paper Presented at the 2017 7th World Engineering Education Forum (WEEF), Kuala Lumpur, 461–465. 10.1109/WEEF.2017.8467037

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 51

  HoffmanH. G.Garcia-PalaciosA.PattersonD. R.JensenM.FurnessT.AmmonsW. F.Jr. (2001). The effectiveness of virtual reality for dental pain control: a case study. CyberPsychol. Behav.4, 527–535. 10.1089/109493101750527088

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 52

  Hong-xuanB. (2016). Application of virtual reality in music teaching system. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn.11, 21–25. 10.3991/ijet.v11i11.6247

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 53

  HuD.WangZ. (2015). Research on numerical control technology teaching reform based on virtual reality technology, in Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Management, Education, Information and Control (Shenyang), 125, 818–822.

  • Google Scholar

• 54

  HuangC.ChengH.BureauY.AgrawalS. K.LadakH. M. (2015). Face and content validity of a virtual-reality simulator for myringotomy with tube placement; 26481401. J. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg.44:1. 10.1186/s40463-015-0094-2

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 55

  Hui-ZhenR.Zong-FaL. (2013). Application and prospect of the virtual reality technology in college ideological education, in Paper presented at the 2013 Fourth International Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Engineering Applications, Zhangjiajie, 125–128. 10.1109/ISDEA.2013.434

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 56

  HusseinM.NätterdalC. (2015). The benefits of virtual reality in education-A comparision study (Bachelor thesis). Available online at: http://hdl.handle.net/2077/39977

  • Google Scholar

• 57

  ImT.AnD.KwonO.KimS. (2017). A virtual reality based engine training system: a prototype development and evaluation, in 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (Porto), 262–267.

  • Google Scholar

• 58

  JeffriesP. R.JeffriesP. R. (2012). Simulation in Nursing Education: From Conceptualization to Evaluation. New York, NY: National League for Nursing.

  • Google Scholar

• 59

  JensenL.KonradsenF. (2018). A review of the use of virtual reality head-mounted displays in education and training. Educ. Inform. Technol.23, 1515–1529. 10.1007/s10639-017-9676-0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 60

  JohnsonC. D. L. (2018). Using virtual reality and 360-degree video in the religious studies classroom: an experiment. Teach. Theol. Religion21, 228–241. 10.1111/teth.12446

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 61

  JourilesE. N.KleinsasserA.RosenfieldD.McDonaldR. (2016). Measuring bystander behavior to prevent sexual violence: moving beyond self reports. Psychol. Violence6, 73–81. 10.1177/0886260515591979

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 62

  KalyviotiK.MikropoulosT. A. (2013). A virtual reality test for the identification of memory strengths of dyslexic students in higher education. J.Univ Comput Sci.19, 2698–2721. 10.3217/jucs-019-18-2698

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 63

  KhuongB. M.KiyokawaK.MillerA.La ViolaJ. J.MashitaT.TakemuraH. (2014). The effectiveness of an AR-based context-aware assembly support system in object assembly. Paper Presented at the 2014 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), 57–62. 10.1109/VR.2014.6802051

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 64

  KilteniK.BergstromI.SlaterM. (2013). Drumming in immersive virtual reality: the body shapes the way we play. IEEE Trans. Visual. Comput. Graphics19, 597–605. 10.1109/VR.2013.6549442

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 65

  KilteniK.MaselliA.KordingK. P.SlaterM. (2015). Over my fake body: body ownership illusions for studying the multisensory basis of own-body perception. Front. Hum. Neurosci.9:141. 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00141

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 66

  KlevenN.Prasolova-FørlandE.FominykhM.HansenA.RasmussenG.SagbergL.LindsethF. (2014). Training nurses and educating the public using a virtual operating room with oculus rift, in Paper Presented at the 2014 International Conference on Virtual Systems and Multimedia (VSMM), Hong Kong, 206–213. 10.1109/VSMM.2014.7136687

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 67

  KniffinT. C.CarlsonC. R.EllzeyA.Eisenlohr-MoulT.BeckK. B.McDonaldR.JourilesE. N. (2014). Using virtual reality to explore self-regulation in high-risk settings. Trauma Violence Abuse 15, 310–321. 10.1177/1524838014521501

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 68

  KolbD. A. (1984). Experiential Learning.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

  • Google Scholar

• 69

  KozhevnikovM.GurlittJ.KozhevnikovM. (2013). Learning relative motion concepts in immersive and non-immersive virtual environments. J. Sci. Educ. Technol.22, 952–962. 10.1007/s10956-013-9441-0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 70

  KuhnJ.LukowiczP.HirthM.WeppnerJ. (2015). gPhysics - using google glass as experimental tool for wearable-technology enhanced learning in physics, in Paper Presented at the Workshop Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Intelligent Environments, 19 (Prague), 212–219. 10.3233/978-1-61499-530-2-212

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 71

  LambR.AntonenkoP.EtopioE.SecciaA. (2018). Comparison of virtual reality and hands on activities in science education via functional near infrared spectroscopy. Comput. Educ.124, 14–26. 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.014

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 72

  LauK. W.KanC. W.LeeP. Y. (2017). Doing textiles experiments in game-based virtual reality: a design of the stereoscopic chemical laboratory (SCL) for textiles education. Int. J. Inform. Learn. Technol.34, 242–258. 10.1108/IJILT-05-2016-0016

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 73

  LeaderJ. F. (2018). Mixed reality therapy clinic design, in Paper Presented at the IEEE Games, Entertainment, Media Conference (GEM), Galway, 1–9. 10.1109/GEM.2018.8516530

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 74

  LeeE. A.WongK. W. (2008). A Review of Using Virtual Reality for Learning. Transactions on edutainment I.Berlin: Springer, 231–241.

  • Google Scholar

• 75

  LeeS. H.SergueevaK.CatanguiM.KandaurovaM. (2017). Assessing google cardboard virtual reality as a content delivery system in business classrooms. J. Educ. Business92, 153–160. 10.1080/08832323.2017.1308308

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 76

  LeitritzM. A.ZiemssenF.SuesskindD.PartschM.VoykovB.Bartz-SchmidtK.et al. (2014). Critical evaluation of the usability of augmented reality ophthalmoscopy for the training of inexperienced examiners; 24670999. Retina34, 785–791. 10.1097/IAE.0b013e3182a2e75d

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 77

  LemleyJ.KarA.CorcoranP. (2018). Eye tracking in augmented spaces: a deep learning approach, in Paper Presented at the 2018 IEEE Games, Entertainment, Media Conference (GEM), Galway, 1–6. 10.1109/GEM.2018.8516529

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 78

  LeueM. C.JungT.tom DieckD. (2015). Google Glass Augmented Reality: Generic Learning Outcomes for Art Galleries. Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism.Cham: Springer, 463–476.

  • Google Scholar

• 79

  LiG. X. (2014). Research on application of computer technology in the virtual reality in sports. Adv. Mater. Res.1049, 2024–2027. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1049-1050.2024

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 80

  LiangH.ChangJ.DengS.ChenC.TongR.ZhangJ. J. (2017). Exploitation of multiplayer interaction and development of virtual puppetry storytelling using gesture control and stereoscopic devices. Comput. Animat. Virtual Worlds28:5. 10.1002/cav.1727

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 81

  LiangH.XiaomingB. (2013). Application research of virtual reality technology in electronic technique teaching, in Paper Presented at the Intelligence Computation and Evolutionary Computation, Berlin, Heidelberg, 180153–159.

  • Google Scholar

• 82

  LiarokapisF.PetridisP.ListerP. F.WhiteM. (2002). Multimedia augmented reality interface for e-learning (MARIE). World Trans. Eng. Technol. Educ.1, 173–176.

  • Google Scholar

• 83

  LikitweerawongK.PaleeP. (2018). The virtual reality serious game for learning driving skills before taking practical test, in Paper Presented at the Digital Arts, Media and Technology (ICDAMT), 2018 International Conference on, Phayao, 158–161. 10.1109/ICDAMT.2018.8376515

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 84

  LinJ. T. (2017). Fear in virtual reality (VR): Fear elements, coping reactions, immediate and next-day fright responses toward a survival horror zombie virtual reality game. Comput. Hum. Behav.72, 350–361. 10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.057

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 85

  LiuB.CampbellA. G.GladyshevP. (2017a). Development of a cybercrime investigation simulator for immersive virtual reality, in 23rd International Conference on Virtual System and Multimedia (VSMM), 2017 (Dublin), 1–4. 10.1109/VSMM.2017.8346258

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 86

  LiuD.DedeC.HuangR.RichardsJ. (2017b). Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Realities in Education. Dublin: Springer.

  • Google Scholar

• 87

  MakranskyG.LilleholtL. (2018). A structural equation modeling investigation of the emotional value of immersive virtual reality in education. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev.66, 1141–1164. 10.1007/s11423-018-9581-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 88

  MareskyH. S.OikonomouA.AliI.DitkofskyN.PakkalM.BallykB. (2018). Virtual reality and cardiac anatomy: exploring immersive three-dimensional cardiac imaging, a pilot study in undergraduate medical anatomy education. Clin. Anat.32, 238–243. 10.1002/ca.23292

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 89

  MarkowitzD. M.LahaR.PeroneB. P.PeaR. D.BailensonJ. N. (2018). Immersive virtual reality field trips facilitate learning about climate change. Front. Psychol.9:2364. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02364

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 90

  MathurA. S. (2015). Low cost virtual reality for medical training, in Paper Presented at the 2015 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), Arles, 345–346. 10.1109/VR.2015.7223437

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 91

  MatsutomoS.ManabeT.CingoskiV.NoguchiS. (2017). A computer aided education system based on augmented reality by immersion to 3-D magnetic field. IEEE Trans. Magnet.53, 1–4. 10.1109/TMAG.2017.2665563

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 92

  MehrabianA.RussellJ. A. (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology.Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • Google Scholar

• 93

  MilgramP.TakemuraH.UtsumiA.KishinoF. (1995). Augmented reality: a class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. Telemanipulat. Telepresence Technol.2351, 282–293.

  • Google Scholar

• 94

  MisbhauddinM. (2018). VREdu: a framework for interactive immersive lectures using virtual reality, in Paper Presented at the 2018 21st Saudi Computer Society National Computer Conference (NCC), Saudi, 1–6. 10.1109/NCG.2018.8593095

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 95

  MogliaA.FerrariV.MorelliL.FerrariM.MoscaF.CuschieriA. (2016). A systematic review of virtual reality simulators for robot-assisted surgery. Eur. Urol.69, 1065–1080. 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.09.021

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 96

  MoroC.ŠtrombergaZ.RaikosA.StirlingA. (2017). The effectiveness of virtual and augmented reality in health sciences and medical anatomy. Anat. Sci. Educ.10, 549–559. 10.1002/ase.1696

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 97

  MullerN.PanzoliD.GalaupM.LagarrigueP.JesselJ. P. (2017). Learning mechanical engineering in a virtual workshop: A preliminary study on utilisability, utility and acceptability, in Paper Presented at the 2017 9th International Conference on Virtual Worlds and Games for Serious Applications (VS-Games), Athens, 55–62. 10.1109/VS-GAMES.2017.8055811

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 98

  Murcia-LopezM.SteedA. (2018). A comparison of virtual and physical training transfer of bimanual assembly tasks. IEEE Trans. Visual. Comput. Graphics24, 1574–1583. 10.1109/TVCG.2018.2793638

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 99

  NagelD. (2019). Education Helping to Drive Massive Surge in AR and VR. The Journal. Retrieved from: https://thejournal.com/articles/2019/06/18/education-helping-to-drive-massive-surge-in-ar-vr.aspx

  • Google Scholar

• 100

  NakayamaT.NumaoN.YoshidaS.IshiokaJ.MatsuokaY.SaitoK.KiharaK. (2016). A novel interactive educational system in the operating room–the IE system. BMC Med. Educ.16:44. 10.1186/s12909-016-0561-0

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 101

  NazirS.SorensenL. J.ØvergårdK. I.MancaD. (2015). Impact of training methods on distributed situation awareness of industrial operators. Safety Sci.73, 136–145. 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.11.015

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 102

  Ndez-FerreiraR. M.FuenteA. J.MezM. G.CamachoD. (2017). Improving sociocultural outcomes for students in the higher education through participation on virtual mobility: the UbiCamp experience. Int. J. Eng. Educ.33, 2050–2060. Available online at: http://hdl.handle.net/10651/46201

  • Google Scholar

• 103

  NewtonS.LoweR. (2015). Situational elearning with immersive technologies, in Paper Presented at the 8th International Structural Engineering and Construction Conference: Implementing Innovative Ideas in Structural Engineering and Project Management, ISEC (Sydney), 3–12.

  • Google Scholar

• 104

  OlaskyJ.SankaranarayananG.SeymourN. E.MageeJ. H.EnquobahrieA.LinM. C.et al. (2015). Identifying opportunities for virtual reality simulation in surgical education: a review of the proceedings from the innovation, design, and emerging alliances in surgery (IDEAS) conference: VR surgery. Surg. Innovat.22, 514–521. 10.1177/1553350615583559

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 105

  OrmanE. K.PriceH. E.RussellC. R. (2017). Feasibility of using an augmented immersive virtual reality learning environment to enhance music conducting skills. J. Music Teach. Educ.27, 24–35. 10.1177/1057083717697962

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 106

  OyasijiT. O.ThirunavukarasuP.NurkinS. (2014). The use of wearable technology in the operating room. J. Am. Coll. Surg.219:e163. 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.07.825

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 107

  PaasF.RenklA.SwellerJ. (2016). Cognitive Load Theory: A Special Issue of Educational Psychologist. Oxfordshire: Routledge.

  • Google Scholar

• 108

  PanH. (2015). Research on application of computer virtual reality technology in college sports training, in Paper Presented at the Measuring Technology and Mechatronics Automation (ICMTMA), 2015 Seventh International Conference on, Nanchang, 842–845. 10.1109/ICMTMA.2015.207

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 109

  PapertS.HarelI. (1991). Situating constructionism. Constructionism36, 1–11.

  • Google Scholar

• 110

  ParongJ.MayerR. E. (2018). Learning science in immersive virtual reality. J. Educ. Psychol.110, 785–797. 10.1037/edu0000241

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 111

  ParsonsT. D. (2015). Virtual reality for enhanced ecological validity and experimental control in the clinical, affective and social neurosciences. Front. Hum. Neurosci.9:660. 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00660

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 112

  ParsonsT. D.CourtneyC. G. (2014). An initial validation of the virtual reality paced auditory serial addition test in a college sample; 24184058. J. Neurosci. Methods222, 15–23. 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2013.10.006

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 113

  PashlerH.McDanielM.RohrerD.BjorkR. (2008). Learning styles: concepts and evidence. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest9, 105–119. 10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 114

  PekrunR. (2016). Emotions at school, in Handbook of Motivation at School2nd ed, eds WentzelK. R.MieleD. B.. (New York, NY: Routledge, 120–144.

  • Google Scholar

• 115

  PotkonjakV.GardnerM.CallaghanV.MattilaP.GuetlC.PetrovićV. M.et al. (2016). Virtual laboratories for education in science, technology, and engineering: a review. Comput. Educ.95, 309–327. 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 116

  RealF. J.DeBlasioD.BeckA. F.OllberdingN. J.DavisD.CruseB.KleinM. D. (2017a). A virtual reality curriculum for pediatric residents decreases rates of influenza vaccine refusal. Acad. Pediatr.17, 431–435. 10.1016/j.acap.2017.01.010

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 117

  RealF. J.DeBlasioD.OllberdingN. J.DavisD.CruseB.MclindenD.et al. (2017b). Resident perspectives on communication training that utilizes immersive virtual reality. Educ. Health30, 228–231. 10.4103/efh.EfH_9_17

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 118

  RebeloF.NoriegaP.DuarteE.SoaresM. (2012). Using virtual reality to assess user experience. Hum. Factors54, 964–982. 10.1177/0018720812465006

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 119

  RehmannA. J.MitmanR. D.ReynoldsM. C. (1995). A Handbook of Flight Simulation Fidelity Requirements for Human Factors Research. Federal Aviation Administration Technical Center (Atlantic City Airport, NJ).

  • Google Scholar

• 120

  RiveP.KarmokarS. (2016). Design thinking methods and creative technologies in virtual worlds, in Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship (Jyväskylä), 635–644.

  • Google Scholar

• 121

  RobinettW.RollandJ. P. (1992). A computational model for the stereoscopic optics of a head-mounted display. Presence1, 45–62.

  • Google Scholar

• 122

  RosenfieldP.FayJ.GilchristR. K.CuiC.WeigelA. D.RobitailleT.et al. (2018). AAS WorldWide telescope: a seamless, cross-platform data visualization engine for astronomy research, education, and democratizing data. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.236:22. 10.3847/1538-4365/aab776

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 123

  RudarakanchanaN.Van HerzeeleI.DesenderL.CheshireN. J. (2015). Virtual reality simulation for the optimization of endovascular procedures: current perspectives. Vasc. Health Risk Manage.11, 195–202. 10.2147/VHRM.S46194

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 124

  SabalicM.SchoenerJ. (2017). Virtual reality-based technologies in dental medicine: knowledge, attitudes and practice among students and practitioners. Technol. Knowl. Learn.22, 199–207. 10.1007/s10758-017-9305-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 125

  Sanchez-VivesM. V.SlaterM. (2005). From presence to consciousness through virtual reality. Nat. Rev. Neurosci.6:332. 10.1038/nrn1651

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 126

  Savin-BadenM.GourlayL.TombsC.SteilsN.TombsG.MawerM. (2010). Situating pedagogies, positions and practices in immersive virtual worlds. Educ. Res.52, 123–133. 10.1080/00131881.2010.482732

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 127

  SchirmerC. M.ElderJ. B.RoitbergB.LobelD. A. (2013a). Virtual reality-based simulation training for ventriculostomy: an evidence-based approach; 24051886. Neurosurgery73, S66–S73. 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000074

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 128

  SchirmerC. M.MoccoJ.ElderJ. B. (2013b). Evolving virtual reality simulation in neurosurgery; 24051876. Neurosurgery73, S127–S137. 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000060

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 129

  SchottC.MarshallS. (2018). Virtual reality and situated experiential education: a conceptualization and exploratory trial. J. Comput. Assist. Learn.34, 843–852. 10.1111/jcal.12293

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 130

  SeeZ. S.LeeX. S.BrimoA.ThwaitesH.GoodmanL. (2018). MOOC for AR VR training, in Paper Presented at the 2018 IEEE Games, Entertainment, Media Conference (GEM) (Galway), 1–9. 10.1109/GEM.2018.8516514

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 131

  SeoJ. H.SmithB.CookM.PineM.MaloneE.LealS.et al. (2017). Anatomy builder VR: applying a constructive learning method in the virtual reality canine skeletal system, in Paper Presented at the International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, Los Angeles, CA, 399–400. 10.1109/VR.2017.7892345

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 132

  SeoJ. H.SmithB. M.CookM.MaloneE.PineM.LealS.et al. (2018). Anatomy builder VR: applying a constructive learning method in the virtual reality canine skeletal system. Adv. Hum. Fact. Train. Educ. Learn. Sci.596, 245–252. 10.1007/978-3-319-60018-5_24

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 133

  ShakurS. F.LucianoC. J.KaniaP.RoitbergB. Z.BanerjeeP. P.SlavinK. V.et al. (2015). Usefulness of a virtual reality percutaneous trigeminal rhizotomy simulator in neurosurgical training; 26103444. Clin. Neurosurg.11, 420–425. 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000853

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 134

  ShinH.KimK. (2015). Virtual reality for cognitive rehabilitation after brain injury: a systematic review. J. Phys. Ther. Sci.27, 2999–3002. 10.1589/jpts.27.2999

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 135

  SinghA. K.ChenH.ChengY.KingJ.KoL.GramannK.LinC. (2018). Visual appearance modulates prediction error in virtual reality. IEEE Access6, 24617–24624. 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2832089

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 136

  SmithS. J.FarraS. L.UlrichD. L.HodgsonE.NicelyS.MickleA. (2018). Effectiveness of two varying levels of virtual reality simulation. Nurs. Educ. Perspect.39, E10–E15. 10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000000369

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 137

  SpanlangB.NormandJ.BorlandD.KilteniK.GiannopoulosE.PomésA.et al. (2014). How to build an embodiment lab: achieving body representation illusions in virtual reality. Front. Robotics AI1:9. 10.3389/frobt.2014.00009

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 138

  StarkeyE. M.SpencerC.LesniakK.TuckerC.MillerS. R. (2017). Do technological advancements lead to learning enhancements? an exploration in virtual product dissection, in Paper Presented at the ASME 2017 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Cleveland, OH. 10.1115/DETC2017-68237

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 139

  StepanK.ZeigerJ.HanchukS.Del SignoreA.ShrivastavaR.GovindarajS.et al. (2017). Immersive virtual reality as a teaching tool for neuroanatomy. Int. Forum Allergy Rhinol.7, 1006–1013. 10.1002/alr.21986

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 140

  StigallJ.SharmaS. (2017). Virtual reality instructional modules for introductory programming courses, in Paper Presented at the 2017 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC), Princeton, NJ, 34–42. 10.1109/ISECon.2017.7910245

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 141

  SuhA.ProphetJ. (2018). The state of immersive technology research: a literature analysis. Comput. Hum. Behav.86, 77–90. 10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.019

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 142

  SunC.XuD.DariaK.TaoP. (2017). A “bounded adoption” strategy and its performance evaluation of virtual reality technologies applied in online architectural education, in Paper Presented at the Proceedings of CAADRIA (Suzhou), 43–52.

  • Google Scholar

• 143

  SwezeyR. W.LlanerasR. E. (1997). Models in training and instruction. Handbook Hum. Factors Ergonom.1997, 514–577.

  • Google Scholar

• 144

  TacginZ.ArslanA. (2017). The perceptions of CEIT postgraduate students regarding reality concepts: augmented, virtual, mixed and mirror reality. Educ. Inform. Technol.22, 1179–1194. 10.1007/s10639-016-9484-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 145

  TajiriK.SetozakiN. (2016). Development of immersive teaching material using HMD and 3D gesture operation for astronomy education, in Paper Presented at the 24th International Conference on Computers in Education, ICCE (Bombay), 160–162.

  • Google Scholar

• 146

  TaljaardJ. (2016). A review of multi-sensory technologies in a science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics (STEAM) classroom. J. Learn. Design9, 46–55. Available online at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1117662 (accessed July 31, 2019).

  • Google Scholar

• 147

  TepeT.KaleciD.TuzunH. (2018). Integration of virtual reality fire drill application into authentic learning environments. World J. Educ. Technol.10, 72–78. 10.18844/wjet.v10i4.3786

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 148

  TeranishiS.YamagishiY. (2018). Educational effects of a virtual reality simulation system for constructing self-built PCs. J. Educ. Multimedia Hypermedia27, 411–423. Available online at: https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/178534/ (accessed July 31, 2019).

  • Google Scholar

• 149

  ThompsonL. J.KrienkeB.FergusonR. B.LuckJ. D. (2018). Using 360-degree video for immersive learner engagement. J. Extens.56, 22–22. Available online at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ119215 (accessed July 31, 2019).

  • Google Scholar

• 150

  TimcenkoO.KofoedL. B.Schoenau-FogH.RengL. (2017). Learning, Games and Gamification, in Purposive Game Production in Educational Setup: Investigating Team Collaboration in Virtual Reality, ed StephanidisC. (Verlag: Springer), p. 184–191. 10.1007/978-3-319-58753-0_29

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 151

  TrepteS.ReineckeL.BehrK. (2010). Avatar creation and video game enjoyment: effects of life-satisfaction, game competitiveness, and identification with the avatar world, in Paper Presented at the Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, Suntec, Singapore.

  • Google Scholar

• 152

  VeronezM. R.GonzagaL.BordinF.KupssinskuL.KannenbergG. L.DuarteT.et al. (2018). RIDERS: road inspection driver simulation, in Paper Presented at the 2018 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) (Tuebingen/Reutlingen), 715–716. 10.1109/VR.2018.8446207

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 153

  WangC.LiH.KhoS. Y. (2018). VR-embedded BIM immersive system for QS engineering education. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ.26, 626–641. 10.1002/cae.21915

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 154

  WangY. H. (2017). Using augmented reality to support a software editing course for college students. J. Comput. Assist. Learn.33, 532–546. 10.1111/jcal.12199

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 155

  WenX.DuanF.YuY.TanJ. T. C.ChengX. (2014). Design of a multi-functional system based on virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation, in Proceeding of the 11th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation, IEEE, Shenyang, 2412–2417.

  • Google Scholar

• 156

  WiederholdB. K.MillerI. T.WiederholdM. D. (2018). Using virtual reality to mobilize health care: mobile virtual reality technology for attenuation of anxiety and pain. IEEE Consum. Electron. Magaz.7, 106–109. 10.1109/MCE.2017.2715365

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 157

  WigfieldA.TonksS.KlaudaS. L. (2016). Expectancy-value theory, in Handbook of Motivation in School, 2nd ed, eds WentzelK. R.MieleD. B.(New York, NY: Routledge, 55–74.

  • Google Scholar

• 158

  WitmerB. G.SingerM. F. (1994). Measuring presence in virtual environments (Technical Report No. ARI-TR-1014). Available online at: https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA286183 (accessed July 31, 2019).

  • Google Scholar

• 159

  YangX.LinL.ChengP.YangX.RenY.HuangY. (2018). Examining creativity through a virtual reality support system. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev.66, 1231–1254. 10.1007/s11423-018-9604-z

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 160

  YildirimG.ElbanM.YildirimS. (2018). Analysis of use of virtual reality technologies in history education: a case study. Asian J. Educ. Train.4, 62–69. 10.20448/journal.522.2018.42.62.69

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 161

  YoganathanS.FinchD. A.ParkinE.PollardJ. (2018). 360 degrees virtual reality video for the acquisition of knot tying skills: a randomised controlled trial. Int. J. Surg.54, 24–27. 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.04.002

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 162

  ZaphirisP.IoannouA. (2017). Learning and collaboration technologies. novel learning ecosystems, in 4th International Conference, LCT 2017, held as Part of HCI International 2017, Vancouver, BC, July 9–14, 2017, Springer.

  • Google Scholar

• 163

  ZhangW. (2014). On college oral english teaching in the base of virtual reality technology. Appl. Mech. Mater.687, 2427–2430). 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.687-691.2427

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 164

  ZikkyM.FathoniK.FirdausM. (2018). Interactive distance media learning collaborative based on virtual reality with solar system subject, in Paper Presented at the 2018 19th IEEE/ACIS International Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking and Parallel/Distributed Computing (SNPD), Busan, 4–9. 10.1109/SNPD.2018.8441031

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 165

  ZivA.WolpeP. R.SmallS. D.GlickS. (2003). Simulation-based medical education: an ethical imperative. Acad. Med.78, 783–788.

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • Google Scholar