Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,484

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning

Makransky, Guido, Terkildsen, Thomas S., Mayer, Richard E.·2019·Learning and Instruction
DOI 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.007
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Virtual reality (VR) is predicted to create a paradigm shift in education and training, but there is little empirical evidence of its educational value. The main objectives of this study were to determine the consequences of adding immersive VR to virtual learning simulations, and to investigate whether the principles of multimedia learning generalize to immersive VR. Furthermore, electroencephalogram (EEG) was used to obtain a direct measure of cognitive processing during learning. A sample of 52 university students participated in a 2 × 2 experimental cross-panel design wherein students learned from a science simulation via a desktop display (PC) or a head-mounted display (VR); and the simulations contained on-screen text or on-screen text with narration. Across both text versions, students reported being more present in the VR condition (d = 1.30); but they learned less (d = 0.80), and had significantly higher cognitive load based on the EEG measure (d = 0.59). In spite of its motivating properties (as reflected in presence ratings), learning science in VR may overload and distract the learner (as reflected in EEG measures of cognitive load), resulting in less opportunity to build learning outcomes (as reflected in poorer learning outcome test performance).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.007

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 13 references

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. Alhalabi, 2016, Virtual reality systems enhance students' achievements in engineering education, Behaviour & Information Technology, 35, 919, 10.1080/0144929X.2016.1212931 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Antonenko, 2010, Using electroencephalography to measure cognitive load, Educational Psychology Review, 22, 425, 10.1007/s10648-010-9130-y · DOI · Paper page
  3. Bayraktar, 2001, A Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in science education, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34, 173, 10.1080/15391523.2001.10782344 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Berka, 2007, EEG correlates of task engagement and mental workload in vigilance, learning, and memory tasks, Aviation Space & Environmental Medicine, 78, 231
  5. Berka, 2004, Real-time analysis of EEG indexes of alertness, cognition, and memory acquired with a wirelessEEG headset, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 17, 151, 10.1207/s15327590ijhc1702_3 · DOI · Paper page
  6. De Jong, 2013, Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education, Science, 80, 305, 10.1126/science.1230579 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Gerjets, 2014, Cognitive state monitoring and the design of adaptive instruction in digital environments: Lessons learned from cognitive workload assessment using a passive brain-computer interface approach, Frontiers in Neuroscience, 8, 386, 10.3389/fnins.2014.00385 · DOI
  8. Gevins, 1998, Monitoring working memory load during computer-based tasks with EEG pattern recognition methods, Human Factors, 40, 79, 10.1518/001872098779480578 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Harp, 1997, The role of interest in learning from scientific text and illustrations: On the distinction between emotional interest and cognitive interest, Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 92, 10.1037/0022-0663.89.1.92 · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.1.92 · Paper page
  10. Kalyuga, 1999, Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351, 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199908)13:4<351::AID-ACP589>3.0.CO;2-6 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Lee, 2014, Learning with desktop virtual reality: Low spatial ability learners are more positively affected, Computers & Education, 79, 49, 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.010 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Lee, 2010, How does desktop virtual reality enhance learning outcomes? A structural equation modeling approach, Computers & Education, 55, 1424, 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.006 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Limniou, 2007, Full immersive virtual environment CAVEtm in chemistry education, Computers & Education, 51, 584, 10.1016/j.compedu.2007.06.014 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Mayer, 2017, How can brain research inform academic learning and instruction?, Educational Psychology Review, 29, 835, 10.1007/s10648-016-9391-1 · DOI
  15. Merchant, 2014, Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students' learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education, Computers & Education, 70, 29, 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Moreno, 1999, Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity, Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358, 10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.358 · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.358 · Paper page
  17. Moreno, 2002, Learning science in virtual reality multimedia environments: Role of methods and media, Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 598, 10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.598 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Moreno, 2007, Interactive multimodal learning environments, Educational Psychology Review, 19, 309, 10.1007/s10648-007-9047-2 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Pallant, 2007, An introduction to the Rasch measurement model: An example using the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS), British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 46, 1, 10.1348/014466506X96931 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Passig, 2016, Improving children's cognitive modifiability by dynamic assessment in 3D Immersive Virtual Reality environments, Computers & Education, 95, 296, 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.009 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Richards, 2015, A Comparison of learning gains when using a 2D simulation tool versus a 3D virtual world: An experiment to find the right representation involving the Marginal Value Theorem, Computers & Education, 86, 157, 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.009 · DOI
  22. Rutten, 2012, The learning effects of computer simulations in science education, Compuers & Education, 58, 136, 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.017 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Salzman, 1999, A model for understanding how virtual reality aids complex conceptual learning, Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 8, 293, 10.1162/105474699566242 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Sauseng, 2005, EEG alpha synchronization and functional coupling during top-down processing in a working memory task, Human Brain Mapping, 26, 148, 10.1002/hbm.20150 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Sciarini, 2014, Cognitive state assessment: Examination of EEG-based measures on a stroop task, Vol. 58, 215
  26. Sitzmann, 2011, A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games, Personnel Psychology, 64, 489, 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01190.x · DOI · Paper page
  27. Sterman, 1995, Concepts and applications of EEG analysis in aviation performance evaluation, Biological Psychology, 40, 115, 10.1016/0301-0511(95)05101-5 · DOI
  28. Thisgaard, 2017, Virtual learning simulations in high School: Effects on cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes and implications on the development of STEM academic and career choice, Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00805 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Van Der Heijden, 2004, User acceptance of hedonic information systems, MIS Quarterly, 28, 695, 10.2307/25148660 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Vogel, 2006, Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: A meta-analysis, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34, 229, 10.2190/FLHV-K4WA-WPVQ-H0YM · DOI · Paper page
  31. Webster, 2016, Declarative knowledge acquisition in immersive virtual learning environments, Interactive Learning Environments, 24, 1319, 10.1080/10494820.2014.994533 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 1,484

Metadata

Authors
Makransky, G., Terkildsen, T. S., & Mayer, R. E.
Venue
Learning and Instruction
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
60
Pages
225-236
ISSN
0959-4752 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.007
OpenAlex
W2777517149
Cited by
1,484
References
13
FWCI
64.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
  • www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
  • www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.007
The paper
Makransky, G., Terkildsen, T. S., & Mayer, R. E. (2019). Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.