Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 205

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Virtual reality and brain anatomy: a randomised trial of e‐learning instructional designs

Levinson, Anthony J, Weaver, Bruce, Garside, Sarah, McGinn, Holly, Norman, Geoffrey R·2007·Medical Education

Abstract

Context Computer‐aided instruction is used increasingly in medical education and anatomy instruction with limited research evidence to guide its design and deployment. Objectives To determine the effects of (a) learner control over the e‐learning environment and (b) key views of the brain versus multiple views in the learning of brain surface anatomy. Design Randomised trial with 2 phases of study. Participants Volunteer sample of 1st‐year psychology students (phase 1, n = 120; phase 2, n = 120). Interventions Phase 1: computer‐based instruction in brain surface anatomy with 4 conditions: (1) learner control/multiple views (LMV); (2) learner control/key views (LKV); (3) programme control/multiple views (PMV); (4) programme control/key views (PKV). Phase 2: 2 conditions: low learner control/key views (PKV) versus no learner control/key views (SKV). All participants performed a pre‐test, post‐test and test of visuospatial ability. Main outcome measures A 30‐item post‐test of brain surface anatomy structure identification. Results The PKV group attained the best post‐test score (57.7%) and the PMV group received the worst (42.2%), with the 2 high learner control groups performing in between. For students with low spatial ability, estimated scores are 20% lower for those who saw multiple views during learning. In phase 2, students with the most static condition and no learner control (SKV) performed similarly to those students in the PKV group. Conclusions Multiple views may impede learning, particularly for those with relatively poor spatial ability. High degrees of learner control may reduce effectiveness of learning.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02694.x

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

See all 205

Metadata

Authors
Levinson, A. J., Weaver, B., Garside, S., McGinn, H., & Norman, G. R.
Venue
Medical Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-04-05
Volume
41
Issue
5
Pages
495-501
ISSN
  • 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2923
OpenAlex
W2103887544
Cited by
205
References
8
FWCI
5.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Virtual reality and brain anatomy: a randomised trial of e‐learning instructional designs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02694.x
The paper
Levinson, A. J., Weaver, B., Garside, S., McGinn, H., & Norman, G. R. (2007). Virtual reality and brain anatomy: a randomised trial of e‐learning instructional designs. Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02694.x

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.