Virtual Reality Assisted Engineering Education: A Multimedia Learning Perspective

Computers & Education: X Reality 3 (2023) 100033
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers & Education: X Reality

journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/computers-and-education-x-reality
Virtual reality assisted engineering education: A multimedia

learning perspective
Adurangba V. Oje a, *, Nathaniel J. Hunsu a, Dominik May b
a
Engineering Transformations Institute, College of Engineering, University of Georgia Athens, GA, 30602, USA
b
University of Wuppertal, Germany
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Virtual Reality (VR) is a powerful technology that can enhance engineering education by providing immersive
Virtual reality (VR) and interactive learning experiences. However, many VR studies in engineering education lack a clear theoretical
Design principles or pedagogical framework to guide their design and evaluation. This scoping review analyzes 51 studies on VR-
Learning theories
assisted engineering education and reveals the trends and gaps in the current research. We argue that engi
Pedagogical principles
Multimedia learning
neering VR studies should be informed by theories of learning and instruction that address the cognitive and
Engineering education socio-cognitive aspects of learning. We also suggest that VR-assisted engineering education research should
incorporate multimedia design and pedagogical principles to optimize the effectiveness of VR applications. Our
perspective aims to inspire engineering educators, practitioners, and instructional designers to develop VR
contents and formulate VR research imperatives grounded in sound educational theories and multimedia
learning principles.
1. Introduction fields in the last decade. In a recent literature review, Makransky &
Petersen, 2021 reported that educational VR research increased
Virtual realities (VR) are computer-enabled simulation of real-world dramatically over the last decade. They attributed this increase to a
impressions in artificial or virtual environment (Bailenson et al., 2008). growing interest in the adoption, application, and, thus, research of
Advances in computing and image processing capabilities have signifi instructional VR technologies in educational literature. Their search of
cantly enhanced the capabilities of VR technologies to render real-world the Scopus database showed that more than 500 educational VR
scenes in a manner that emulates a near-real experience. VR technolo research studies were published between 2016 and 2020. In addition, in
gies are categorized as immersive VR (IVR) and non-immersive desktop a bibliometric analysis of 3342 articles, Chen, Zou, Cheng, & Xie (2020)
VR (DVR) based on the type of experience they afford (Hamilton et al., noted that VR research was one of the major topics identified by studies
2021). Immersive VR experiences rely on head-mounted devices (HMD) in the Computers and Education research community. This growing
– examples include the Oculus Rift or HTC Vive – and creates the body of studies examines the applications of instructional VR to address
impression of completely immersing users in the experience. They give educational challenges – including using VR to motivate learning and
users a greater sense of ‘being there’. Contrariwise, desktop VR does not enhance students’ cognitive and spatial abilities.
require headsets - only computer keyboard and mouse devices are Several empirical studies have explored how VR is used in educa
needed to interact with the virtual reality environment. Desktop VR tional contexts – a few reviews of these empirical studies in the K-12 and
environments are projected on a desktop computer monitor or television higher educational settings have also been published (Jensen & Kon
screen. In addition, because users view and interact with desktop VR radsen, 2018; Luo et al., 2021; Merchant et al., 2014; Mikropoulos &
representations without being embedded in the environment, they also Natsis, 2011). Many of these studies make impressive claims about the
do not get the same level of immersiveness that HMD devices offer (Ochs educational benefits of instructional VR. However, these claims are not
& Sonderegger, 2022). often grounded in empirically tested theoretical principles. For example,
There has been an increasing adoption and application of Virtual while principles based on learning theories are essential to designing
Realities (VR) for instructional purposes across several educational and implementing effective pedagogies and promoting positive learning
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (A.V. Oje), [email protected] (N.J. Hunsu), [email protected] (D. May).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cexr.2023.100033
Received 23 July 2022; Received in revised form 17 June 2023; Accepted 19 June 2023
Available online 14 July 2023
2949-6780/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
A.V. Oje et al. Computers & Education: X Reality 3 (2023) 100033
experiences, many educational technologies are designed and imple foundations. Our goal is to inform STEM researchers and educators of
mented with little or no recourse to relevant learning theories (Clark, the need for trustworthy research about the affordances and limitations
1994). Existing empirical and review studies on educational technolo of VR to foster positive learning experiences. By highlighting multi
gies suggests that educational technology adopters tend to focus more on media learning principles from prior VR literature in the learning sci
the technology itself rather than how learning theories can inform how ences, we intend to inform about potential considerations in designing
these learning technologies can be optimally adopted (Granić, 2022). and implementing VR pedagogies that support positive learning expe
Multimedia learning theorists argue for the application of theory- rience in VR-aided engineering education.
based and empirically tested principles in designing multimedia envi
ronments that limits extraneous cognitive processing – to reduce 2. Background
cognitive load (Mayer. 2005), and enhances germane cognitive pro
cessing – to promote meaningful engagement with learning (Chang & 2.1. Virtual reality applications in educational settings
Yang, 2023). For example, by invoking the distraction hypothesis, the
orists argue that high-fidelity multimedia learning environments, e.g., VR applications have revolutionized how instructional content can
VR environments, can comprise high sensory stimuli that overload be delivered and experienced across several educational fields. For
learners’ memory capacity and reduce their ability to process the most instance, students can experience and learn about near and distant
critical information in the learning environment. places by exploring geographical scenes rendered in VR without leaving
Hence, such environments must be designed to minimize seductive the classroom, sometimes even without leaving their homes. Unlike
details that mitigate germane cognitive processing (Mutlu-Bayraktar video representations of the same learning content, students can interact
et al., 2019). Furthermore, theorists also propose that learners be with the environment and vividly experience the content as though they
encouraged to engage in generative learning activities that focus their are at the scene. Medical science educational fields leverage instruc
attention and optimize cognitive processing. tional VR to facilitate safe, near-real-life medical experiments where
Despite the importance of multimedia learning theories to designing students can learn procedural skills that are too risky or costly to support
multimedia learning contents that reduces learning inhibitors, a careful otherwise (Merchant et al., 2014)4). For example, VR technologies are
evaluation of the VR literature reveals that only a few educational VR used to deliver instructional content about surgical procedures and
studies were grounded or guided by empirically tested cognitive and human anatomy in ways that are cost-effective and improve the learning
non-cognitive theories of multi-media learning. This observation is experience (Javaid & Haleem, 2020).
especially pronounced in discipline-based VR-focused educational Apart from their application in medical science and geography ed
research (Radianti et al., 2020). The growing adoption of VR to support ucation, several studies have reported the benefits of VR activities in
engineering pedagogy and learning is a welcome development. How language learning (Lan, 2020), physics, and astronomy (Barnett, 2005;
ever, VR technologies could become a fad if instructors find them inef Chen et al., 2007; Porter et al., 2020), mathematics (Hsu, 2020), psy
fective in supporting learning. As Clark and Mayer (2016) argued, chology and other STEM fields (Pellas et al., 2020; Riva, 2022). Advo
educational technologies (Edtechs) are no antidotes for solving learning cates of VR argue that the kind of immersive learning experiences that
challenges. However, designing and implementing Edtech’s based on instructional VR affords can remediate students’ misconceptions of
empirically tested theories and principles can increase their efficacy to geographical and geological concepts (Yusuf & Safitri, 2021) and that
motivate meaningful learning and engagement. they offer better visualization and spatial navigation of abstract con
This article was motivated by two primary objectives: (i.) to inves cepts than traditional teaching methods could do (Bailenson et al., 2008;
tigate reported uses of VR to facilitate learning in engineering education Salzman et al., 1999). Some studies also indicated that instructional VR
(and their intended learning goals), and (ii.) whether those uses were technologies could facilitate collaborative exchange in a virtual learning
informed by learning theories and principles. Where theories of learning environment (Zheng et al., 2017), stimulate students’ motivation and
and pedagogies played a deciding role in study, we wanted to know self-efficacy to complete procedural task science laboratory experiments
which theories were references, to what depth were they used, and how (Makransky et al., 2019), and support emotional regulation strategies
frequently these learning theories occur in VR research. Mostly impor (Colombo et al., 2019). In summary, advocates argue that educational
tantly, we also examined whether the VR study designs were informed VR can allow learners to experience a variety of environments with
by multimedia learning theories or principles. To this end, our scoping diverse placements and perspectives. Consequently, educational VRs
review was guided by the following questions: can facilitate discovery-based activities and stimulate learning interest
and motivation (Pantelidis, 2010).
1. Which specific learning theories and design principles have been
reported in VR-assisted engineering education research literature? 2.2. Virtual reality applications in engineering education
2. How frequently, and to what extent, do VR-assisted engineering
education research incorporate relevant theories and multimedia Many students find abstract engineering concepts too intangible and
design principles? cognitively challenging to grasp. Such students may struggle to formu
3. Which learning outcomes have been reported as the focus of VR- late coherent mental models of abstract engineering concepts and,
assisted engineering education research? consequently, fail to gain a conceptual understanding of such concepts
4. Which multimedia learning theories and design principles from other (Streveler et al., 2008). Educational VR environments can be especially
educational technology literature can inform research on instruc beneficial in supporting students learning of such content. For example,
tional VR in engineering education? electromagnetism or three-dimensional (3-D) statics concepts can be
challenging to grasp mentally because such concepts cannot be physi
Subsequently, we highlight principles of multimedia learning the cally observed. Representing such abstract concepts in Virtual Reality
ories reported in the learning sciences literature that may be relevant to Learning Environments (VRLEs) can make them more vivid and clarify
discipline-based VR research. Our focus on discipline-based VR research, abstract concepts (Manseur, 2005).
especially within the sciences, is informed by the fact that VR can change Several research studies have described different uses of VR-based
the way abstract and procedural concepts in STEM fields are learned. instructional applications in engineering learning contexts to aid con
While that may be true, it is expedient that such claims be substantiated ceptual understanding, problem-solving, and skill training, among
in theory and backed by empirical data. Our focus on engineering ed others (Halabi, 2020; Stuchlíková et al., 2017). For example, Salzman
ucation was informed by our disciplinary affiliation, and the desire to et al. (1999) opined that VR’s multisensory cues could improve learners’
substantiate the validity of prior VR efficacy claims on sound theorical interaction with electrical engineering activities in a VRLE. In applying
2
VR to assist students with grasping challenging electric fields and elec weft-knitting engineering in their participants.
trostatics concepts, they observed that students gained a better con Given the growing interest in, and adoption of, instructional VR to
ceptual understanding of the distribution of forces in an electric field as support the pedagogy and learning of conceptual knowledge and pro
they interacted with concepts and navigated multiple perspectives in a cedural skills across engineering fields, there has been a proliferation of
VRLE. Valdez et al. (2014)4) designed and used a prototype VRLE called published studies focusing on the uses of VRLEs to facilitate engineering
the Virtual Electric Manual (VEMA) to teach and demonstrate various education. Many of these VR studies focused on student perceptions and
electrical experiments using the technology’s visualization capabilities. the usability of VR to support the learning of engineering content.
In addition, VR-based instruction has been used to facilitate inductive However, as it is often the case with much educational technology
learning of fluid pressure in fluid mechanics (Savadatti & Johnsen, research, claims about the affordances of VRLEs and their effectiveness
2017), fluid statics and dynamics (Johnsen & Savadatti, 2019), and are thinly rooted in empirically tested theories or principles. This article
Truss systems (Banow & Maw, 2019) in mechanical engineering appli highlights how frequently VR-assisted engineering education research
cations. Apart from their use in delivering engineering content, some draws on theory and outlines potentially relevant theories and learning
articles have described using VRLEs to facilitate problem-solving skills principles that future VR studies in the engineering domain can draw on.
in craft production and manufacturing design processes (Aqlan et al.,
2019), problem-solving and collaborative skills in an engineering statics 3. Methods
domain (Tuttle et al., 2019).
Fig. 1 depicts screenshots of a VRLE of an engineering content. A scoping review of VR-assisted engineering education research was
Because engineering education is a practical and experiential field conducted to address our study objectives. The methodology for the
that integrates theory and practice, laboratory instructions have always scoping review entailed a: systematic literature search, screening and
been integral to undergraduate and graduate engineering curricula ex selection of relevant articles, and coding for variables deemed relevant
periences (Feisel & Rosa, 2005). VR-based laboratories can be leveraged to answering our research questions.
to support alternative laboratory experiences in engineering without
necessarily replacing the traditional in-person laboratory experience. 3.1. Literature search and article selection
VR platforms can support laboratory instructions and experiences in
engineering fields because practical activities that result in the acqui The literature search was conducted between August 2021 and
sition of procedural skills can be rendered in VRLE-based training sys March 2022 and was limited to VR studies published within the last
tems (Kollöffel & de Jong, 2013). decade (2011-2021). Key terms that are relevant to VR-assisted engi
Some studies have reported instances where VR was used to support neering education research were combined using Boolean operations to
laboratory experiences in engineering education. For example, Singh search the Web of Science, Wiley, EBSCO Complete, and IEEE Explore
et al. (2021) used a VRLE to train engineering students to ‘handle’ databases:
electronic hardware and conduct laboratory experiments. They reported
that the students they observed found the virtual activities especially “Virtual Reality” AND “Engineering” AND “Education” OR
useful for learning. In another instance reported in the literature, a VRLE “Training” OR “Learning” OR “Teaching”.
was used to illustrate relative motion concepts (Kozhevnikov et al., The literature search returned 1492 VR studies from all search in
2013), to train engineering students to operate a transformer in an dexes. Information about the searched articles was downloaded into
electrical power station (Barata et al., 2015); in chemical production EndNote® and later transferred into Excel to manage the process of
plant operations (Ouyang et al., 2018); in operating weft-knitting ma screening and selecting relevant articles. The titles and abstracts of the
chines (Zhang et al., 2018). Zhang and colleagues argued that VRLE articles were read to screen and eliminate irrelevant and non-empirical
fostered operational skills, practice ability, and holistic knowledge of VR research articles – 367 articles were retained after the title and
Fig. 1. VR content from Labster showing conceptual and procedural learning of a circuit concept in electrical engineering.
3
abstract screening exercise. The remaining articles were then screened One study referenced a motivational.
based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria (Table 1) to determine
whether they met our selection criteria. Overall, fifty-one articles were 4.3. How frequently, and to what extent, do VR-assisted engineering
retained after further screening with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. education research incorporate relevant theories and multimedia design
principles?
3.2. Coding
In addition to highlighting which theories were referenced by the
Selected articles were then coded to extract quantitative and quali studies scoped, Table 2 also reported how frequently each theory was
tative information about the use of learning theories and principles in referenced. With regards to the quality of reference or usage of theory,
VR-assisted engineering education research: For a quantitative assess Fig. 3 showed that 15.7% of the studies reviewed relied on theory to
ment of the VR research studies, we coded for: the frequency of occur support the conceptualization (to argue the logic of the study), design
rence of VR research per year, and the frequency of learning theories and (inform data collection, and which variables were relevant to their
principles in VR research. For qualitative assessment of extant engi study’s objective), and analysis and interpretation of their findings;
neering educational VR research, we coded for: (i.) which learning 19.6% made a rather superficial reference some theory or theoretical
theories and principles are cited; (ii.) the extent to which they inform the frameworks without leaning on such theories substantively; 64.7% of
objective and design of each study analyzed. Each study was classified the VR studies made no reference to or use of a theoretical or peda
based on whether it referenced or did not reference theory, whether gogical framework(s).
theory was only superficially mentioned, or whether it informed the
study’s objective and design. 4.4. Which learning outcomes have been reported as the focus of VR-
Because we sought to uncover the theoretical underpinnings of VR assisted engineering education research?
studies and the assessment of outcomes in engineering education, we
constrained our coding to study features that identify how theory has Next, we examined which learning outcomes were assessed in the
been employed to support the research objectives of VR studies in en studies that were identified. More studies (n = 17) were focused on as
gineering education. In addition, we extracted descriptive study char sessments of participants’ perceptions of the usability of VR-based in
acteristics that illustrate the current state of VR-assisted engineering struction or a VRLE. Several of these studies examined the effects of VR
education research. The different study features (see Appendix for on cognitive learning outcomes or school performance measures. We
coding scheme) were explored using the visualization capabilities of R categorized learning outcomes that examined affects, motivation,
studio to identify trends in VR-assisted engineering education research. spatial ability, and cognitive overload as others (please refer to Table 2
and Fig. 4).
4. Observations and discussion
4.5. A general overview of VR-assisted engineering education research
4.1. Growth of VR-assisted engineering education research
A major trend from our scoping review suggests that a greater ratio of
Fig. 2 shows that VR-assisted engineering education research studies engineering-focused VR studies did not consider how empirically tested
published in peered review journals and conference outlets have been on learning (and motivational) theories can shape the design of VRLEs to
the rise within the last five years. About 49% of all VR studies in the field optimize their learning efficacy. Most prior VR studies in engineering
were published between 2019 and 2021 alone. education focused on evaluating VR aesthetic and technology features,
VR usability, and the affects and emotions that VRs engender. Further
4.2. Which specific learning theories and design principles have been more, we observed that many of the positive claims about the instruc
reported in VR-assisted engineering education research literature? tional value of VRLEs are either informed by anecdotes or, at best,
conjectures based on students’ subjective self-reports on studies about
Sequel to coding and extracting relevant information from the arti VR usability or their perception of the VR learning experience. Some
cles included in this study, we analyzed our datasheet to examine the instructional VR advocates argue that the aesthetics features of VRLEs
extent to which these studies referenced or used relevant theories to promote arousal and immersion. The arousal hypothesis holds that the
inform the basis of their inquiry and to support the learning outcome attractive graphics or auditory design of VRLEs fosters a sense of im
each study examined. Overall, 16 studies made references or used 12 mersion that makes the VR learning experience enjoyable. VR arousal
theoretical lenses, while 33 studies made no theoretical references at all. advocates argue that VRs engender positive emotions and learning
Only three studies referenced the cognitive load theory, which often engagement. They also suggested that the perceptual realism of VRLEs
informs the design of multi-media learning content and environment. could induce flow or presence, which can stimulate positive emotional
The other references to theory were about pedagogies of engagement (e. responses and willingness to engage in VR-based learning content
g., Problem-based learning, Collaborative learning, Guided inquiry (Parong & Mayer, 2021).
learning) and usability (i.e., Unified Theory of Use and Acceptance of Although the arousal and immersion hypotheses seem logical, critics
Technology). Table 2 highlights the specific theories or theoretical have argued that emotional and affective arousals alone may be insuf
frameworks that informed, or are mentioned in, the studies examined. ficient to ensure that students are meaningfully engaged with learning in
VRLEs. Similarly, aroused interest or emotional responses may not
necessarily translate to positive learning outcomes (Mayer, 2020).
Table 1
Inclusion and exclusion criteria of selected studies. Emotional arousals may actually distract from learning in some situa
tions (Makransky et al., 2019). Some critics also argue that seductive
Inclusion Criteria Exclusion Criteria
details, such as excessive imagery and background sounds in VRs, can
Articles is publicly available and indexed by Articles focused on only VR engender extraneous cognitive processing that may inhibit learning
the databases development
(Hamilton et al., 2021; Mikropoulos & Natsis, 2011; Radianti et al.,
Full-text available Reviews, meta-analysis,
qualitative or commentary articles 2020). Therefore, educational psychologists and instructional theoreti
Articles focused on the implementation and Articles are peer-reviewed cians strongly recommend balancing the emotional benefits of the
use of VR in engineering education ‘interesting features’ of multimedia learning environments and their
Articles not published in English Studies outside the engineering cognitive consequences (Sundararajan & Adesope, 2020).
education field
We noted that very little has been done to explore or highlight the
4
Fig. 2. The growth of VR in engineering education.
implications of design and pedagogies principles on the effectiveness of behavioral, cognitive, and social engagement as they learn engineering
VRs for learning engineering content. There is currently a dearth of contents in VRLEs, and how to facilitate meaningful learning and in
empirical research on designing and implementing VR for effective en struction in VRs are urgently needed. Such empirical studies are
gineering education. Similarly, prior VR studies within the discipline important for identifying evidence-based recommendations for
have given little attention to theoretical and methodological rigor in designing and implementing efficacious educational VRLEs for engi
extant educational VR studies. However, theory-driven VR studies are neering learning contexts.
necessary because they can aid our understanding of how students learn
using VR technologies. For example, theoretical frameworks can provide
4.7. Recommendations of theoretical perspectives for VR research from
explanatory frameworks for the design of effective VRLEs, and to predict
the multimedia learning literature
how different elements in VRLEs would affect learning effectiveness.
Hence, we reecho earlier calls for more VR studies that draw upon
Relevant learning theories can provide frameworks that can help
empirically tested design and pedagogical principles to validate claims
explain and predict the potential effects of VRLEs in various learning
about the educational affordances and efficacy of VR (Kalyuga et al.,
contexts. Rather than hoping that VR imageries and features will pro
1999; 2000; Mayer & Johnson, 2010).
mote positive learning engagement and outcomes, VRLE design for en
gineering contents can be informed by intentional applications of design
principles grounded upon cognitive and non-cognitive theories with
4.6. A case for engineering education VRLE design and research grounded
solid empirical supports. Such deliberate research and development
in multimedia learning theories and principles
initiatives may draw on existing multimedia learning design principles.
Based on the multimedia learning literature, VRLEs must be thought
As VR technologies become better and the cost of acquiring them for
fully designed to minimize factors that engender cognitive load. Simi
instructional purposes decline, they are bound to become ubiquitous in
larly, the educational affordances of VRs may be enhanced if VR learning
our future classrooms. Hence, it is highly likely that more engineering
incorporates pedagogies that encourages learners to engage meaning
educators will increasingly seek to leverage VR to enhance engineering
fully with their learning material. Drawing on the multimedia and VR
classrooms and laboratory instruction and learning experiences.
learning literature from adjacent educational disciplines, we highlight
Although VR instruction can potentially enhance how certain engi
cognitive and non-cognitive theories that may be relevant to advancing
neering contents are delivered, poorly designed or poorly implemented
VRLE designs and pedagogy research in engineering education in the
VRLE pedagogies can distract or harm learning. For instance, a recent
following sections.
study reported that students who learned in highly aesthetic VR envi
ronments performed worse than those who learned with VR with less
aesthetical detail (Petersen, Petkakis, & Makransky, 2022). Not 4.8. Relevant design-focused cognitive principles for VRLEs
addressing avoidable distractions can undermine any potential affor
dances of VR engineering pedagogy. 4.8.1. Cognitive theory of multimedia learning (CTML)
Given that poorly designed and implemented instructional VR can be Richard Mayer and colleagues proposed the CTML to explain how
deleterious to learning (Parong & Mayer, 2018), engineering educators learning ensues in multimedia learning environments (Mayer, 2005).
who intend to ethnically adopt VR for engineering instruction must The CTML presumes that multimedia content is processed through two
ensure to ‘do no harm’ to students learning. (verbal and visual) processing channels. The theory also presupposes
Based on the preceding, we argue that the design, development, and that working memory capacity is limited – meaning that learners can
adoption of VR technologies for engineering instruction must be only process a limited amount of information at a time. Because memory
informed by evidence-based theoretical principles (Kalyuga et al., 1999, capacity is limited, learners only focus on a proportion of instructional
2000; Mayer & Johnson, 2010; Pollock et al., 2002). Hence, more content while neglecting the rest at any given time (Mayer & Moreno,
theory-informed VR studies investigating imperatives for designing 2002). Furthermore, theorists argue that effective multimedia learning
effective VRLEs for engineering contents are needed. Apart from environments must carefully balance how sensory information arrives at
investigating VRLE design considerations, studies that explore students’ learners’ visual and verbal channels to avoid overloading any one
5
Table 2 intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive loads (Sweller, 2005a).

Theoretical paradigms and outcomes study features in retained studies. Extraneous loads are features, or contents, of the multimedia environ
Theoretical paradigm n Learning Outcome n Measured ment that overload working memory and distract from actual learning.
(Category) Outcomes For example, features of VR environments and activities that unduly
Cognitive Load 3 Usability (e.g., 17 Ease of Use, placate learners’ emotions or irrelevant visual appeals can evoke un
Theory (e.g., Dayarathna et al., Usefulness, Intent necessary cognitive processing that constitutes extraneous cognitive
Carbonell- 2020; Dinis et al., to Use, Perceived load. Hence, it is better to present the instructional contents of multi
( Carbonell-Carrera 2017; Tanner et al., Usefulness, media VR in ways that minimize extraneous processing and cognitive
and Saorin, 2017; 2016) Technology
Chen et al., 2022) Acceptance
load (Chen et al., 2015).
Creativity (e.g., Lin 2 Intrinsic cognitive load is due to the number of interacting elements
et al., 2020) in a learning content or task (Mutlu-Bayraktar et al., 2019). The inter
Embodied cognition 2 activity of task elements increases as the material, or the learning
(e.g., Xu & Wang,
environment, to be processed becomes more complex or difficult.
2022)
Collaborative learning 1 Cognitive (e.g., Dinis 12 Retention, (Frederiksen et al., 2020). Germane cognitive load is the mental load
(e.g., Schuster et al., et al., 2017; Schuster Transfer, Problem- caused by learners’ effort to make sense of the instructional content.
2015) et al., 2015; Yang Solving, This load type focuses on the effort required to learn a task. Some have
Self-determination (e. 1 et al., 2021) Comprehension, processed integrating active or generative learning activities in VR en
g., Makransky et al., Operational skills
2019)
vironments that could elicit the cognitive processes necessary to in
Game-based learning 1 crease germane cognitive load (Seufert, 2018).
(e.g., Nelson & Ahn,
2018)
Constructivist (e.g., 1
4.9. Relevant CTML and CLT principles and VRLE design
Akbulut et al.,
2018)
Problem-based 1 Educational contents are delivered as combinations of aural (spoken
learning (e.g., words), textual (written words), and animations in VRLE (Albus et al.,
Halabi, 2020)
2021; Parong & Mayer, 2018). Visual contents of VRLEs may contain
Queuing theory (e.g., 1
Dayarathna et al.,
dynamic or static animation accompanied by narration or simulated
2020) action accompanied by written and spoken information sources. The
Spatial ability theory 1 Performance 13 GPA, Academic CTML proposes different principles for enhancing cognitive processes
(e.g., Assessment (e.g., performance and learning in multimedia learning environments. We highlight some
Roca-González, Alhalabi, 2016; scores,
design principles that could be relevant in VR instructional design.
Martín Gutiérrez, Makarova et al., 2015; Performance
García-Dominguez, Salah et al., 2019) expectancy
& Mato 4.9.1. The redundancy and modality principles
Carrodeguas, 2017) The redundancy principle suggests that “redundant material interferes
Guided inquiry 1 with rather than facilitates learning” because both the auditory and vi
learning (e.g.,
Tanner et al., 2016)
sual processing channels can be overloaded (Sweller, 2005b). Mean
Unified Theory of Use 1 while, the modality principle suggests that “low-experience learners more
and Acceptance of successfully understand information that uses narration rather than
Technology (e.g., on-screen text” (Oberfoell & Correia, 2016). Hence, VRLEs design must
Udeozor et al.,
consider how best to represent instructional information different of
2021)
NR (e.g., Makarova 33 Others (e.g., 9 Learning different modes in ways that reduce the adverse effect of redundancy on
et al., 2015; Carbonell-Carrera & preference, Design learning without losing the benefit of the modality effects for certain
Valentine et al., Saorin, 2017; thinking, Spatial learner groups.
2021) Roca-González, orientation, Spatial
Martín Gutiérrez, visualization
García-Dominguez, &
4.9.2. The coherence principle
Mato Carrodeguas, Proposes that learning improves when interesting but irrelevant
2017; Rossado words, pictures, symbols, sounds, music, or animations are minimized
Espinoza et al., 2021) (Moreno & Mayer, 2000). Irrelevant details (or seductive details) inhibit
learning in multimedia learning environments (Mayer, 2017, 2020;
Sundararajan & Adesope, 2020). Although seductive details might pique
channel (Bull, 2013). Inversely, overwhelming the memory channels
students’ interest and arouse affects and emotions, they may also in
with sub-optimally designed instructional information would create
crease the extraneous cognitive load and impede learning (Moreno &
cognitive overload and have undesirable learning effects. Lastly, the
Mayer, 2000; Sundararajan & Adesope, 2020; Sweller, 2020). Hence,
CTML presumes that meaningful learning occurs in multimedia envi
the design imperative for VRLEs must be to minimize details that may
ronments only when learners are actively engaged in optimal cognitive
engender extraneous cognitive processing, even if VRLE developers
processing (Mayer & Moreno, 2002). To be meaningfully engaged with
envisage such details may arouse interest and emotion (Mayer, 2009).
learning in multimedia learning environments, learners must inten
tionally select the most relevant information and organize selected in
4.9.3. The pre-training principle
formation to build a coherent mental representation of the instructional
Proposes that learners process multimedia information more deeply
elements being processed (Albus et al., 2021).
when they are familiarized with key terms and basic concepts or char
acteristics prior to engaging in the main learning activity (Mayer, 2017).
4.8.2. Cognitive load theory (CLT)
Prior experimental studies have concluded that pre-training exposures
Like the CTML, the CTL proposes that the human memory capacity is
can increase recall, comprehension, and knowledge transfer (Meyer
limited and can be overloaded by novel information or non-essential
et al., 2019; Parong & Mayer, 2018). VR environments can be cogni
details of poorly-designed instructional content (Sweller et al., 2019).
tively intensive for students with limited prior exposure or experience in
According to the CLT, instructional information can be categorized into
a similar environment.
6
Fig. 3. The Integration of Theoretical or Pedagogical Framework in VR research.
Fig. 4. A treemap showing the category of learning outcomes.
4.9.4. The segmentation principle Mayer, 2007) and the Cognitive-Affective Model of Immersive Learning
Proposes that “people learn better when a multimedia message is – CAMIL (Makransky & Petersen, 2021) framework to accommodate the
presented in user-paced segments rather than as a continuous unit when role of affective and psychological factors in multimedia and VR
information is presented in segments, rather than one long continuous learning experiences. These frameworks describe how cognitive, affec
stream” (Mayer, 2009). Parong and Mayer (2018) found that learners tive, and psychological interaction and factors influence learning pro
who received VR multimedia lessons in short segments performed better cesses and outcomes in multimedia and VR learning environments.
on factual questions than those in a VR control group. Their findings Furthermore, because engineering activities occur in highly collabora
demonstrated the relevance of the segmenting principle in VRLE tive contexts, contextually relevant VRLEs for engineering education
designs. must enable collaborative learning experiences. Hence, it is essential
that VRLE designs, and implementation draw on relevant theories of
social engagement in learning contexts.
4.10. Relevance of non-cognitive multimedia theories to VRLE design
Several prior studies have highlighted the effects of psychological 4.11. Pedagogy-focused principles for VRLE implementation
and emotional factors (such as achievement emotions, presence, in
terests, self-beliefs, etc.) on learning engagements, processes, and out Beyond design imperatives, the quality of students’ cognitive and
comes in multimedia environments (Mayer & Estrella, 2014)4). socio-cognitive engagement with learning contents and environments is
Likewise, some studies have suggested that VRLEs trigger situational critical. Learning is a generative activity that depends on the quality of
interests, presence, and flow ((Kim & Ko, 2019; Parong & Mayer, 2018). the cognitive activities that students engage in as they interact with and
As a consequence, multimedia learning theorists have proposed the process the learning material (Fiorella & Mayer, 2016). Thoughtfully
Cognitive-Affective Theory of Multimedia Learning – CATML (Moreno & designing VRLEs to balance features of VR environments and
7
instructional material does not automatically guarantee meaningful 4.11.2. Elaboration

learning will occur in VR environments. As such, it is also essential to A study by Vogt et al. (2021) showed that participants who were
consider how students interact with instructional material in VRLE and prompted to elaborate on the main ideas in a VR-based learning activity
how to encourage them to use strategies that engender meaningful outperformed the control group on a factual knowledge test. Their
learning in VRLEs. The generative learning framework highlights findings indicate that elaboration (a generative learning activity) aided
different strategic learning activities that can foster meaningful learning in the retention of information in a VR environment. Invariably, intro
engagement in multimedia learning. ducing generative learning activities into VR-based learning could
prompt germane cognitive processing and facilitate positive learning
4.11.1. Generative learning principles (GLP) outcomes. Hence, the research and development of effective VRLEs of
According to the GLP framework, learning occurs when students engineering content can identify how to include elaboration as a
employ learning strategies that foster meaningful cognitive engagement generative learning activity to facilitate learning in VRLEs.
and active processing of instructional information (Mayer, 2020). The
orists argue that engaged learners perform generative learning activities 4.12. Embodied cognition and VRLE research
when they actively select, organize, and integrate (SOI) instructional
materials in ways that enhance cognitive processing and a deeper un Immersive VR learning partially or totally immerses learners in the
derstanding of the instructional material (Fiorella & Mayer, 2015; learning experience in ways that require their bodily interaction with
Mayer, 2005; Wittrock, 1974). Generative learning activities prime the VR content and environment. Some learning theorists have proposed
learners to identify and select the most important content of the that learning processes are inextricably linked to our interactions with
instructional material (e.g., by paying attention to the most relevant our learning environment. For example, the embodied cognition
words or graphics). Furthermore, learners can better organize selected framework posits that our bodies play a critical role in the learning
instructional content into coherent mental representations, integrate process (Wilson, 2002). When students engage in embodied activities,
these new representations with prior knowledge, and readily store them such as gesticulating or moving their bodies, they activate mental rep
in their long-term memory for future retrieval (Fiorella & Mayer, 2015, resentations that enable them to think about abstract concepts (De
2016). Koning & Tabbers, 2011). Thus, embodiment is essential for learning in
Many students lack the metacognitive and self-regulatory skills to three ways: it reinforces conceptual representations, activates abstract
isolate relevant information from irrelevant ones during the learning concepts in long-term memory, and stimulates spontaneous mental
process (Johnson-Glenberg, 2018). In high-fidelity VR environments, simulations. However, for embodiment to have tangible learning effects,
such students might focus more on the aesthetic and exciting features (or VR users must actively engage with the instructional content rather than
seductive details) of a VR environment if no pedagogical pointers or passively observe it (Kontra et al., 2015) – by prompting learners to
prompts for strategic engagement are provided. However, combining VR manipulate instructional content through gestures, drawing, and per
and generative learning activities could foster germane cognitive pro spectives (Fiorella, 2022).
cessing that enhances the learning experience and outcome. Several Despite the embodied cognition framework’s relevance to VR
generative learning strategies have been identified in the literature learning, the embodied learning process is not well understood because
(Fiorella & Mayer, 2015, 2016). However, we highlight three generative embodied cognition research in educational VR is still in its infancy. For
learning strategies (the use of self-explanation, summarizing, and elabo instance, little is known about the effects of object manipulation on
rations) that can facilitate meaningful learning engagement in a VRLE working memory (Paas & Sweller, 2012). Research that helps us un
below. derstand how to facilitate effective embodied pedagogies and learning in
VRLEs is also needed. In the future, researchers may examine how to
4.11.1.1. Self-explanation. Involves students’ explaining the to-be- incorporate feedback and reflective activities into a highly embodied VR
learned concepts to themselves (Wylie & Chi, 2014, p. 413). environment, especially for promoting knowledge construction and
Self-explanation has been used to prime generative learning in positive learning outcomes in learners with limited prior knowledge.
computer-based learning environments. For example, in a computer The interaction effects of prior knowledge (or prior exposure to VR) and
game study, Pilegard and Mayer (2016) observed that participants in an embodied cognition on learning in VR environments can also be
experimental group that engaged in self-explanation activities out explored in the future.
performed a (non-self-explanation) control group on a transfer test (d =
0.74). Fiorella and Mayer (2015) reported that self-explaining showed 4.13. Collaborative learning in VRLEs
an average effect of d = 0.61 across 54 studies. Students may be asked to
think aloud as they interact with VRLE knowledge contents to help them The social-cognitive literature suggests that collaborative learning
identify relevant details, organize their thoughts, and elicit mis fosters self-efficacy and improves the collective problem-solving process
conceptions they might have about the material. Self-explanation could of collaborating students (Francescato et al., 2006; Kim & Baylor, 2006).
help learners elaborate on main ideas (Bisra et al., 2018), generate in In addition, several empirical studies have demonstrated the benefits of
ferences, and link them with prior knowledge (Fiorella & Mayer, 2016; collaborative engagements on cognitive and affective learning outcomes
Roy & Chi, 2005, pp. 271–286; Wylie & Chi, 2014, p. 413) as they (Laal & Ghodsi, 2012). Because the engineering profession is socially
interact with VR contents. and collaboratively practiced, students get several team-based and
collaborative learning opportunities and experiences during their engi
4.11.1.2. Summarizing. Self-explaining is an in-the-process learning neering education career.
strategy. Learners can also be prompted to summarize the VR-based Educational VR technologies have several capabilities to support
learning activity or exercise they experienced after the learning computer-mediated collaborative learning activities. (de Back et al.,
encounter. By summarizing, students can organize their thoughts 2020). For example, students could collaboratively resolve engineering
around the main ideas of the learning activity that they just experienced. problems by sharing resources and engaging in immersive and
A study by Parong and Mayer (2018) suggested that summarizing ac embodied learning concurrently in collaborative VRLE activities.
tivities after an immersive VR learning activity benefited learning. They Studies that compare the gains of collaborative and individual learning
found that learners who summarized segments of a VR lesson out in VRLEs have shown inconsistent results (Paas & Sweller, 2012). Hence,
performed those who did not. VR-related research must investigate relative individual learning and
how collaborative learning occurs in VRLE. Future research may explore
individual differences when learning from VR. For instance, de Back
8
et al. (2020) found that spatial ability moderates the effects of collab 4.16. Exploring the mechanisms of learning in engineering VRLEs through
orative learning in VR. the lenses of learning theories
4.14. Study contributions As noted earlier, previous research on VR in engineering education

has often neglected to use relevant theoretical frameworks to under
Although previous reviews have examined the educational benefits stand students’ interaction with learning materials, tasks and peers in
of VR-assisted learning in engineering education, most studies have engineering focused VRLEs. To move the engineering education field
focused on the technical aspects of VR-assisted instruction and its use in forward, Magana (2022) argued that theoretical and pedagogical
teaching specific engineering concepts (Lai et al., 2020; Pellas et al., models could offer explanatory frameworks for understanding the social
2020; Radianti et al., 2020). Our study, on the other hand, aims to phenomena under investigation. Furthermore, Matusovich and Benson
highlight gaps in the previous research by examining the frequency and (2022) argued that explicit recourse to theory is critical to advancing the
occurrence of relevant theories and learning outcomes in VR engineer creation and communication of trustworthy knowledge in engineering
ing education assisted literature. Our observations are similar to previ education. Therefore, to better understand how to employ VR for
ous reviews showing the growing trend of VR studies withing effective engineering instruction and learning, we propose that future
engineering (Lai et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2018; Özyurt et al., 2021). Our VR research move beyond merely admiring the features of VR technol
findings are also similar to previous reviews that suggest a lack of ogy or from overly focusing on student perceptions of VR learning ex
theoretical perspectives and empirical investigation of learning princi periences. Instead, studies that dig deep to understand the mechanisms
ples in the broader VR literature (Luo et al., 2021; Radianti et al., 2020). of students’ cognitive and socio-cognitive engagement in VR environ
A unique contribution of our study is that we have identified specific ments are needed. This can be achieved by drawing on learning, moti
gaps in the VR-assisted engineering education literature that need to be vational, and pedagogical theories to explore how to best support
addressed. These gaps include the need for more research on the effec VR-based instruction in engineering education.
tiveness of VR literature in fostering cognitive learning outcomes, such
as knowledge application, knowledge transfer, problem-solving, opera 4.17. Exploring instructional methods in VR engineering education
tional skills and creativity among engineering students. Furthermore, research
there is need for research to examine cognitive load outcomes in VR
engineering education environments. Out study also highlights the Meaningful learning depends on effective instructional methodolo
importance of integrating theoretical frameworks from learning science gies and not on the medium of instruction in and of itself (Clark, 1994;
and the broader education literature into VR-assisted engineering edu Clark & Mayer, 2016). Therefore, we advocate for research that explores
cation research to enhance our understanding of student learning and the curricular and instructional imperatives for VRLEs in engineering
experience in immersive and simulation-based environments. Lastly, our education. There is growing evidence that multimedia and generative
study echoes previous calls for theoretical and pedagogical consider learning principles make VR-based instruction in the learning sciences
ations in the design of educational VR learning environments (Johnston more effective. However, the research literature on engineering educa
et al., 2019), and perspectives from engineering education researchers tional technologies is notably trailing this research drive. Studies that
who argue that integrating theoretical framework from cognitive and examine the validity and robustness of these principles in facilitating
educational psychology to engineering education (Brown et al., 2015; engineering pedagogies are also essential to engineering education
Johri & Olds, 2011), can aid engineering educational practitioners in research and practitioner communities. In addition to exploring the
developing effective instructional strategies in engineering relevance of multimedia learning theories and principles in instructional
education-assisted learning environments. VR application, future research can explore the boundary conditions of
VR-based pedagogy to clarify the strengths and limits of their educa
4.15. Potential paths for future VR research in engineering education tional benefits. For example, it is important to investigate the conditions
(when, what, and for whom) under which VR-based instructions are
As VR technology becomes more familiar and accessible for facili effective or ineffective.
tating engineering pedagogy and learning, more empirical studies
exploring how to effectively integrate VR-based learning and instruction 4.18. Assessment of learning outcomes in VR research
at all levels of engineering education are needed. However, we recom
mend that VR-assisted engineering education research must draw on Our study found that VR-assisted engineering education research
relevant cognitive and non-cognitive learning theories to identify the overly focused on perceptions and usability studies. Only very few
following: studies have explored the effectiveness of VR-based instructions on
cognitive, social-cognitive, and metacognitive learning outcomes.
(i) design principles for developing efficacious VRLEs of engineering Considering this gap in the literature, we recommend that studies
contents; that investigate the impact of VR-based instruction on cognitive out
(ii) to identify activities that support meaningful student comes, such as conceptual and procedural understanding, application
engagements; and transfer of knowledge, immediate and delayed recall, and psycho
(iii) promote positive cognitive and non-cognitive educational out motor skills, are needed. Such studies could determine whether VR-
comes; and based instructions are better for lower-order or higher-order thinking
(iv) to assess and evaluate learning objectives and outcomes in activities (Chen, 2016; Papanastasiou et al., 2019).
VLREs. Furthermore, theorists argue that media-related instruction should
focus more on how people learn from technology or how to promote
Luo et al. (2021) argued that the effectiveness of VR-based pedagogy learning with technology rather than on the technology itself (Clark &
is contingent upon the design philosophies and principles upon which it Mayer, 2016). We propose that future VR research for engineering ed
is designed, developed, and implemented. Considering the preceding, ucation leverage data on student’s engagement with learning tasks,
we propose the following as research imperatives or potential directions content, and technology by triangulating cognitive, affective, and
for future instructional VR-assisted engineering education research: meta-data of students’ moment-by- moment movements or interactions
in VR space may be informative. Lastly, future studies may draw on the
community of inquiry framework to assess how students interact with
their peers and instructors during VR-based activities.
9
5. Conclusion Acronyms
This article highlights the growing trend in adopting VR for engi CATML Cognitive-Affective Theory of Multimedia Learning
neering education and the need to leverage empirically tested learning CAMIL Cognitive-Affective Model of Immersive Learning
theories and design principles in engineering VR research. Our scoping CLT Cognitive Load Theory
review showed that there is currently a lackluster approach to CTML Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning GLP – Generative
leveraging tested learning theories and principles to the study of the VR Learning Principles
learning phenomenon in engineering education. Consequently, we HMD Head-Mounted Devices IVR – Immersive VR
described some relevant theoretical principles for designing, imple STEM Science Technology Engineering Mathematics VEMA – Virtual
menting, and studying effective VRLEs. We hope this article inspires a Electric Manual
discussion about the value of a theoretical framework in research on VR VR Virtual Reality
engineering education and how instructional design principles can be VRLE Virtual Reality Learning Environments
used to predict and explain the unique affordances of VR instruction.
Our study focused on theoretical perspectives that concentrate on the References
design and pedagogy of efficacious multimedia and simulation-based
environments based on learning science research. Akbulut, A., Catal, C., & Yıldız, B. (2018). On the effectiveness of virtual reality in the
education of software engineering. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 26
Our study has three main implications for VR-assisted engineering (4), 918–927.
education research and practice. First, researchers can use established Albus, P., Vogt, A., & Seufert, T. (2021). Signaling in virtual reality influences learning
learning theories and instructional principles to formulate hypothesis outcome and cognitive load. Computers & Education, 166, Article 104154.
Alhalabi, W. (2016). Virtual reality systems enhance students’ achievements in
and predictions about how engineering students learn in VR environ engineering education. Behaviour & Information Technology, 35(11), 919–925.
ments and what factors affect their learning experiences. This can lead to Aqlan, F., Zhao, R., Lum, H., & Elliott, L. J. (2019). Integrating simulation games and
more focused research questions and empirical evaluations of VR- virtual reality to teach manufacturing systems concepts. In Proceedings of the
American society engineering education annual conference, tampa, Florida.
assisted engineering instruction effectiveness. de Back, T. T., Tinga, A. M., Nguyen, P., & Louwerse, M. M. (2020). Benefits of immersive
Second, empirically tested instructional principles can guide the collaborative learning in CAVE-based virtual reality. International Journal of
development and implementation of VR-assisted engineering education Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 1–18.
Bailenson, J. N., Yee, N., Blascovich, J., Beall, A. C., Lundblad, N., & Jin, M. (2008). The
materials and presentations that are both effective and engaging. For
use of immersive virtual reality in the learning sciences: Digital transformations of
instance, segmenting complex VR lessons can reduce cognitive load teachers, students, and social context. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(1),
caused by immersion (Rey et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2021), and incor 102–141.
porating generative activities can foster cognitive processes for knowl Banow, R., & Maw, S. (2019). First results from a study on the efficacy of using virtual
reality (VR) to teach truss mechanics. In Proceedings of the Canadian engineering
edge acquisition (Fiorella & Mayer, 2016). education association (CEEA). Ottawa, ontario.
Third, by considering cognitive outcomes (such as procedural Barata, P. N. A., Ribeiro Filho, M., & Nunes, M. V. A. (2015). Consolidating learning in
knowledge), affective outcomes (such as learner motivation), cognitive power systems: Virtual reality applied to the study of the operation of electric power
transformers. IEEE Transactions on Education, 58(4), 255–261.
load and interaction mechanisms, instructional designers can create VR Barnett, M. (2005). Using virtual reality computer models to support student
learning experiences that meet the diverse needs of today’s engineering understanding of astronomical concepts. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and
learners. In summary, our study suggests that theoretical frameworks, Science Teaching, 24(4), 333–356.
Bisra, K., Liu, Q., Nesbit, J. C., Salimi, F., & Winne, P. H. (2018). Inducing self-
multimedia instructional design and pedagogical principles based on explanation: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30, 703–725.
learning science research can advance VR-assisted engineering educa Brown, P. R., McCord, R. E., Matusovich, H. M., & Kajfez, R. L. (2015). The use of
tion field. motivation theory in engineering education research: A systematic review of
literature. European Journal of Engineering Education, 40(2), 186–205.
Although the theories proposed in this article provide a strong Bull, P. H. (2013). Cognitive constructivist theory of multimedia: Designing teacher-
foundation for understanding the use of VR in engineering education, made interactive digital. Creative Education, 4(9), 614.
they are by no means exhaustive. As such, we recommend that future Carbonell-Carrera, C., & Saorin, J. L. (2017). Virtual learning environments to enhance
spatial orientation. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education,
research continues to explore other related theories related to
14(3), 709–719.
technology-enhanced education. This could include examining appli Chang, C.-C., & Yang, S.-T. (2023). Interactive effects of scaffolding digital game-based
cability of theories from cognitive psychology and related fields to better learning and cognitive style on adult learners’ emotion, cognitive load and learning
understand how VR can be used to enhance learning outcomes. By performance. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20
(1), 16.
drawing on a diverse theoretical perspective, engineering education Chen, Y.-L. (2016). The effects of virtual reality learning environment on student
researchers can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the po cognitive and linguistic development. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(4),
tential benefits and limitations of engineering-based VR learning ma 637–646.
Chen, X., Zou, D., Cheng, G., & Xie, H. (2020). Detecting latent topics and trends in
terials. The coalescence of VR instructional design and the learning educational technologies over four decades using structural topic modeling. In , 151.
sciences can result in a fruitful and exciting area of research capable of Computers & Education (p. 103855). A retrospective of all volumes of Computers.
advancing both instructional VR theory and practice in engineering Chen, Y. C., Chang, Y. S., & Chuang, M. J. (2022). Virtual reality application influences
cognitive load-mediated creativity components and creative performance in
education. engineering design. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(1), 6–18.
Chen, R., Grierson, L., & Norman, G. (2015). Manipulation of cognitive load variables
Statements on open data and ethics and impact on auscultation test performance. Advances in Health Sciences Education,
20(4), 935–952.
Chen, C.-H., Yang, J.-C., Shen, S., & Jeng, M.-C. (2007). A desktop virtual reality earth
As the research does not involve human participants, no ethical motion system in astronomy education. J. Educ. Technol. Soc., 10(3), 289–304.
approval was needed for this research study. However, the authors fol Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research
& Development, 42(2), 21–29.
lowed high standards to ensure eligible studies were included for anal
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven
ysis. The corresponding author provided access to the datasheet for the guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. John Wiley & Sons.
study upon request by email. Colombo, D., Suso-Ribera, C., Fernandez-Álvarez, J., Felipe, I. F., Cipresso, P.,
Palacios, A. G., Riva, G., & Botella, C. (2019). Exploring affect recall bias and the
impact of mild depressive symptoms: An ecological momentary study. In
Declaration of competing interest International symposium on pervasive computing paradigms for mental health.
Dayarathna, V. L., Karam, S., Jaradat, R., Hamilton, M. A., Nagahi, M., Joshi, S., Ma, J.,
Ashour, O., & Driouche, B. (2020). Assessment of the efficacy and effectiveness of
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
virtual reality teaching module: A gender-based comparison. International Journal of
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence Engineering Education, 36(6), 1938–1955.
the work reported in this paper.
10
De Koning, B. B., & Tabbers, H. K. (2011). Facilitating understanding of movements in Makransky, G., Borre-Gude, S., & Mayer, R. E. (2019). Motivational and cognitive
dynamic visualizations: An embodied perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 23 benefits of training in immersive virtual reality based on multiple assessments.
(4), 501–521. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(6), 691–707.
Dinis, F. M., Guimarães, A. S., Carvalho, B. R., & Martins, J. P. P. (2017). Virtual and Makransky, G., & Petersen, G. B. (2021). The cognitive affective model of immersive
augmented reality game-based applications to civil engineering education. In 2017 learning (CAMIL): A theoretical research-based model of learning in immersive
IEEE global engineering education conference (EDUCON). virtual reality. Educational Psychology Review, 1–22.
Feisel, L. D., & Rosa, A. J. (2005). The role of the laboratory in undergraduate Manseur, R. (2005 October). Virtual reality in science and engineering education (pp.
engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 121–130. F2E–8). IEEE.Chicago.
Fiorella, L. (2022). 23 the embodiment principle in multimedia learning. Matusovich, H., & Benson, L. (2022). Roles of advances in engineering education and journal
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2015). Learning as a generative activity. Cambridge university of engineering education for the engineering education community. Wiley Online Library.
press. Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Eight ways to promote generative learning [Review] multimedia learning, 41, 31–48.
Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 717–741. Mayer, R. E. (2009). The science of instruction: Determining what works in multimedia
Francescato, D., Porcelli, R., Mebane, M., Cuddetta, M., Klobas, J., & Renzi, P. (2006). learning. <Go to ISI>://WOS:000313984600004.
Evaluation of the efficacy of collaborative learning in face-to-face and computer- Mayer, R. E. (2017). Using multimedia for e-learning. Journal of Computer Assisted
supported university contexts. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 163–176. Learning, 33(5), 403–423.
Frederiksen, J. G., Sørensen, S. M. D., Konge, L., Svendsen, M. B. S., Nobel-Jørgensen, M., Mayer, R. E. (2020). Multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press.
Bjerrum, F., & Andersen, S. A. W. (2020). Cognitive load and performance in Mayer, R. E., & Estrella, G. (2014). Benefits of emotional design in multimedia
immersive virtual reality versus conventional virtual reality simulation training of instruction. Learning and Instruction, 33, 12–18.
laparoscopic surgery: A randomized trial. Surgical Endoscopy, 34(3), 1244–1252. Mayer, R. E., & Johnson, C. I. (2010). Adding instructional features that promote
Granić, A. (2022). Educational technology adoption: A systematic review. Education and learning in a game-like environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42
Information Technologies, 27(7), 9725–9744. (3), 241–265.
Halabi, O. (2020). Immersive virtual reality to enforce teaching in engineering Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia
education. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 79(3), 2987–3004. learning. [Web-based learning: What do we know? Where do we go?. May 15-17.
Hamilton, D., McKechnie, J., Edgerton, E., & Wilson, C. (2021). Immersive virtual reality Lincoln, Ne: Nebraska Symposium on Information Technology in Education.
as a pedagogical tool in education: A systematic literature review of quantitative Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014).
learning outcomes and experimental design. Journal of Computers in Education, 8(1), Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-
1–32. 12 and higher education: A meta-analysis [article]. Computers & Education, 70,
Hsu, Y.-C. (2020). Exploring the learning motivation and effectiveness of applying virtual 29–40.
reality to high school mathematics. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(2), Meyer, O. A., Omdahl, M. K., & Makransky, G. (2019). Investigating the effect of pre-
438–444. training when learning through immersive virtual reality and video: A media and
Javaid, M., & Haleem, A. (2020). Virtual reality applications toward medical field. methods experiment. Computers & Education, 140, Article 103603.
Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health, 8(2), 600–605. Mikropoulos, T. A., & Natsis, A. (2011). Educational virtual environments: A ten-year
Jensen, L., & Konradsen, F. (2018). A review of the use of virtual reality head-mounted review of empirical research (1999–2009). Computers & Education, 56(3), 769–780.
displays in education and training. Education and Information Technologies, 23(4), Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). A coherence effect in multimedia learning: The case
1515–1529. for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia instructional messages.
Johnsen, K., & Savadatti, S. (2019). Virtual reality case studies in fluid mechanics: Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 117–125.
Development, student performance and feedback. In 2019 ASEE annual conference & Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (2007). Interactive multimodal learning environments.
exposition. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 309–326.
Johnson-Glenberg, M. C. (2018). Immersive VR and education: Embodied design Mutlu-Bayraktar, D., Cosgun, V., & Altan, T. (2019). Cognitive load in multimedia
principles that include gesture and hand controls [hypothesis and theory]. Frontiers learning environments: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 141, Article
in Robotics and AI, 5. 103618.
Johnston, E. A., Olivas, G. W., Steele, P., Smith, C., & Bailey, L. W. (2019). Virtual reality Nelson, M. E., & Ahn, B. (2018). Virtual reality activities for teaching engineering
pedagogical considerations in learning environments. In Student-centered virtual students professional development skills. In 2018 IEEE frontiers in education
learning environments in higher education (pp. 21–39). IGI Global. conference (FIE).
Johri, A., & Olds, B. M. (2011). Situated engineering learning: Bridging engineering Oberfoell, A., & Correia, A. (2016). Understanding the role of the modality principle in
education research and the learning sciences. Journal of Engineering Education, 100 multimedia learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(6),
(1), 151–185. 607–617.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy Ochs, C., & Sonderegger, A. (2022). The interplay between presence and learning.
in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13(4), 351–371. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 7.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2000). Incorporating learner experience into the Ouyang, S. G., Wang, G., Yao, J. Y., Zhu, G. H. W., Liu, Z. Y., & Feng, C. (2018).
design of multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 126–136. A Unity3D- based interactive three-dimensional virtual practice platform for
Kim, Y., & Baylor, A. L. (2006). A social-cognitive framework for pedagogical agents as chemical engineering. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 26(1), 91–100.
learning companions. Educational Technology Research & Development, 54(6), Özyurt, Ö., Cagiltay, N. E., Özyurt, H., & Akgun, A. (2021). A systematic review and
569–596. mapping of the literature of virtual reality studies in earth science engineering
Kim, D., & Ko, Y. J. (2019). The impact of virtual reality (VR) technology on sport education. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 5(2), 237–256.
spectators’ flow experience and satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 93, Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2012). An evolutionary upgrade of cognitive load theory: Using
346–356. the human motor system and collaboration to support the learning of complex
Kollöffel, B., & de Jong, T. (2013). Conceptual understanding of electrical circuits in cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 24(1), 27–45.
secondary vocational engineering education: Combining traditional instruction with Pantelidis, V. S. (2010). Reasons to use virtual reality in education and training courses
inquiry learning in a virtual lab. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(3), 375–393. and a model to determine when to use virtual reality. Themes in Science and
Kontra, C., Lyons, D. J., Fischer, S. M., & Beilock, S. L. (2015). Physical experience Technology Education, 2(1–2), 59–70.
enhances science learning. Psychological Science, 26(6), 737–749. Papanastasiou, G., Drigas, A., Skianis, C., Lytras, M., & Papanastasiou, E. (2019). Virtual
Kozhevnikov, M., Gurlitt, J., & Kozhevnikov, M. (2013). Learning relative motion and augmented reality effects on K-12, higher and tertiary education students’
concepts in immersive and non-immersive virtual environments. Journal of Science twenty-first century skills. Virtual Reality, 23(4), 425–436.
Education and Technology, 22(6), 952–962. Parong, J., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). Learning science in immersive virtual reality. Journal
Laal, M., & Ghodsi, S. M. (2012). Benefits of collaborative learning. Procedia - Social and of Educational Psychology, 110(6), 785.
Behavioral Sciences, 31, 486–490. Parong, J., & Mayer, R. E. (2021). Learning about history in immersive virtual reality:
Lai, N. Y. G., Wong, K. H., Yu, L. J., & Kang, H. S. (2020). Virtual reality (VR) in Does immersion facilitate learning? Educational Technology Research & Development,
engineering education and training: A bibliometric analysis. In Proceedings of the 2nd 69(3), 1433–1451.
world symposium on software engineering. Pellas, N., Dengel, A., & Christopoulos, A. (2020). A scoping review of immersive virtual
Lan, Y.-J. (2020). Chapter One - immersion into virtual reality for language learning. In reality in STEM education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13(4),
K. D. Federmeier, & H.-W. Huang (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation, 72 pp. 748–761.
1–26). Academic Press. Petersen, G. B., Petkakis, G., & Makransky, G. (2022). A study of how immersion and
Lin, H.-C., Chang, Y.-s., & Li, W.-H. (2020). Effects of a virtual reality teaching interactivity drive VR learning. Computers & Education, 179, Article 104429.
application on engineering design creativity of boys and girls. Thinking Skills and Pilegard, C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Improving academic learning from computer-based
Creativity, 37, Article 100705. narrative games. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44, 12–20.
Luo, H., Li, G., Feng, Q., Yang, Y., & Zuo, M. (2021). Virtual reality in K-12 and higher Pollock, E., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information.
education: A systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2019. Journal of Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 61–86.
Computer Assisted Learning, 37(3), 887–901. Porter, C. D., Smith, J. R., Stagar, E. M., Simmons, A., Nieberding, M., Orban, C.,
Magana, A. J. (2022). The role of frameworks in engineering education research. Wiley Brown, J., & Ayers, A. (2020). Using virtual reality in electrostatics instruction: The
Online Library. impact of training. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16(2), Article 020119.
Makarova, I., Khabibullin, R., Belyaev, E., & Bogateeva, A. (2015). The application of Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T. A., Fromm, J., & Wohlgenannt, I. (2020). A systematic review
virtual reality technologies in engineering education for the automotive industry. In of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements,
2015 international conference on interactive collaborative learning (ICL). lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education, 147, Article 103778.
11
Rey, G. D., Beege, M., Nebel, S., Wirzberger, M., Schmitt, T. H., & Schneider, S. (2019). Tanner, E., Savadatti, S., Manning, B., & Johnsen, K. (2016). Usability and cognitive
A meta- analysis of the segmenting effect. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), benefits of a mobile tracked display in virtual laboratories for engineering education.
389–419. In 2016 IEEE symposium on 3D user interfaces (3DUI).
Riva, G. (2022). Virtual reality in clinical psychology. Reference Module in Neuroscience Tuttle, A. J., Johnsen, K., & Savadatti, S. (2019). Facilitating collaborative engineering
and Biobehavioral Psychology. analysis problem solving in immersive virtual reality. In 2019 ASEE annual
Roca-González, C., Martín Gutiérrez, J., García-Dominguez, M., & Mato Carrodeguas, M. conference & exposition.
d. C. (2017). Virtual technologies to develop visual-spatial ability in engineering Udeozor, C., Toyoda, R., Russo Abegão, F., & Glassey, J. (2021). Perceptions of the use of
students. Eurasia Journal Of Mathematics Science And Technology Education, 13(2), virtual reality games for chemical engineering education and professional training.
441–468. Higher Education Pedagogies, 6(1), 175–194.
Rossado Espinoza, V. P., Cárdenas Salas, D. E., Cabrera Lau, A., & Coronel, L. (2021). Valdez, M. T., Ferreira, C. M., Martins, M. J. M., & Barbosa, F. M. (2014). Virtual labs in
Virtual reality and BIM methodology as teaching-learning improvement tools for sanitary electrical engineering education-the VEMA environment. 2014 information technology
engineering courses. based higher education and training (ITHET).
Roy, M., & Chi, M. T. (2005). The self-explanation principle in multimedia learning. The Valentine, A., Van der Veen, T., Kenworthy, P., Hassan, G. M., Guzzomi, A. L.,
Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 271–286). Khan, R. N., & Male, S. A. (2021). Using head mounted display virtual reality
Salah, B., Abidi, M. H., Mian, S. H., Krid, M., Alkhalefah, H., & Abdo, A. (2019). Virtual simulations in large engineering classes: Operating vs observing. Australasian Journal
reality- based engineering education to enhance manufacturing sustainability in of Educational Technology, 37(3), 119–136.
industry 4.0. Sustainability, 11(5), 1477. Vogt, A., Babel, F., Hock, P., Baumann, M., & Seufert, T. (2021). Prompting in-depth
Salzman, M. C., Dede, C., Loftin, R. B., & Chen, J. (1999). A model for understanding how learning in immersive virtual reality: Impact of an elaboration prompt on developing
virtual reality aids complex conceptual learning [article]. Presence: Teleoperators and a mental model. Computers & Education, 171, Article 104235.
Virtual Environments, 8(3), 293–316. Wang, A., Thompson, M., Uz-Bilgin, C., & Klopfer, E. (2021). Authenticity, interactivity,
Savadatti, S., & Johnsen, K. (2017). Exploring a virtual reality simulation to aid inductive and collaboration in virtual reality games: Best practices and lessons learned
learning of fluid pressure characteristics. 2017 ASEE annual conference & exposition, [original research]. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 2.
schuster. Wang, P., Wu, P., Wang, J., Chi, H.-L., & Wang, X. (2018). A critical review of the use of
Schuster, K., Plumanns, L., Groß, K., Vossen, R., Richert, A., & Jeschke, S. (2015). virtual reality in construction engineering education and training. International
Preparing for Industry 4.0–Testing collaborative virtual learning environments with Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(6), 1204.
students and professional trainers. International journal of advanced corporate learning, Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4),
8(4), 14. 625–636.
Seufert, T. (2018). The interplay between self-regulation in learning and cognitive load. Wittrock, M. C. (1974). Learning as a generative process. Educational Psychologist, 11(2),
Educational Research Review, 24, 116–129. 87–95.
Singh, G., Mantri, A., Sharma, O., & Kaur, R. (2021). Virtual reality learning environment Wylie, R., & Chi, M. T. (2014). 17 the self-explanation principle in multimedia learning (p.
for enhancing electronics engineering laboratory experience. Computer Applications 413). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning.
in Engineering Education, 29(1), 229–243. Xu, X., & Wang, F. (2022). Engineering lab in immersive VR—an embodied approach to
Streveler, R. A., Litzinger, T. A., Miller, R. L., & Steif, P. S. (2008). Learning conceptual training wafer preparation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(2),
knowledge in the engineering sciences: Overview and future research directions. 455–480.
Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 279–294. Yang, J., Liu, F., Wang, J., Kou, Z., Zhu, A., & Yao, D. (2021). Effect of virtual reality
Stuchlíková, L., Kósa, A., Benko, P., & Juhász, P. (2017). Virtual reality vs. reality in technology on the teaching of urban railway vehicle engineering. Computer
engineering education. In 2017 15th international conference on emerging eLearning Applications in Engineering Education, 29(5), 1163–1175.
technologies and applications (ICETA). Zhang, X., Liu, J., Chen, Q., Song, H., Zhan, Q., & Lu, J. (2018). A 3D virtual Weft-
Sundararajan, N., & Adesope, O. (2020). Keep it coherent: A meta-analysis of the knitting Engineering learning system based on Unreal Engine 4. Computer
seductive details effect. Educational Psychology Review, 32(3), 707–734. Applications in Engineering Education, 26(6), 2223–2236.
Sweller, J. (2005a). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning (pp. Zheng, D., Schmidt, M. M., Hu, Y., Liu, M., & Hsu, J. (2017). Eco-dialogical learning and
19–30). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. translanguaging in open-ended 3D virtual learning environments: Where place, time,
Sweller, J. (2005b). The redundancy principle in multimedia learning. The Cambridge and objects matter. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5).
handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 159–167). Yusuf, M., & Safitri, R. (2021). The effect of learning model on integrated virtual reality
Sweller, J. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational to reduce misconceptions of geography concept in geography students. Journal of
Technology Research & Development, 68(1), 1–16. Physics: Conference Series, 1899(1), Article 012159.
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and
instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261–292.
12

Virtual Reality Assisted Engineering Education: A Multimedia Learning Perspective

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Virtual Reality Assisted Engineering Education: A Multimedia Learning Perspective

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Virtual Reality Assisted Engineering Education: A Multimedia Learning Perspective

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Computers & Education: X Reality 3 (2023) 100033

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers & Education: X Reality

Virtual reality assisted engineering education: A multimedia

Fig. 2. The growth of VR in engineering education.

Table 2 intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive loads (Sweller, 2005a).

Fig. 3. The Integration of Theoretical or Pedagogical Framework in VR research.

Fig. 4. A treemap showing the category of learning outcomes.

instructional material does not automatically guarantee meaningful 4.11.2. Elaboration

4.14. Study contributions As noted earlier, previous research on VR in engineering education

You might also like