4.6 Review

A review of the evidence for training effectiveness with virtual reality technology

Journal

VIRTUAL REALITY
Volume 25, Issue 4, Pages 919-933

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s10055-020-00498-8

Keywords

Training effectiveness; Virtual reality; Virtual environment; Psychomotor; Knowledge acquisition; Spatial ability

Funding

  1. [N6833519-C-0089]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Prior evaluations need to be conducted before adopting new technologies for training to showcase their benefits, with virtual reality being a promising tool that enhances knowledge, skills, and abilities. Recommendations are provided to utilize VR training systems for achieving training outcomes effectively.
Prior to adopting new technologies for training, evaluations must be executed to demonstrate their benefit. Specifically, the appeal of virtual reality has led to applications across domains. While many evaluations have been conducted on their effectiveness, there has yet been a review to summarize and categorize the evidence on training outcomes. To assess the benefits these new technologies may bring to the trainee, a review of the research on the training effectiveness with virtual reality (VR) technology that was conducted. The goal for this review was to take a domain-agnostic perspective to identify the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) that have been trained effectively or enhanced with the use of VR. This review searched the related literature within multiple databases and found publications that met the search criteria from 1992 to 2019. A discussion of previous VR training reviews is first presented, followed by an in-depth evaluation of the literature that met the inclusion criteria. Three distinct categories of KSAs were identified consistently: psychomotor performance, knowledge acquisition, and spatial ability. Recommendations to support achievement of training outcomes utilizing VR training systems are provided.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available