Immersive and non-immersive VR video formats showed no significant difference in learning success for clinical procedures, though immersive VR was rated more positively¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? One included quasi-experimental study found no significant difference in learning success between immersive and non-immersive VR groups for clinical procedure videos. → Stamer Tjorven 2026 q2 i? The immersive VR group rated the course more positively on clarity, learning atmosphere and overall satisfaction and was more likely to recommend it. → Stamer Tjorven 2026

Evidence¶

Stamer Tjorven 2026¶

Stamer Tjorven, Machinek Nora, Steinhäuser Jost, Goujard Mathilde, Flägel Kristina. (2026). The role of digital teaching methods in supporting practical skills training in the academic training of health professions – a scoping review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-08785-9

q2 · i? · causal · r?

Quasi-experimental study (Omlor et al., 2022) summarized in the review's VR table: students watched 3D clinical procedure videos via VR headsets or 2D on standard devices, then took knowledge and self-assessment tests. "No significant difference in learning success" was found; equivalence was not tested.

"No significant difference in learning success between the immersive and non-immersive groups was found. However, students in the immersive virtual reality group rated the course more positively in terms of clarity, learning atmosphere and overall satisfaction."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Immersive procedural training in VR shows a significant medium positive effect on learning outcomes compared to less immersive environments (Hedges' g = 0.58) — reports the opposite
• Immersion principle: people do not necessarily learn better in 3D immersive virtual reality than with a corresponding 2D desktop presentation (d = -0.10 across 9 tests) — related
• Review syntheses: VR/AR most often improved academic achievement and motivation, but sometimes performed no better than conventional technologies — related
• Immersion in virtual reality adds extraneous load yet can boost transfer, enjoyment, and motivation while leaving retention unaffected — related
• 3D virtual-reality lecture was statistically non-inferior to 2D lecture on knowledge and rated better on spatial understanding and enjoyment (Kockro et al.) — related