No difference in motivation between the iVR-orchestrated lesson and the student video design control group¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i1 Increases in intrinsic motivation did not differ between the iVR and control groups (ηp² = .023, non-significant). → P. Spangenberger 2025

Evidence¶

P. Spangenberger 2025¶

P. Spangenberger, N. Matthes, F. Kapp, L. Kruse, J. L. Plass. (2025). Orchestrating iVR technology in an authentic classroom setting and its effects on factual knowledge, comprehension and transfer. Education Tech Research Dev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10409-2

q2 · i1 · causal · r2

Repeated measures ANOVA on a six-item intrinsic motivation scale (ωpre = 0.803; ωpost = 0.832) in the classroom study. No significant interaction, F (1, 27) = .640, p = .431, η p2 = .023; Wilcoxon tests showed no significant within-group changes.

"The analysis did not show an interaction effect for time and condition (F (1, 27) = .640, p = .431, η p2 = .023), indicating that increases in motivation did not differ between groups"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The iVR-orchestrated lesson produced significantly stronger comprehension gains (troubleshooting procedure ordering) than the control group — related
• In an authentic vocational classroom setting, a lesson orchestrated around an iVR serious game produced significantly stronger factual knowledge gains than a student video design control group — related
• KBD configuration produced no significant between-condition differences in system acceptance, intrinsic motivation, or subjective learning effectiveness in a single tutoring session — related
• No difference in troubleshooting transfer (flashlight task) between the iVR and control groups — related