No significant interaction between learning mode and learning style on gain scores, while the learning-mode main effect was significant¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2005 · checked against its sources 2026-10-16 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? The learning mode × learning style interaction was not significant (F(2, 177) = 1.762, p < 0.175), so the effect of learning mode did not depend on learning style. → Chwen Jen Chen 2005 q3 i2 The learning-mode main effect was significant with η2 = 0.199, while the learning-style main effect was not significant (F(1, 177) = 0.154, p < 0.695). → Chwen Jen Chen 2005

Evidence¶

Chwen Jen Chen 2005¶

Chwen Jen Chen, Seong Chong Toh, & Wan Mohd Fauzy Wan Ismail. (2005). Are Learning Styles Relevant To Virtual Reality? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(2). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ728898 doi:10.1080/15391523.2005.10782453

q3 · i? · causal · r2

A 3 by 2 two-way ANCOVA of gain score by learning mode and learning style with pre-test as covariate, on all 184 learners. Table 7 reports the learning-mode main effect η2 = 0.199 (Sig. 0.000) and the learning-style main effect η2 = 0.001 (Sig. 0.695); no effect size is printed for the interaction.

"The two-way ANCOVA results, as shown in Table 7 (page 136), indicated that the interaction between learning modes and learning styles was not signiﬁcant, F(2, 177)=1.762, p < 0.175."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

Learning-Style Preferences — moderator: an effect differed by reported style in this study; matching to style is not supported overall

Learning Styles Matching Does Not Improve Learning — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
Accommodator learners gained significantly more in the VR (guided exploration) mode than in VR (non-guided exploration) or Non VR modes — related
Assimilator learners gained significantly more in the VR (guided exploration) mode than in VR (non-guided exploration) or Non VR modes — related
In the VR (guided exploration) mode, assimilator and accommodator learners did not differ significantly in gain score — related
VR (non-guided exploration) did not differ significantly from Non VR for either assimilator or accommodator learners — related

Page metadata

Field	Value
`type`	`claim`
`id`	`no-mode-by-style-interaction-vr-gains`
`title`	`No significant interaction between learning mode and learning style on gain scores, while the learning-mode main effect was significant`
`description`	`No significant interaction between learning mode and learning style on gain scores, while the learning-mode main effect was significant`
`status`	`review`
`evidence_strength`	`moderate`
`newest_evidence`	`2005`
`source_checked`	`2026-10-16`
`generated`	by `process:wiki-ingest` on `2026-10-07`
`trust`	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
`sources`	1 — `chwen-jen-chen-2005`

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.