The impact of haptic feedback vibration in single-user and collaborative VR learning environment

Abstract

This research explores the impact of haptic feedback vibration in Virtual Reality Environments (VREs) in higher education. In particular, the study concentrates on the role of haptic feedback vibrations, investigating their overall impact during interactions in VREs and the specific effects of adaptable vibration settings that are activated by user errors in both single-user and Collaborative Virtual Environments (CVEs). The study conducts the exploration from both the educators’ and students’ perspectives. From the educators’ perspective, the research aims to identify: 1) impactful configurations of haptic feedback vibration in both single-user and collaborative VREs, including “asymmetric” collaboration (one learner in VR and another guiding) and “symmetric” collaboration (both learners in VR) scenarios; and 2) cognitive levels of learning tasks for which haptic feedback vibration would enhance the efficiency of the learning experience. From the learners’ perspective, the research aims to comprehend their experiences, perceptions, and preferences. This is a two-part quantitative study following the Design Science Research (DSR) approach. The first part is a controlled, quantitative quasi-experiment based on developed VRE and CVE for the single and multi-user parts, respectively. The aim is to capture the interaction between the participants in both settings and examine their performance compared to a traditional physical lab quiz. The second part is a quantitative survey (questionnaire) administered after the experiment, aiming to investigate the participants’ reflections and feedback. Two courses heavily utilising 3D models—Computer Information Science and Aviation Engineering—were chosen to develop the VREs/CVEs to enhance the generalisability of the findings. Each course included tasks targeting different cognitive levels: identifying components and assembling 3D models such as a PC or an aeroplane. Performance was evaluated based on correct interactions tracked on a virtual whiteboard. Afterwards, participants completed a survey. A non-probability convenience sample of 264 students from a major U.A.E. higher education institution participated. Of these, 102 Computer Science and 82 Aviation Engineering students took part in VRE/CVE experiments, while 80 took physical lab tests under the same conditions. Adaptable haptic feedback was randomly applied in VREs and universally in CVEs. The experimental study involved two dependent variables: the time to complete a task and the number of successes. Given that the data closely followed a normal distribution, the parametric statistical t-test for paired two samples for means was used to compare the results of the VREs and CVEs with those from the normal physical lab tests. The α levels were set at the standard 0.05 and the estimated test power was 0.8 for an effect size of 0.8. The quantitative part of the study, the survey, involved two additional research constructs: the preference for VRE/CVEs over physical labs and the participants’ reflections on the overall experience. The reliability of the participants’ responses was considered acceptable in cases where Cronbach’s Alpha was above 0.6. Overall, the participants favoured the VRE experience, expressing satisfaction, enjoyment, and a sense of competence. Adaptable haptic feedback, in particular, was recognised for enhancing the immersive experience. Collaborative CVEs further enriched their VR experience, particularly in the “asymmetric” mode, but also in the “symmetric” mode, suggesting improved teamwork skills through CVEs. Notably, participants preferred a blended approach, advocating for the incorporation of both VREs/CVEs and physical labs in the content delivery and assessment process. These findings have substantial implications for decision-making when planning the deployment of VREs/CVEs in content delivery and assessment within higher education institutions and are presented in the form of a set of recommendations towards decision-making in the conclusions of the thesis.