A Study of the Effects of Sensory Distraction on the Efficacy of Computer-Mediated Learning in Immersive 3-D Virtual Envir...
Brief Background <ul><li>An experiment to determine the extent to which varying levels of sensory distraction affect learn...
Test Subjects <ul><li>20 people divided into 4 groups </li></ul><ul><li>College students </li></ul><ul><li>Not selected ba...
Tech Requirements <ul><li>Technical Requirements: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1 PC running the Second Life VE </li></ul></ul><ul...
The Process
Room Setup <ul><li>Group 1 Setup: Well-lit room, LCD monitor, large open room, computer sound turned off, keyboard & mouse...
Pilot Experiment (testing the test) <ul><li>Only Groups 1-3 tested (due to lack of hardware availability) </li></ul><ul><l...
Pilot Experiment Results
Thoughts on Pilot Results <ul><li>The results of the assessment showed a pattern similar to what I expected to see (test s...
Thoughts on Pilot Results <ul><li>Although the “wandering around and looking at things” method used here is typical of vir...
References <ul><li>Bricken, Meredith. “Virtual worlds: No interface to design.” Ed. M. Benedikt.  Cyberspace: First steps ...
References <ul><li>Kirschner, Paul A. “Why Unguided Learning Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Discovery Learni...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

A Study of the Effects of Sensory Distraction on the Efficacy of Computer-Mediated Learning in Immersive 3-D Virtual Environments

506 views
448 views

Published on

Summary presentation. Full research is documented in my paper.

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
506
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

A Study of the Effects of Sensory Distraction on the Efficacy of Computer-Mediated Learning in Immersive 3-D Virtual Environments

  1. 1. A Study of the Effects of Sensory Distraction on the Efficacy of Computer-Mediated Learning in Immersive 3-D Virtual Environments Experiment Design Report Gavin Larson COMM 6270: Digital Rhetoric Fall 2009
  2. 2. Brief Background <ul><li>An experiment to determine the extent to which varying levels of sensory distraction affect learning efficacy in a virtual environment. </li></ul>
  3. 3. Test Subjects <ul><li>20 people divided into 4 groups </li></ul><ul><li>College students </li></ul><ul><li>Not selected based on age, gender, or area of study, but that information will be collected to enhance the data gathered from the experiment (and guide future experiments) </li></ul>
  4. 4. Tech Requirements <ul><li>Technical Requirements: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1 PC running the Second Life VE </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 Keyboard </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 Mouse </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 LCD monitor </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 Pair of external speakers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 Pair of circumaural headphones </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 Pair of Vuzix iWear VR920 Video Eyewear </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1 Belkin N52TE PC input device </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. The Process
  6. 6. Room Setup <ul><li>Group 1 Setup: Well-lit room, LCD monitor, large open room, computer sound turned off, keyboard & mouse for input </li></ul><ul><li>Group 2 Setup: Well-lit room, LCD monitor, closed room, external PC speakers for sound, keyboard & mouse for input </li></ul><ul><li>Group 3 Setup: Dark room, LCD monitor, closed room, circumaural isolation headphones for sound, keyboard & mouse for input </li></ul><ul><li>Group 4 Setup: Dark room, Vuzix device for visuals and sound, closed room, Belkin input device </li></ul>
  7. 7. Pilot Experiment (testing the test) <ul><li>Only Groups 1-3 tested (due to lack of hardware availability) </li></ul><ul><li>Nine participants (recruited from within SL), divided into three groups </li></ul><ul><li>Web-based assessment ( here ) used rather than pen & paper, because participants were distributed (and because pen & paper is a hassle) </li></ul>
  8. 8. Pilot Experiment Results
  9. 9. Thoughts on Pilot Results <ul><li>The results of the assessment showed a pattern similar to what I expected to see (test scores increasing as distraction decreases), but the difference between groups is much less pronounced than expected. Perhaps the addition of the 4 th group, and a larger set of test subjects in the “real” experiment would make the gaps between groups a little more clear. </li></ul>
  10. 10. Thoughts on Pilot Results <ul><li>Although the “wandering around and looking at things” method used here is typical of virtual environment learning, participants expressed some frustration with the ambiguity (lack of clear direction). It may be worthwhile to search for (or design) a more appropriate learning task. </li></ul>
  11. 11. References <ul><li>Bricken, Meredith. “Virtual worlds: No interface to design.” Ed. M. Benedikt. Cyberspace: First steps . Cambridge: MIT Press, (1992). </li></ul><ul><li>Bronack, Stephen C., et al. “Designing Virtual Worlds to Facilitate Meaningful Communication: Issues, Considerations, and Lessons Learned” Technical Communication 55.3 (2008): 261-267. </li></ul><ul><li>Bronack, Stephen C., et al. “Presence Pedagogy: Teaching and Learning in a 3D Virtual Immersive World” International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 20.1 (2008): 59-69. </li></ul><ul><li>Dickey, Michele D. “Three-dimensional virtual worlds and distance learning: two case studies of Active Worlds as a medium for distance eductation” British Journal of Educational Technology 36.3 (2005): 439-451. </li></ul><ul><li>Franceschi, Katherine G., and Ronald M. Lee. “Virtual Social Presence for Effective Collaborative E-Learning” Proceedings of the 11th Annual International Workshop on Presence . 2008. </li></ul><ul><li>Gabbard, Joseph L. A Taxonomy of Usability Characteristics in Virtual Environments . MS thesis Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1997. </li></ul>
  12. 12. References <ul><li>Kirschner, Paul A. “Why Unguided Learning Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Discovery Learning, Problem-Based Learning, Experiential Learning, and Inquiry-Based Learning” Educational Psychologist . 2004. </li></ul><ul><li>Martinez, Nicola. “Second Life: The Future of Communications?” Proceedings of the 55th Annual Conference of the Society for Technical Communication . 2008. </li></ul><ul><li>Padmanabhan, Poornima. “Exploring Human Factors in Virtual Worlds.” Technical Communication 55.3 (2008): 270-275. </li></ul><ul><li>Slater, Mel. “Measuring Presence: A Response to the Witmer and Singer Presence Questionnaire” Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 8.5 (1999): 560-565. </li></ul><ul><li>Witmer, Bob G., and Michael J. Singer. “Measuring Presence in Virtual Environments: A Presence Questionnaire” Presence 7.3 (1998): 225-240. </li></ul>

×