Multimedia and Immersive Training Materials Influence Impressions of Learning But Not Learning Outcomes
Authors:
Benjamin A. Clegg,
Alex Karduna,
Ethan Holen,
Jason Garcia,
Matthew G. Rhodes,
Francisco R. Ortega
Abstract:
Although the use of technologies like multimedia and virtual reality (VR) in training offer the promise of improved learning, these richer and potentially more engaging materials do not consistently produce superior learning outcomes. Default approaches to such training may inadvertently mimic concepts like naive realism in display design, and desirable difficulties in the science of learning - fo…
▽ More
Although the use of technologies like multimedia and virtual reality (VR) in training offer the promise of improved learning, these richer and potentially more engaging materials do not consistently produce superior learning outcomes. Default approaches to such training may inadvertently mimic concepts like naive realism in display design, and desirable difficulties in the science of learning - fostering an impression of greater learning dissociated from actual gains in memory. This research examined the influence of format of instructions in learning to assemble items from components. Participants in two experiments were trained on the steps to assemble a series of bars, that resembled Meccano pieces, into eight different shapes. After training on pairs of shapes, participants rated the likelihood they would remember the shapes and then were administered a recognition test. Relative to viewing a static diagram, viewing videos of shapes being constructed in a VR environment (Experiment 1) or viewing within an immersive VR system (Experiment 2) elevated participants' assessments of their learning but without enhancing learning outcomes. Overall, these findings illustrate how future workers might mistakenly come to believe that technologically advanced support improves learning and prefer instructional designs that integrate similarly complex cues into training.
△ Less
Submitted 7 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
Fast, Accurate, but Sometimes Too-Compelling Support: The Impact of Imperfectly Automated Cues in an Augmented Reality Head-Mounted Display on Visual Search Performance
Authors:
Amelia C. Warden,
Christopher D. Wickens,
Daniel Rehberg,
Francisco R. Ortega,
Benjamin A. Clegg
Abstract:
While visual search for targets within a complex scene might benefit from using augmented-reality (AR) head-mounted display (HMD) technologies hel** to efficiently direct human attention, imperfectly reliable automation support could manifest in occasional errors. The current study examined the effectiveness of different HMD cues that might support visual search performance and their respective…
▽ More
While visual search for targets within a complex scene might benefit from using augmented-reality (AR) head-mounted display (HMD) technologies hel** to efficiently direct human attention, imperfectly reliable automation support could manifest in occasional errors. The current study examined the effectiveness of different HMD cues that might support visual search performance and their respective consequences following automation errors. Fifty-six participants searched a 3D environment containing 48 objects in a room, in order to locate a target object that was viewed prior to each trial. They searched either unaided or assisted by one of three HMD types of cues: an arrow pointing to the target, a plan-view minimap highlighting the target, and a constantly visible icon depicting the appearance of the target object. The cue was incorrect on 17% of the trials for one group of participants and 100% correct for the second group. Through both analysis and modeling of both search speed and accuracy, the results indicated that the arrow and minimap cues depicting location information were more effective than the icon cue depicting visual appearance, both overall, and when the cue was correct. However, there was a tradeoff on the infrequent occasions when the cue erred. The most effective AR-based cue led to a greater automation bias, in which the cue was more often blindly followed without careful examination of the raw images. The results speak to the benefits of augmented reality and the need to examine potential costs when AR-conveyed information may be incorrect because of imperfectly reliable systems.
△ Less
Submitted 24 March, 2023;
originally announced March 2023.
