Reviewers of Educational Immersive and Extended Reality (XR) experiences: Who is creating these reviews and why?
0
🎲
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper presents a scoping review of literature to examine who is reviewing educational immersive or extended reality (eduXR) experiences and why.
- EduXR experiences in augmented, virtual, or mixed reality take many forms, from supporting manual training to engaging learners in conservation and providing opportunities for social connection.
- Reviews of eduXR experiences can help users determine whether an experience will meet their learning needs.
- The source of the review, including who the reviewer is and why they conducted the review, is critical in helping users judge the review's quality and relevance.
- There is currently no settled review system in place for eduXR, though relevant frameworks exist for serious games review with relevance and overlap for some, but not all, eduXR experiences.
- The authors conducted a scoping review to identify who is creating eduXR reviews and why.
Plain English Explanation
The paper looks at who is writing reviews of educational virtual reality and extended reality experiences, and why they are doing it. These experiences can take many forms, like helping people learn practical skills or allowing them to explore and learn about the natural world in an immersive environment.
Reviews of these experiences can be helpful for people trying to decide if a particular virtual reality or augmented reality experience will be a good fit for their learning needs. But the person writing the review and their reasons for doing so are important in understanding how reliable and relevant the review is.
There isn't currently a standardized system in place for reviewing these types of educational immersive experiences, although some frameworks exist for reviewing similar types of serious games. The authors wanted to better understand who is writing these reviews and why, to help people make more informed choices about the extended reality experiences they use for learning.
Technical Explanation
The paper conducts a scoping review to examine who is evaluating educational immersive or extended reality (eduXR) experiences, and the reasons behind their reviews. EduXR experiences encompass a range of applications in augmented, virtual, and mixed reality, serving diverse purposes such as manual training, environmental education, and facilitating social connections.
Reviews of eduXR experiences can provide valuable information to help users determine if a particular experience meets their learning needs. Critically, the source of the review, including the reviewer's background and motivations, is essential in assessing the review's quality and relevance.
Currently, there is no established review system for eduXR, though related frameworks for serious games evaluations have some overlap and applicability. Some authors have proposed detailed review structures for eduXR, but a clear and accessible way for users to understand reviewer details (who and why) is still needed to support informed decision-making about eduXR experiences.
To address this gap, the authors conducted a scoping review to identify who is creating eduXR reviews and their underlying reasons. The review analyzed 16 papers that present academic evaluations of the eduXR review process. Using thematic analysis, the authors coded the papers for "who" and "why" themes across two cycles, aiming to understand what enables, inhibits, and remains unknown about how the eduXR community reviews and selects the experiences they engage with.
Critical Analysis
The scoping review provides a valuable starting point for understanding the current landscape of eduXR reviews and the factors that shape them. By examining who is conducting these reviews and their motivations, the research lays the groundwork for developing more robust and transparent review systems that can better support users in making informed choices about eduXR experiences.
However, the study is limited to a relatively small sample of 16 academic papers, which may not fully capture the diverse range of review sources and perspectives within the broader eduXR community. Additionally, the thematic analysis approach, while useful for identifying high-level themes, may not provide a comprehensive understanding of the nuances and complexities involved in eduXR review practices.
Further research could explore the perspectives of eduXR users, developers, and other stakeholders to gain a more holistic understanding of the review ecosystem. Comparative analyses of review practices across different types of eduXR experiences, such as those focused on skills training versus those aimed at educational engagement, could also yield valuable insights.
Ultimately, the findings of this scoping review highlight the need for a more transparent and standardized approach to eduXR reviews, which could help users navigate the growing landscape of immersive learning experiences and make informed choices that align with their educational goals and needs.
Conclusion
This scoping review examined who is reviewing educational immersive or extended reality (eduXR) experiences and why. The authors found that the source and motivation behind eduXR reviews are critical factors in helping users determine the relevance and quality of the information provided.
While there is currently no settled review system for eduXR, the research identified a need for a clear and accessible way for users to understand key details about the reviewers, such as their background and reasons for conducting the review. By addressing this gap, the eduXR community can better support users in making informed choices about the immersive learning experiences they engage with.
The findings of this study provide a foundation for future research and the development of more robust review frameworks that can enhance the transparency and utility of eduXR evaluations, ultimately empowering learners to make the most of these innovative educational technologies.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🎲
0
Reviewers of Educational Immersive and Extended Reality (XR) experiences: Who is creating these reviews and why?
Sophie McKenzie, Shaun Bangay, Maria Nicholas, Adam Cardilini, Majeet Singh
This paper presents a scoping review of literature to examine who is reviewing educational immersive or extended reality - eduXR experiences and why. EduXR experiences in augmented, virtual or mixed reality take many forms, from supporting manual training, engaging learners in conservation, to provide opportunities for social connection. For users of eduXR, reviews of an experience can provide information that helps them determine whether it will meet their learning needs or not. The source of the review, that is, who they are and why they have conducted the review, is critical in helping the user judge the reviews quality and relevance. At present, there is no settled review system in place for eduXR, though relevant frameworks exist for serious games review with relevance and overlap for some, but not all, eduXR experiences. While some authors have engaged in preparing a detailed review structure for eduXR, there remains a need for a clear and simple way for users of eduXR to know details about reviewers, e.g., who and why, to help make it easier for users to identify relevant reviews and gain useful insight about eduXR experiences. To help address this issue, we conducted a scoping review asking the question; Who is creating eduXR reviews, and why? We identified 16 papers that present an academic evaluation on the review process of eduXR reviews. The 16 papers were analysed, coding for who themes and why themes over two separate cycles, using thematic analysis. An analysis looked to examine what we know regarding who is providing the reviews, and why, to help us to understand what enables, inhibits and what is yet unknown about how the eduXR community goes about making informed choices regarding the eduXR experiences they engage with.
Read more7/8/2024
📈
0
Extended Reality for Mental Health Evaluation -A Scoping Review
Omisore Olatunji, Ifeanyi Odenigbo, Joseph Orji, Amelia Beltran, Nilufar Baghaei, Meier Sandra, Rita Orji
Mental health disorders are the leading cause of health-related problems globally. It is projected that mental health disorders will be the leading cause of morbidity among adults as the incidence rates of anxiety and depression grows globally. Recently, extended reality (XR), a general term covering virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and mixed reality (MR), is paving a new way to deliver mental health care. In this paper, we conduct a scoping review on the development and application of XR in the area of mental disorders. We performed a scoping database search to identify the relevant studies indexed in Google Scholar, PubMed, and the ACM Digital Library. A search period between August 2016 and December 2023 was defined to select articles related to the usage of VR, AR, and MR in a mental health context. We identified a total of 85 studies from 27 countries across the globe. By performing data analysis, we found that most of the studies focused on developed countries such as the US (16.47%) and Germany (12.94%). None of the studies were for African countries. The majority of the articles reported that XR techniques led to a significant reduction in symptoms of anxiety or depression. More studies were published in the year 2021, i.e., 31.76% (n = 31). This could indicate that mental disorder intervention received a higher attention when COVID-19 emerged. Most studies (n = 65) focused on a population between 18 and 65 years old, only a few studies focused on teenagers (n = 2). Also, more studies were done experimentally (n = 67, 78.82%) rather than by analytical and modeling approaches (n = 8, 9.41%). This shows that there is a rapid development of XR technology for mental health care. Furthermore, these studies showed that XR technology can effectively be used for evaluating mental disorders in similar or better way as the conventional approaches.
Read more4/12/2024
0
Working in Extended Reality in the Wild: Worker and Bystander Experiences of XR Virtual Displays in Real-World Settings
Leonardo Pavanatto, Verena Biener, Jennifer Chandran, Snehanjali Kalamkar, Feiyu Lu, John J. Dudley, Jinghui Hu, G. Nikki Ramirez-Saffy, Per Ola Kristensson, Alexander Giovannelli, Luke Schlueter, Jorg Muller, Jens Grubert, Doug A. Bowman
Although access to sufficient screen space is crucial to knowledge work, workers often find themselves with limited access to display infrastructure in remote or public settings. While virtual displays can be used to extend the available screen space through extended reality (XR) head-worn displays (HWD), we must better understand the implications of working with them in public settings from both users' and bystanders' viewpoints. To this end, we conducted two user studies. We first explored the usage of a hybrid AR display across real-world settings and tasks. We focused on how users take advantage of virtual displays and what social and environmental factors impact their usage of the system. A second study investigated the differences between working with a laptop, an AR system, or a VR system in public. We focused on a single location and participants performed a predefined task to enable direct comparisons between the conditions while also gathering data from bystanders. The combined results suggest a positive acceptance of XR technology in public settings and show that virtual displays can be used to accompany existing devices. We highlighted some environmental and social factors. We saw that previous XR experience and personality can influence how people perceive the use of XR in public. In addition, we confirmed that using XR in public still makes users stand out and that bystanders are curious about the devices, yet have no clear understanding of how they can be used.
Read more8/20/2024
📉
0
Systematic Review of Extended Reality for Smart Built Environments Lighting Design Simulations
Elham Mohammadrezaei, Shiva Ghasemi, Poorvesh Dongre, Denis Gracanin, Hongbo Zhang
This systematic literature review paper explores the use of extended reality {(XR)} technology for smart built environments and particularly for smart lighting systems design. Smart lighting is a novel concept that has emerged over a decade now and is being used and tested in commercial and industrial built environments. We used PRISMA methodology to review 270 research papers published from 1968 to 2023. Following a discussion of historical advances and key modeling techniques, a description of lighting simulation in the context of extended reality and smart built environment is given, followed by a discussion of the current trends and challenges.
Read more5/14/2024