{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03153988868274583, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0055658627087198514, 'mean_word_length': 5.550607287449393, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Identifying the Optimal 3D Display Technology for Hands-On Virtual Experiential Learning: A Comparison Study

The purpose of this study was to test different 3D display technologies in a hands-on virtual experiential learning environment (VELE) and determine the optimal 3D display technology. A conceptual framework was firstly proposed to explain the mechanism of how VR display features affect virtual experiential learning. Then, a single-factor within-subject experimental design was adopted for testing. The within-subject factor was three types of 3D display technology: fully immersive virtual reality (VR) mode [VR head-mounted display (HMD)], partially immersive VR mode (3D projection), and augmented reality (AR) mode (AR HMD). The dependent variables were visual comfort, interaction experience, learning experience, and outcome. A virtual math learning environment was established, and the aforementioned display technologies were tested in two hands-on virtual experiential learning scenarios. Results showed that different display technologies significantly affected users’ visual comfort, interaction experience, learning experience, and outcome in experiential learning (ps < 0.05). User ratings on these aspects for the VR HMD were significantly higher than those for the 3D projection and AR HMD. Thus, the VR HMD contributes to a best viewing experience and learning experience in terms of hands-on virtual experiential learning in the scenarios tested. Whether the study results still hold reliably in terms of more complex learning activities and long-term learning needs to be further studied.