Using VR in education case study & role of creativity in experimental design

(seminar 2) (case study 1)

Project mobius

• to deliver learning experiences

• app which can teach 

  • one of these apps was the trolley problem 

Comparison of standard 2D and Virtual Reality-based teaching of moral dilemmas: the case of the Trolley Problem (Savickaite. & Gallagher)

• a case study

• quantitative aims

  • Assess moral judgment change using Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ) and Utilitarianism Scale

  • Explore immersion & emotional involvement

• qualitative aims 

  • Thematically analyze how 2D vs VR affects engagement. • Focus on affective, behavioural, and cognitive dimensions of learning moral dilemmas.

• Methodology

  • VR vs 2D version of the Trolley Problem

  • Quantitative: pre/post MFQ + Utilitarian Scale

  • Qualitative: semi-structured interviews, thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006)

• quantative findings

  • VR may shift p towards ulitarian reaosning but distract reflection

  • small MFQ change for 2D group, 

• qualitative findings

  • VR provided higher focus & sustained attention

    • higher stress, guilt even physiological arouasal 

    • induced deeper moral relfection

  • 2D was boring, was emotionally detached

    • more analyitcal and less emotionally involved

moral dilemmas

• situations where individuals must choose between conflicting moral values, resulting in the sacrifice of at least one

• help moral reasoning & are widely used in ethics/psychology education

trolley problem

• divert a train to save five people but kill one person on the other track

2D immersive education

• effective at improving retention & understdning but can lack emotional involvement (Shah & Khan, 2015)

VR immersive education (Savickaite & Simmons, 2022)

• creates immersive & emotionally engaging experiences

• but rarely used for teaching abstract moral concepts

VR vs 2D immersive education

•  VR increases affective and behavioural engagement

• 2D supports cognitive engagement more consistently.

• Findings support prior literature (Slater & Sanchez-Vives, 2016; Jennah et al., 2023) and highlight that presence doesn’t always equal learning.

• Supports Savickaite & Simmons (2022): VR must be combined with active learning and reflection to be effective

  • cannot just leave individuals within VR world, must have ability tor reflect

role of novelty in VR

• shapes how VR is experienced

• initial boosts engagement but can distract from moral reasoning

recommendations for increasing novelty in VR

• Combine VR with guided reflection

• Include onboarding to reduce novelty overload

• Use VR thoughtfully, not just for “wow factor.”