Beyond Traditional Classrooms: Comparing Virtual Reality Applications and Their Influence on Students’ Motivation

Abstract

This study examines the impact of virtual reality (VR) on student motivation in education, emphasizing its potential to create immersive learning environments that enhance engagement and learning outcomes. By adopting a quantitative approach, the research investigates the motivational effects of two VR applications among 52 high school students in Mexico, exploring variations in motivation across four dimensions—attention, relevance, satisfaction, and confidence—and assessing gender-based differences. Results indicate improvements in all dimensions, particularly in attention and satisfaction, which are crucial for intrinsic motivation. Female students showed superior results in all dimensions, suggesting gender-specific impacts. The study underscores VR’s role in fostering motivation and offers practical recommendations for integrating VR technology in educational settings to maximize their benefits for student engagement and motivation. Possible limitations that should be considered to optimize its use are also identified. This research aims to provide valuable guidance for educators, researchers, and educational institutions seeking to harness VR technology for improved engagement and motivation in education.

1. Introduction

The use of VR has gained significant interest in the field of education due to its ability to create immersive environments where students can interact with educational content. This technology is applicable across all levels of education, from primary to university [1]. VR enhances the student experience by displaying realistic virtual environments that enable the exploration of concepts, providing a more engaging and effective learning space and facilitating innovative pedagogical methods [2,3]. Among the benefits of using VR in education are improved learning outcomes and increased student motivation [4]. However, challenges remain, such as the need for further research and development and limited access to VR devices [5]. Despite these challenges, VR technology is poised to become more widely used in the future.

VR continues to lead the way in the use of emerging technologies in education. According to the Horizon 2023 report, VR and augmented reality stand out as powerful tools among the technologies expected to have a lasting impact on the educational system. These technologies extend the learning experience beyond the traditional classroom by allowing students to engage with real-world scenarios in a more immersive manner [6]. Such immersion enhances student engagement by offering active learning experiences and interactions with objects and activities that traditional teaching methods cannot provide, leading to greater motivation and commitment to the learning material [7,8]. However, achieving these benefits requires the use of applications tailored to various academic content. While numerous VR applications are available, only a few are specifically designed to address distinct academic subjects, presenting a challenge for their integration into courses.

The integration of VR applications for educational purposes presents significant challenges for teachers and educational institutions, primarily due to cost constraints and infrastructure requirements. It is essential to explore emerging technologies applications that are not only accessible but also suitable for integration into curricula [9]. Additionally, these applications must feature content that is relevant and engaging, aligning with students’ interests to enhance their motivation and engagement [10]. Lorenz et al. [11] note that there are few studies analyzing the factors that could influence students’ immersive experiences. Therefore, there is a pressing need to identify whether students will have a positive experience using these applications from their own perspective.

In

Table 1. Comparison of studies related to VR.

Study	Strengths	Limitations	How Does Our Study Contribute?
Jiang et al. [2]	Analyzes the practical applications of VR in education and explores how it can be adapted to different types of knowledge.	Does not thoroughly explore the economic and logistical barriers that could prevent widespread adoption of VR.	Our study explores applications that are accessible and can be integrated into course curricula, including possible limitations in their use.
Rafiq et al. [7]	Identified the capability of VR to enhance student engagement by creating immersive and realistic experiences that simulate real-world work environments.	Requires analysis of learning objectives to ensure that VR is the appropriate tool.	Our study provides recommendations on how to use VR applications in the classroom, specifically addressing each dimension of the ARCS model.
Santos et al. [8]	Explores how VR can influence interest, motivation, and student engagement in the learning process.	The study focused solely on a chemistry class. Further research is needed to determine if the results can be replicated in other subjects.	Our study reviews two courses with two different applications to understand differences in student motivation across various subjects.
Bawa & Bawa [10]	Analyzes how educators can enhance VR experiences within curricula.	The use of VR poses challenges in creating more immersive and engaging educational spaces.	Our study proposes a tool to assess the impact of VR on educational processes and provides recommendations for its application, considering gender differences among participants.
Lorenz et al. [11]	Jointly investigates the effects of age and gender on presence, user experience, and usability in virtual reality.	The authors acknowledge that the literature investigating the relationship between age and gender in VR use is very limited and requires further research.	Our study aims to contribute to this topic by identifying whether gender differences exist in VR experiences.

, the main strengths and limitations of studies found in the literature on the use of VR in education are compared, and we discuss how our study addresses these limitations.

The main gap in the literature addressed by this study is the lack of research on the practical and accessible implementation of VR applications in various educational settings, with a particular focus on adaptability to curricula and the consideration of gender differences in student responses to these technologies. This study seeks to answer the question: How does the implementation of virtual reality applications influence the motivation of high school students, and what are the gender differences? It aims to provide recommendations for the use of VR across various disciplines. The study’s innovative contribution lies in its comprehensive examination of the impact of VR on student motivation across different academic domains, considering practical implementation aspects and potential gender differences. This research aims to offer valuable recommendations for educators, researchers, and educational institutions seeking to leverage VR technology to enhance engagement and motivation in education.

1.1. Use of Virtual Reality in Education

Virtual reality has been increasingly used in education. According to Mustafa [12], VR is valuable for safely understanding and learning various concepts, including gene modeling, laboratory experiments, surgical procedures, and more. Additionally, VR experiences are often more desirable than real ones, especially when access to the object or context is difficult, impossible, risky, or costly. Authors such as Di Natale et al. [13] highlight that the main advantage of VR in education is its ability to provide users with experiences that would otherwise not be possible, fostering experiential learning and enhancing student motivation and engagement. Therefore, its application in educational environments holds significant promise.

The use of VR has been extensively researched across various disciplines. VR is defined as a computer-generated simulation of real life that can be accessed through head-mounted displays or other devices, such as glasses or applications that project virtual images onto a mobile device [14]. While research on its use to enhance learning experiences has increased in recent years, a gap remains in understanding how educators and administrators can effectively utilize this technology in their classes without specialized knowledge [15,16]. Therefore, it is necessary to provide tools and resources that enable teachers to integrate VR into their curricula effectively.

When using VR in education, it is crucial to consider the pedagogical aspects of instructional design. According to Antón-Sancho et al. [17], employing VR in educational settings requires not only technical knowledge but also technopedagogical skills to facilitate highly meaningful learning experiences. Further exploration of interdisciplinary comparisons can enrich our understanding of how VR enhances learning by examining its application and effectiveness across various educational contexts [18]. By utilizing a comprehensive approach that integrates pedagogical expertise with technological proficiency, educational settings can unlock the true potential of immersive learning experiences, thereby enhancing student motivation and interest.

1.2. Impact on Student Motivation through the Use of VR

VR has been shown to positively impact student motivation. The incorporation of advanced technologies has consistently been found to increase motivation in learning [19,20,21,22]. In a study conducted with pre-service teachers in higher education, participants used an application to recreate 3D city scenarios and reconstruct historical sites [23]. Using an adaptation of Keller’s Instructional Material Motivational Survey (IMMS) instrument, the study identified higher results in overall motivation and in the attention dimension, followed by satisfaction. In terms of gender differences, women had higher average scores than men in three out of four dimensions—attention, relevance, and satisfaction—while men only scored higher in confidence. However, no significant gender differences were found in overall motivation or relevance.

In another study involving both graduate and undergraduate students, VR resources were utilized to visualize geometric objects from various angles. This approach was designed to aid engineering students in understanding representation exercises [24]. The use of this technology led to an increase in overall motivation among participants. Similarly to the previous study, the IMMS instrument was employed to measure motivation across its four dimensions. In this study, although men exhibited higher means, particularly in the satisfaction dimension, the results did not reveal any significant gender differences in any of the subscales.

Lastly, a study conducted in a chemistry course demonstrated an improvement in student motivation, with the most positive results observed in the dimensions of attention and satisfaction, followed by confidence and relevance [8]. The use of VR applications and devices like Oculus Go enabled students to interact with images representing concepts that are challenging to grasp through traditional methods. This study, which also employed the Instructional Material Motivational Survey (IMMS) to measure motivation, found that female students had a more favorable response across all dimensions. However, a significant difference was noted only in the attention dimension, favoring women. The goal of this study was to compare two VR applications in two different courses to identify features that teachers can use to enhance student motivation through immersive methodologies. These methodologies not only appeal to students but also facilitate their understanding of complex concepts. Additionally, the study aimed to identify gender differences across various dimensions of the instrument.

1.3. Characteristics for the Use of VR in Education

VR applications have the potential to significantly enhance student engagement and classroom outcomes. By immersing students in environments that closely simulate the real world, these applications provide a self-directed, safe setting for exploration without constant teacher oversight [25], while also emphasizing the essential role of student participation in learning and motivation [26]. VR creates a three-dimensional world, allowing students to see, hear, touch, and interact with virtual objects, fostering a sense of direct participation and exploratory learning [27]. Utilizing VR to create immersive and interactive experiences promotes active learning and engagement, leading to increased student involvement [28]. Additionally, VR facilitates the simulation of scientific experiments and the reproduction of complex concepts in the classroom.

VR applications can be integrated across various subjects to enhance students’ learning experiences. When selecting the most suitable applications, key aspects such as the integration of virtual reality into curricula and evaluating which environments yield the best results for students must be considered [29]. Additionally, the need for hardware to access these applications should be taken into account. The authors suggest designing activities of short duration to ensure that electronic devices are accessible to everyone in the classroom [30]. Although some studies have analyzed existing VR applications, few provide recommendations for effectively selecting these for educational settings.

Educators can make informed decisions when choosing VR applications for the classroom. A structured analysis of available applications should be conducted, reviewing current market options and categorizing them based on design elements and learning content [31]. Authors like Smutny [32] recommend exploring platforms such as Meta Quest educational apps to review the application catalogue and identify those associated with relevant content [33]. Stecula also suggests using the Steam platform for accessing application data [34,35]. Additionally, considering user reviews can help identify the most appreciated and potentially effective applications in the classroom, as well as pinpoint specific learning domains that align with educational objectives [36].

This study aims to explore and compare the impact of VR applications on student motivation across different disciplines. A significant contribution of this research is the comparative analysis of two VR applications in different academic courses, focusing on their immersive capabilities and the resulting motivation levels among students. By examining the impact of VR on motivation through the lens of Keller’s ARCS model [37], the study seeks to provide specific insights into how VR can effectively enhance student engagement and motivation.

This study is grounded in Keller’s ARCS model, which comprises four critical elements for fostering motivation in educational environments: attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction [37]. The four dimensions of Keller’s ARCS motivation model are detailed below [8].

• Attention: This dimension refers to capturing and maintaining Student’s attention or interest. To keep interest high, teachers must use various strategies to create varied and exciting lessons.
• Relevance: This dimension focuses on the relevance of the course in relation to the goals and needs of the students. It is essential that students perceive the content offered in the teaching–learning process as related to their interests.
• Confidence: This dimension involves students having confidence in their ability to succeed in learning (expectation of success). Teachers should create a favorable environment that allows students to communicate their expectations during the lesson.
• Satisfaction: Students should feel satisfied with their achievements in the learning opportunity. Intrinsic motivation is one of the most important elements of satisfaction and is difficult to influence. However, extrinsic motivation is easier to influence, primarily through the use of feedback.

Each of these components plays an essential role in designing learning experiences that not only capture students’ attention but also highlight the relevance of the content, build confidence in their learning abilities, and ensure they are satisfied with the process and outcomes of their education.

The study also addresses the need to consider gender differences in motivation and engagement when utilizing VR applications in educational settings. Understanding how gender may influence the effectiveness and reception of VR-based learning experiences is a valuable aspect that could contribute to designing more inclusive and effective educational interventions using VR. Furthermore, the study emphasizes the importance of considering practical aspects, such as hardware accessibility and the selection of VR applications tailored to specific educational objectives. This practical perspective is essential for educators and institutions seeking to integrate VR effectively into their curricula.

2. Methods

In this research, a quasi-experimental study was conducted using two VR applications across two different study groups, both led by the same instructor. The research design is quantitative, exploratory, and descriptive. The VR applications were used in English. The VR implementation was guided by an instrument based on Keller’s four dimensions of motivation [37]. The sample consisted of 52 final-semester high school students studying physics and an introduction to biomedical sciences at a private institution in Mexico. Each group comprised 15 female and 11 male students. Data analysis involved descriptive and inferential statistics to assess student motivation when using VR in the classroom and to identify any significant gender-related differences among the participants.

2.1. Instrument

The instrument used was an adaptation of the IMMS based on Keller’s ARCS model [37], which encompasses four study dimensions: attention, captured through situations that surprise students; relevance, assessed when students consider the materials valuable for their learning process; confidence, perceived by students based on their expectations of success; and satisfaction, experienced when students feel that the outcome of their effort met their expectations. The instrument consisted of 36 Likert scale questions, divided as follows: twelve for attention, nine for relevance, nine for confidence, and six for satisfaction. It was administered at the end of the immersive experience using the Socrative application.

The reliability of the instrument was validated using Cronbach’s alpha. In the physics course, the values for the attention, confidence, and satisfaction dimensions were above 0.8, indicating excellent reliability. Cronbach’s alpha value for the relevance dimension was 0.78, suggesting good reliability. Additionally, the overall reliability for the instrument was 0.95. In the biomedical course, the values for each dimension also indicated very good reliability, with the total reliability score being 0.97, closely mirroring its application in the physics course.

2.2. Description of the Educational Experience

The VR applications used in the study were chosen based on their relevance to the specific curricular content of the physics and biomedical sciences courses where the study was implemented. Applications offering immersive and educational experiences that directly aligned with the course topics were selected. For instance, the Epic Roller Coasters application was used in the physics course to illustrate concepts of energy and motion, while the Human Anatomy application was used in the biomedical sciences course to explore human anatomy in detail.

During the experience, 64 GB Oculus Go Virtual Reality headsets were used, loaded with the Epic Roller Coasters and Human Anatomy applications. The institution possesses an adequate inventory of these headsets, allowing each student in the study to have access to an individual device during the sessions. This availability reflects a significant prior investment by the institution in educational technology, aimed at enriching learning through advanced and accessible resources. With each student having access to their own VR headset, an immersive and continuous learning experience was facilitated without the need for rotation or sharing equipment. This setup is ideal for maximizing effective learning time and minimizing interruptions. The mode of individual use also allows for the customization of learning experiences to suit the needs and learning paces of each student.

In the physics course, the Epic Roller Coasters application was utilized to achieve specific learning outcomes (Figure 1). Epic Roller Coasters is a virtual reality application designed to provide users with an immersive experience of riding roller coasters [33]. Some key features of the application include the following.

• Variety of roller coasters: The application offers a variety of roller coasters, each featuring distinct designs and characteristics such as twists, drops, and loops. These elements are crafted to closely mimic the physical sensations of real-world roller coasters, enhancing the overall immersive experience.
• Advanced graphic capabilities: The application’s advanced graphics create a highly realistic environment, contributing to a more engaging and lifelike experience for users.
• Interactive elements: Users can engage with the surrounding environment within the application, adding a layer of personalization and engagement that enriches the virtual experience.

The application is accessible on several platforms, including Meta Quest, Oculus Rift, and PlayStation, offering a range of uniquely designed roller coasters that simulate the intense thrill typically associated with these attractions.

This application was utilized in the study to create an immersive learning environment for physics students. The application features a predefined trajectory with predetermined timing, allowing users to select their vehicle for the ride and decide whether to include a virtual companion.

In the context of the study, students engaged with the application by experiencing various emotions as the roller coaster simulated realistic features such as high points, jumps, rapid and steep descents, and wide curves. These features were critical in helping students observe and analyze changes in height and speed, which are fundamental aspects of the law of conservation of energy. By closely observing the roller coasters trajectory, students were able to answer questions related to the behavior of these variables, thereby enhancing their understanding of key physics concepts.

The integration of Epic Roller Coasters into the educational setting underscores the application’s potential to engage students in active learning through immersive experiences that closely mimic real-world scenarios. The application’s design facilitated an interactive approach to teaching physics, making abstract concepts more tangible and accessible to students.

In the biomedical course, the Human Anatomy application was utilized (Figure 2). The Human Anatomy application is an immersive and educational tool available on Meta Quest designed to facilitate learning about the human body through virtual reality. The application features interactive 3D anatomical models that allow users to visualize and explore the complex structures of the human body [33]. With advanced graphic capabilities, the application provides a highly immersive environment, making the study of anatomy more engaging and effective. Users can interact with these models by rotating, zooming in, and examining different parts of the body, which facilitates a deeper understanding of various systems, including the skeletal, muscular, and circulatory systems.

The Human Anatomy application was utilized to allow students to explore the central nervous system in great detail. Within the application, students had full control over navigation, enabling them to choose their own path for specific observations. They could rotate the human body, zoom in on images, and select various types of tissue to view, such as arteries, veins, nerves, and other structures. This interactive approach allowed students to engage deeply with the material by observing anatomical features and answering questions based on their observations, using an activity provided in printed form. The application’s detailed visualizations and interactive capabilities significantly enhanced students’ understanding of complex anatomical concepts, making it an invaluable tool in the educational setting.

The alignment of the applications with learning objectives was a meticulous process that involved reviewing the educational content of the applications to ensure they complemented and enriched the existing curricula. The interactive features and immersive environments of the applications were evaluated for their potential to enhance students’ understanding and retention of key concepts. Additionally, consideration was given to how these tools could foster critical skills such as analytical thinking and problem-solving within real and applicable contexts.

The process of selecting and aligning the VR applications involved close collaboration with the instructor of the courses. The educator played a crucial role in the evaluative process, providing feedback on the educational relevance of the applications and their perceived effectiveness in previous classes. This collaboration with the researchers ensured that the selected applications were pedagogically sound, effective in achieving the desired educational objectives, and appropriate for the comprehension level and needs of high school students. The instructor involved in the study was selected based on their prior experience and familiarity with VR technologies.

This innovation was implemented in two final-semester high school groups, for both physics and biomedical subjects, during the January–May 2023 semester, both taught by the same instructor. After completing the activity, students were asked to respond to a survey to gauge their perception of the experience. The study design focused on a single post-intervention survey, allowing for the capture of students’ immediate perceptions of the effectiveness of VR and providing valuable insights into its direct impact on student motivation.

3. Results

3.1. Descriptive Statistics

To assess the results of motivation as measured by the instrument used, the responses of students who rated the use of each application as positive or very positive were compared. The results are shown in Figure 3. On average, 75% of the students in the physics course had a positive or very positive response to the application used in their course, while in the biomedical course, the response was 69.5%.

The results indicate that the level of satisfaction was higher for both courses, with 79.9% in physics and 75.9% in biomedicine. Across all dimensions, the physics course achieved the highest results. The lowest result was observed in the biomedical course, where 58.6% of students indicated confidence in using the application, compared to 73% of students in the physics course. The following sections will provide a more detailed analysis of each of the dimensions.

3.1.1. Attention

The dimension of attention refers to the ability of the experience to capture students’ attention. The items in the questionnaire are designed to evaluate the capacity of the educational material to capture and maintain students’ attention, as well as their interest in the content presented. These items include assessments of the visual appeal and organization of the materials, the quality and style of the writing, and whether elements such as the variety of materials and surprises in the learning process contributes to greater engagement. The results for this dimension are presented in

Table 2. Responses of the subjects on the attention dimension for both courses.

Results	Physics	Biomedicine
Very positive	52.7%	49.2%
Positive	24.7%	24.9%
Neutral	13.8%	15.2%
Negative	6.7%	8.1%
Very negative	2.1%	2.6%

.

The results show that in both the biomedical and physics courses, the majority of students had positive experiences with the material presented. A high percentage of responses—74.1% in the biomedical course and 77.4% in the physics course—were rated as positive or very positive, indicating strong acceptance of both the teaching method and content in these courses.

The percentage of negative and very negative responses was considerably low, with only 10.7% in the biomedical course and 8.8% in the physics course, reinforcing the perception that the educational experience was largely favorable. However, the biomedical course showed a slightly higher proportion of students who were undecided or neutral, which may suggest variability in how different aspects of the course were received or indicate possible areas of uncertainty that could be explored for future improvements.

3.1.2. Relevance

Relevance refers to the students’ perception of the usefulness of the experience in achieving a better understanding of the course content. The relevance items in the questionnaire are designed to evaluate how students perceive the connection between the lesson material and their prior knowledge, personal interests, and practical applicability. These items aim to capture various dimensions of relevance that can influence motivation and effective learning.

The results from the biomedical and physics courses indicate that the majority of students positively valued the relevance of the material presented in their respective lessons. In the biomedical course, 69.3% of the responses were positive or very positive regarding the relevance of the content, while in physics, this figure slightly increased to 71%. Both courses had a minority of negative responses, with 10.8% in biomedical and 7.4% in physics, highlighting potential areas for improving the alignment of the content with students’ needs and expectations. Additionally, a considerable percentage of students in both courses maintained a neutral opinion—19.9% in biomedical and 21.6% in physics. The results are displayed in

Table 3. Responses of the subjects on the relevance dimension for both courses.

Results	Physics	Biomedicine
Very positive	41.8%	40.7%
Positive	29.2%	28.6%
Neutral	21.6%	19.9%
Negative	6.0%	9.1%
Very negative	1.4%	1.7%

.

These findings underscore the importance of continually evaluating and adjusting educational materials to maximize their relevance and connection with students across different academic disciplines, thereby fostering greater student engagement and satisfaction.

3.1.3. Confidence

Confidence refers to the students’ assurance when interacting with the application, enabling them to successfully complete the assigned activity. The items used to evaluate confidence in the questionnaire are designed to measure students’ perceptions of their ability to understand and manage the educational material presented in the lessons. These items address both the students’ initial reactions to the material and their confidence in learning as they progress through the lesson.

When combining the percentages of positive and very positive responses, they amount to 58.6% for the biomedical course and 73% for the physics course out of the total responses. The negative and very negative responses account for 15.5% in the biomedical course and 10.8% in the physics course. The percentage of students with a neutral opinion was higher in biomedicine, reaching 25.9%, compared to 16.2% in physics. The responses are presented in

Table 4. Responses of the subjects on the confidence dimension for both courses.

Results	Physics	Biomedicine
Very positive	44.1%	31.5%
Positive	28.9%	27.1%
Neutral	16.2%	25.9%
Negative	8.6%	9.5%
Very negative	2.2%	6.0%

.

The very positive responses differ between the two subjects, with greater acceptance among physics students. Neutral responses are more prevalent in the biomedical course, while the overall negative and very negative results are more favorable in the physics course. For the confidence dimension, there is a positive trend; however, the individual responses show less similarity compared to the patterns observed in the previous two dimensions. In this dimension, the difference was more pronounced, with the physics course scoring 14.4% higher.

3.1.4. Satisfaction

Satisfaction refers to the joy or delight that students experience when participating in the activity. These items focus on evaluating the students’ affective experience with the educational material, which is crucial for understanding not only the educational effectiveness of the content but also its emotional impact on students. This understanding is essential for designing motivating and enriching learning experiences. When combining the percentages of positive and very positive responses, they amount to 75.9% for the biomedical course and 79.9% for the physics course out of the total responses. The negative and very negative responses account for 8.4% in the biomedical course and 4.9% in the physics course. The percentage of students with a neutral opinion was similar in both courses. The responses are presented in

Table 5. Responses of the subjects on the satisfaction dimension for both courses.

	Physics	Biomedicine
Very positive	52.7%	52.3%
Positive	27.2%	23.6%
Neutral	15.2%	15.7%
Negative	4.0%	6.7%
Very negative	0.9%	1.7%

.

The positive responses were the most frequent among students in both courses, with neutral responses being similarly valued in both. The very negative responses represented a small percentage. These results highlight a generally positive reception of the lesson design and content in both fields of study, with a stronger inclination toward positive responses in the physics course.

The results of the descriptive statistics show that the responses for the four dimensions of the ARCS model were very favorable, as the highest values are in the very positive range and the lowest values are in the very negative range. When each dimension is analyzed separately, it is observed that the majority of very positive responses fall within the satisfaction dimension for both courses. Conversely, a higher number of very negative responses are found in the confidence dimension. Considering that satisfaction is associated with intrinsic motivation and confidence is related to extrinsic motivation according to Keller’s model, it can be inferred that students enjoy the experience, but may lack confidence in their ability to successfully complete the activity, especially in the biomedical course. The higher number of very negative responses is less frequent in the satisfaction dimension and more prevalent in the confidence dimension. In the case of physics, the results were higher across all four dimensions, particularly in satisfaction. Moreover, the dimension with the most significant difference compared to the biomedical group was confidence.

3.2. Inferential Statistics

This section presents the analysis of differences to determine whether there were significant variations in the four dimensions analyzed. Student’s t-test was used for the following comparisons: (1) comparison of motivation between the two courses using the two applications; (2) comparison of motivation by gender in the physics course; (3) comparison of motivation by gender in the biomedical course; (4) comparison of motivation among females when using the two different types of applications; and (5) comparison of motivation among males when using the two different types of applications.

3.2.1. Comparison of Motivation between the Two Courses with Two Applications

In this section, the responses of male and female students who used the Epic Roller Coasters application in the physics course were compared to the total responses of students who used the Human Anatomy application. The results are presented in

Table 6. Results by dimension by subject.

	Physics (N = 26) Epic Roller Coasters	Biomedicine (N = 26) Human Anatomy
	M (SD)	M (SD)	t	p
Attention	4.17 (0.65)	4.09 (0.72)	0.44	0.663
Relevance	4.08 (0.57)	3.96 (0.66)	0.65	0.518
Confidence	4.03 (0.67)	3.67 (0.72)	1.85	0.071
Satisfaction	4.24 (0.61)	4.15 (0.81)	0.45	0.654

.

For the dimension of attention, the mean (M) for the total students in the physics course was 4.17 with a standard deviation (S.D.) = 0.65, while in the biomedical course, it was M = 4.09 with S.D. = 0.72. Student’s t-test produced a p-value of p = 0.663, which is greater than the confidence interval of 0.05. Therefore, it can be assumed that the means of the samples are not significantly different.

For relevance, the mean in the physics course was 4.08 with S.D. = 0.57, and in the biomedical course, the mean was M = 3.96 with a standard deviation of S.D. = 0.66. Student’s t-test yielded a t-value of 0.65 with p = 0.518, which is greater than the confidence interval of α = 0.05. Thus, it is inferred that the means are not significantly different.

For confidence, the mean in the physics course was 4.03 with S.D. = 0.67, and in the biomedical course, it was M = 3.67 with S.D. = 0.72. Student’s t-test produced a t-value of 1.85 with p = 0.071. Given these data and a confidence interval of α = 0.05, it is assumed that the samples show significant statistical differences.

In the case of satisfaction, this dimension had the highest means in both the physics and biomedical courses. In the physics course, this was M = 4.24 with S.D. = 0.61, and in the biomedical course, it was M = 4.15 with S.D. = 0.81. Student’s t-test yielded a t-value of 0.45 with p = 0.654, leading us to infer that there are no significant differences between the samples.

3.2.2. Comparison of Motivation by Gender in the Physics Course

For each dimension of the ARCS model, the responses of female students were compared to those of male students who used the Epic Roller Coasters application in the physics course. The results are presented in

Table 7. Motivation by gender in the physics course.

	Female (N = 15)	Male (N = 11)
	M (DE)	M (DE)	t	p
Attention	4.31 (0.41)	3.99 (0.86)	1.16	0.268
Relevance	4.22 (0.51)	3.89 (0.62)	1.42	0.172
Confidence	4.08 (0.57)	3.95 (0.82)	0.46	0.652
Satisfaction	4.27 (0.57)	4.20 (0.68)	0.28	0.785

.

For the attention dimension, the mean for female students was 4.31 with a standard deviation (S.D.) of 0.41, and for male students, it was M = 3.99 with an S.D. of 0.86. Student’s t-test yielded a value of −1.16 with p = 0.268, which is greater than the confidence interval of α = 0.05. Therefore, it cannot be assumed that there are significant differences between the means of the samples.

Regarding relevance, the means are very similar, with a mean of 4.22 and S.D. = 0.51 for female students, and M = 3.89 and S.D. = 0.62 for male students. Student’s t-test yielded a value of 1.42 with p = 0.172, indicating no significant difference in the means of the sample responses.

In the case of confidence, the mean for female students in the physics course was 4.08 with S.D. = 0.57, and for male students, it was M = 3.95 with S.D. = 0.82. Student’s t-test produced a value of 0.46 with p = 0.652, suggesting that the means of the samples do not differ significantly.

Lastly, for satisfaction, the mean for female students was 4.27 with S.D. = 0.57, and for male students, it was M = 4.20 with S.D. = 0.68. Student’s t-test yielded a value of 0.28 with p = 0.785, indicating that the means of the samples do not exhibit significant differences.

3.2.3. Comparison of Motivation by Gender in the Biomedical Course

This section presents the results comparing the responses of female students to those of male students when both used the human anatomy application in the biomedical sciences course. The results are summarized in

Table 8. Motivation by gender in the biomedical course.

	Female (N = 15)	Male (N = 11)
	M (SD)	M (SD)	t	p
Attention	4.31 (0.41)	3.99 (0.86)	1.16	0.268
Relevance	4.22 (0.51)	3.89 (0.62)	1.42	0.172
Confidence	4.08 (0.57)	3.95 (0.82)	0.46	0.652
Satisfaction	4.27 (0.57)	4.20 (0.68)	0.28	0.785

.

In the attention dimension, the mean for female students in the biomedical sciences course was 4.34 with S.D. = 0.64, while for male students, it was M = 3.74 with S.D. = 0.70. Student’s t-test yielded a value of 2.24 with p = 0.036. Based on these values, it is inferred that there are significant differences between the means of the samples.

For relevance, the mean for female students was 4.16 with S.D. = 0.65, while for male students, it was M = 3.69 with S.D. = 0.60, which is lower than that of the female students. Student’s t-test yielded a value of 1.90 with p = 0.071, which is greater than the confidence interval of α = 0.05; therefore, there are no significant differences between the means of the samples.

In the case of confidence, the mean for female students was 3.95 with S.D. = 0.51, while for male students, it was M = 3.29 with S.D. = 0.81, which is lower than that of the female students. Student’s t-test yielded a value of 2.38 with p = 0.031, which is less than the confidence interval of α = 0.05, indicating that there is a significant statistical difference between the means of the samples.

Finally, for satisfaction, the mean for female students was 4.47 with S.D. = 0.55, while for male students, it was M = 3.71 with S.D. = 0.93. Although the mean for male students was lower, the standard deviation was higher than that of female students. Student’s t-test yielded a value of 2.39 with p = 0.030, which is less than the confidence interval of α = 0.05, allowing us to infer that there is a significant difference between the samples for the values obtained in this dimension.

3.2.4. Comparison of Motivation in the Female Gender When Using the Two Applications

In this section, the responses from female students who used the Epic Roller Coasters application in their physics course are compared with those from female students who used the Human Anatomy application in their biomedical sciences course. The results are shown in

Table 9. Motivation of female students.

	Physics (N = 15)	Biomedicine (N = 15)
	M (SD)	M (SD)	t	p
Attention	4.31 (0.41)	4.34 (0.64)	−0.17	0.868
Relevance	4.22 (0.51)	4.16 (0.65)	0.24	0.813
Confidence	4.08 (0.57)	3.95 (0.51)	0.68	0.503
Satisfaction	4.27 (0.57)	4.47 (0.55)	−0.98	0.337

.

For the attention dimension, the mean of the responses from female students in the physics course was 4.31 with S.D. = 0.41, while in the biomedical sciences course, it was M = 4.34 with S.D. = 0.64. Student’s t-test yielded a value of −0.17 with p = 0.868, indicating that there are no significant differences between the samples.

In the case of relevance, the mean for the physics course was 4.22 with S.D. = 0.51, and for the biomedical sciences course, it was M = 4.16 with S.D. = 0.65. Student’s t-test produced a value of 0.24 with p = 0.813, suggesting that there are no significant differences between the samples.

For confidence, the means in both courses were very similar. In the physics course, the mean was 4.08 with S.D. = 0.57, and in the biomedical sciences course, it was M = 3.95 with S.D. = 0.51. Student’s t-test yielded a value of 0.68 with p = 0.503, indicating no significant differences between the samples.

Lastly, in the satisfaction dimension, the means were the highest, with M = 4.27 with S.D. = 0.57 for the physics course and M = 4.47 with S.D. = 0.55 for the biomedical sciences course. Student’s t-test produced a value of −0.98 with p = 0.337, indicating that there are no significant differences between the samples.

3.2.5. Comparison of Motivation in the Male Gender When Using the Two Applications

In this case, the responses from male students who used the Epic Roller Coasters application in their physics course are compared with those from male students who used the Human Anatomy application in their biomedical sciences course. The results are shown in

Table 10. Motivation of male students.

	Physics (N = 11)	Biomedicine (N = 11)
	M (SD)	M (SD)	t	p
Attention	3.99 (0.86)	3.74 (0.70)	0.72	0.478
Relevance	3.89 (0.62)	3.69 (0.60)	0.75	0.465
Confidence	3.95 (0.82)	3.29 (0.81)	1.90	0.073
Satisfaction	4.20 (0.63)	3.71 (0.93)	1.39	0.181

.

For the attention dimension, the mean for the physics course was 3.99 with S.D. = 0.86, while for the biomedical sciences course, it was M = 3.74 with S.D. = 0.70. The t-value was 0.72 with p = 0.478, indicating no significant difference in responses between the two courses.

For relevance, the physics course had a mean of 3.89 with S.D. = 0.62, and the biomedical sciences course had a mean of 3.69 with S.D. = 0.60. The t-value from Student’s t-test was 0.75 with p = 0.465, suggesting no significant differences in responses between the subjects.

In terms of confidence, the responses for the physics course had a mean of 3.95 with S.D. = 0.82, while for the biomedical sciences course, it was M = 3.29 with S.D. = 0.81. The t-value was 1.90 with p = 0.073, indicating no significant difference in responses between the two courses.

Lastly, for satisfaction, the mean response for the physics course was 4.20 with S.D. = 0.63, and in the biomedical sciences course, it was M = 3.71 with S.D. = 0.93. The t-value from Student’s t-test was 1.39 with p = 0.181, suggesting no significant differences in responses between the subjects.

In the experience, 64 GB Oculus Go Virtual Reality headsets were used, loaded with the applications Epic Roller Coasters and Human Anatomy. In the physics course, the Epic Roller Coasters application was utilized to achieve learning outcomes. The application offers a predefined trajectory with predetermined timing.

4. Discussion

VR applications enhance student motivation, particularly in terms of satisfaction. As seen in Figure 3, the responses of all students using either of the two VR applications were favorable across all dimensions. This aligns with existing research, which indicates that interaction with immersive objects and the provision of active learning experiences improve student engagement and motivation [8,28]. The ability of virtual reality to simulate real-world experiences can make learning more engaging and effective, especially in educational settings, where capturing student attention is crucial. Additionally, aligning these tools with students’ interests enhances motivation toward learning [10]. By adapting virtual reality experiences to students’ interests, educators can create more relevant and enjoyable learning experiences, leading to increased motivation [4]. These findings underscore the need to integrate tools into educational processes that contribute to learning objectives and are designed to appeal to students, thereby fostering greater motivation toward learning.

The use of VR applications improves satisfaction and attention, thereby enhancing intrinsic motivation. This finding aligns with the existing literature that emphasizes the importance of capturing students’ attention in educational settings [1]. When students are engaged and attentive, they are more likely to learn and retain information [35]. The immersive nature of VR allows students to experience real-world scenarios in a safe and controlled manner, leading to a deeper understanding of the subject matter [7]. This ability to connect with content in a practical way can make learning more enjoyable and satisfying for students, ultimately increasing their motivation to learn [8]. Educators can explore ways to integrate elements within VR applications that foster students’ confidence, such as providing personalized feedback and opportunities to practice new skills in a risk-free virtual environment [2]. Attention and satisfaction are fundamental aspects of engagement, and a positive experience in these dimensions can enhance learning outcomes.

The dimension of relevance, which emphasizes students’ perception of the usefulness of the experience in understanding the course content, plays a crucial role in the success of VR applications in educational settings. In Table 3, it can be observed that when comparing the applications, the results were significant for the relevance aspect, with the Epic Roller Coasters application slightly surpassing the one used in the biomedical course. This highlights how perceived relevance can influence the effectiveness of the tool. This is consistent with the literature suggesting that the perception of relevance in learning materials positively impacts motivation and engagement [2]. When students consider the material to be relevant to their studies and real life, they are more likely to feel motivated to participate in the learning process [37]. This finding further underscores the need for instructional materials to be relevant and meaningful to students. It is not just about introducing technology into the classroom, but ensuring that such technology complements the course content and provides students with a valuable and meaningful learning experience.

Confidence, defined as students’ assurance when interacting with the application to successfully complete the assigned activity, is an essential component of effective learning. The findings shown in Table 4 indicate that the majority of students in the physics course felt more secure with the material presented. However, the presence of neutral responses may suggest that while these students do not feel insecure, they also have not developed a strong sense of confidence in their ability to handle the technology. Designing applications that allow students to manipulate virtual objects, experiment with different problem-solving strategies, and receive personalized feedback can help build confidence by giving them a sense of agency and control over their learning process [4]. Teachers can foster a positive learning culture by providing encouragement and constructive feedback, creating opportunities for peer collaboration and valuing effort and perseverance alongside success [20,22]. It is crucial to design experiences that enable students to develop a deep understanding of the content, believe in their abilities, and approach learning with confidence and enthusiasm.

Women reported higher results in all dimensions than their male counterparts when using immersive VR applications. Table 7 and Table 8 show that the results were higher for women, although without significant differences. However, when analyzing the genders separately, it was found that female participants had better results in three dimensions of the physics course and one in the biomedical course (Table 9), while males had better results in all four dimensions (Table 10), with a significant difference in the confidence dimension. The literature does not reach a consensus regarding gender differences in using VR. In some cases, no significant difference has been demonstrated, although it has been shown to have a greater impact on women in one or more dimensions [8,23,24]. Therefore, further exploration of these differences is warranted. It is essential to recognize these gender differences in perception and response to virtual reality in educational environments. Designing and adapting virtual reality applications with these gender differences in mind can improve the effectiveness of teaching and student engagement.

4.1. Recommendations for the Use of VR Applications in Classroom

Based on the findings of this study, we recommend the following for utilizing VR applications in the classroom.

• Alignment with learning objectives: The applications used in this study were closely aligned with the learning objectives, resulting in high scores across the different analyzed dimensions. It is essential to ensure that selected applications align with learning objectives [36]. This alignment guarantees an effective and relevant experience, thereby enhancing the relevance dimension.
• Diversification of themes and disciplines: This study explored various themes and disciplines, demonstrating the benefits of diverse responses based on the type of application and course. It is advisable to explore a broad range of educational themes and disciplines through VR [32]. Integrating various applications across different subjects and disciplines can cater to students’ preferences and needs, thereby increasing satisfaction and attention.
• Leveraging gender differences: This study identified differences in responses based on gender. It is essential to consider these differences when selecting applications and integrating them into the curriculum [8]. Addressing gender-specific preferences in VR application selection is crucial to ensure inclusivity and equitable participation.
• Appropriate levels of interactivity: The features of the applications used in this study provided an immersive and interactive experience. It is necessary to identify applications that allow students to interact in environments that promote active learning [28]. Selecting VR applications with appropriate levels of interactivity can encourage student engagement and motivation.
• Compatibility with school equipment: In this study, the applications were compatible with the available equipment, ensuring optimal functionality. Numerous VR applications are available for educational use, including free or low-cost options compatible with various electronic devices [33,35]. It is recommended to select applications that best fit the resources of the educational institution and to conduct pilot tests to gather feedback and enhance the VR experience. Additionally, consider VR applications that incorporate playful and gamified elements to boost students’ intrinsic motivation.

Virtual reality enhances student motivation in attention, relevance, satisfaction, and confidence, underscoring its effectiveness in increasing engagement and learning outcomes. Female students achieved superior outcomes in three out of the four motivation dimensions studied. Strategies for integrating VR technologies in education should align with learning objectives and consider gender differences to maximize student engagement. It is also recommended to explore the integration of virtual reality with other emerging technologies to create more immersive and personalized educational experiences.

4.2. Possible Limitations in the Use of VR

In the study of VR applications in educational settings, it is crucial to address some potential limitations that could affect their effective implementation. First, cost remains a significant challenge, as acquiring VR hardware and software can represent a considerable investment for educational institutions, especially those with limited resources. One way to mitigate this is by seeking low-cost hardware and free or low-cost software options. Additionally, accessibility is a multifaceted concern. For instance, most VR content is predominantly in English, which can pose a linguistic barrier for students who do not speak English as their first language. This necessitates the localization of educational resources into multiple languages. Finally, physical side effects, such as nausea, dizziness, and disorientation [7], can limit the time students are able to use these devices effectively, potentially restricting the duration of immersive educational sessions and impacting the overall learning experience. These factors need to be carefully considered and mitigated to maximize the educational benefits of virtual reality.

5. Conclusions

This study provides valuable insights into the impact of VR on student motivation in educational settings, focusing on the dimensions of attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction. The findings revealed that the motivation results when using virtual reality are very similar and mostly positive, regardless of the type of application used. Alignment with learning objectives and appropriate interactivity were crucial for a successful VR experience.

Gender differences in the perception of motivation were observed, emphasizing the importance of considering the diversity of student preferences. In both courses, gender differences were found across the four dimensions of the ARCS model. Among female students, variations were observed depending on the application used, particularly in attention, where it was higher in physics. Differences were also noted across three dimensions (relevance, confidence, and satisfaction), although not significantly so. Male students demonstrated consistency in motivation regardless of the application used, with higher results in physics, including a significant difference in confidence.

One limitation of this study is the sample size. Expanding the sample could provide greater diversity in terms of age, educational level, and cultural backgrounds. Future research could explore the role of gamification and playful elements in VR applications and assess the long-term impact of these experiences on academic performance. While the study’s results suggest that the differences in student responses might primarily stem from the VR applications themselves, it is crucial to consider the potential influence of subject matter differences, student preferences, and contextual implementations. Future research should aim to isolate these variables more effectively, perhaps by using a more controlled experimental design or by diversifying the sample to include different educational contexts and levels. This approach would help clarify whether the observed differences are indeed due to the VR applications or other influencing factors.

Another limitation of the study is that the questionnaire did not delve into the reasons behind negative perceptions of relevance. To address this, future studies should include more detailed questions about the VR technology and the content presented to help discern whether the negative perceptions are more associated with the technical aspects of VR or with the relevance and quality of the educational content. Additionally, it is recommended to identify students’ confidence in using the technology and its utility for learning the content. To further enhance the understanding of these issues, conducting focus groups or interviews with participants could provide qualitative insights into the nuances of student experiences and perceptions. This qualitative approach would allow researchers to gather in-depth feedback and clarify factors influencing students’ attitudes towards VR in educational settings, thereby providing a richer context for interpreting survey results.

It is also recommended that the combination of VR with other emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and augmented reality, be investigated to create more immersive and personalized educational experiences. Exploring the effectiveness of VR in other educational contexts would be beneficial to fully understand its potential impact on different student cohorts. Additionally, future research is encouraged to delve deeper into the analysis of gender differences in motivation and how they can influence perception and performance in VR-based educational environments. This research seeks to offer valuable guidance for educators, researchers, and educational institutions aiming to harness VR technology for improved engagement and motivation in education.