Article3D printing and additive manufacturing2024
Effects of Immersion on Knowledge Gain and Cognitive Load in Additive Manufacturing Process Education.
Article in 3D printing and additive manufacturing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although the additive manufacturing (AM) market continues to grow, industries face barriers to AM adoption due to a shortage of skilled designers in the workforce that can apply AM effectively to meet this demand. This shortage is attributed to the high cost and infrastructural requirements of introducing high- barrier-to-entry AM processes such as powder bed fusion (PBF) into in-person learning environments. To meet the demands for a skilled AM workforce, it is important to explore other mediums of AM education, such as computer-aided instruction (CAI) and virtual reality (VR), which can increase access to hands-on learning experiences for inaccessible AM processes. However, limited work compares virtual and physical AM instruction or explores how the differences in immersion and presence between mediums can affect the knowledge gained and the mental effort exerted when learning about different AM processes. To address this gap in the literature, this research evaluates the use of CAI, VR, and in-person instruction in AM process education when learning about material extrusion (ME) and PBF. Our findings show that the differences in immersion and presence between CAI, VR, and in-person instruction do not have a statistically significant effect when learning about ME, but do have a significant effect when learning about PBF. Specifically, we found that VR generally yields equivalent effects in knowledge gain and cognitive load to in-person PBF education while offering advantages in both metrics over CAI learning. The findings from this work thus have significant implications for using VR as an alternative to in-person training to improve designer development in process-centric AM education of typically high-barrier-to-entry AM processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.