ArticlePloS one2025
The effects of virtual reality and augmented reality technologies on students' story retelling performance.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Practices of Evidence-based Mathematics Interventions for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Cross-sectional Study.Annals of African medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to compare the retelling performance of two groups that engaged in reading activities with virtual reality and augmented reality texts. Furthermore, the results of the interventions using these technologies were compared with the results of the printed text reading activity. The study participants comprised 100 students aged 12-13 years studying in a secondary school. The researchers evaluated the students' story-retelling performance through a rubric in the study. In the pre-test stage, the students performed a paper-based reading activity on the texts in the coursebook and their retelling performance was evaluated. In the post-test stage, the reading activities of the two groups were carried out with the intervention of virtual reality and augmented reality. While the pre-test results showed no significant difference between the groups, the post-test results indicated that the augmented reality intervention better supported the students' retelling performance than virtual reality. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the sub-categories of setting and characters. Additionally, the virtual reality intervention did not create a significant difference in the sub-categories of characters, event/plot, problem, solution, and total score compared to the printed text reading activity. However, it produced better results in the setting sub-category than the printed text. A positive difference was observed in all sub-categories when the augmented reality intervention was compared to the printed text reading activity. AR showed greater benefits for retelling performance in this study, but further research is needed on long-term retention.
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.