ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Peer Effects on Safety and Productivity in a Simulated Workplace Through Usability and Ecological Validity Testing of a Nonimmersive Virtual Simulation With University Students: Cross-Sectional Qualitative Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeer effects influence workplace safety and productivity as employees observe and compare themselves to coworkers. However, prior simulation research has focused mainly on productivity in immersive settings, with limited attention to safety and little evidence on whether nonimmersive environments can capture peer effects across both domains. This study developed a nonimmersive virtual simulation to model peer effects on safety and productivity behavior.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the usability and ecological validity of a theoretically grounded nonimmersive virtual simulation designed to model peer effects through exposure to virtual coworker performance information.
methodsA cross-sectional qualitative design was used across 2 iterative testing phases, alpha and beta. Participants were university students aged 18-30 years (alpha: n=12; beta: n=12). Alpha phase participants had prior kitchen experience to support early usability testing, while beta phase participants reflected the broader target population. The simulation involved timed meal preparation tasks with integrated safety requirements and peer performance feedback. Gameplay observations and semistructured interviews examined instructional clarity, environmental realism, virtual peer credibility, and scoring design.
resultsAlpha phase participants struggled with written instructions, perceived limited realism, and found peer comparisons ineffective because peer scores were unrealistic. After revisions, including experiential training, calibrated peer scores, clearer peer source messaging, and improved environmental cues, beta phase participants reported clearer instructions, greater realism, and more motivating peer comparisons.
conclusionsResults support that a theoretically grounded nonimmersive simulation refined through evidence-based feedback can elicit meaningful peer-related responses in safety and productivity contexts. By preserving calibrated social comparison, credible peer representation, and realistic task contingencies, the simulation offers a controlled and scalable way to examine how peer information shapes safety productivity dynamics. These findings expand methodological options for studying peer effects in settings where real-world experimentation may be impractical or unsafe.
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.