DissLiteratur/storage/XV3GM7L8/.zotero-ft-cache

2023 IEEE Renewable Energy and Sustainable E-Mobility Conference (RESEM) | 979-8-3503-1132-7/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/RESEM57584.2023.10236123

2023 IEEE Renewable Energy and Sustainable E-Mobility Conference (RESEM)
Review on Virtual Reality for the Advancement of Architectural Learning

Palak Patel1
Faculty of Architecture Planning and Design Integral University, Lucknow (U.P.), India
palak0492@gmail.com

Dr. Safiullah Khan2
Faculty of Architecture Planning and Design Integral University, Lucknow (U.P.), India
headarch@iul.com

Abstract—A set of virtual reality (VR) based learning environment is being produced to investigate the possibilities for technological innovations and to discover where and how VR may best assist architecture instructors. VR has been utilized as an instructional aid in education, challenging the idea of what makes a learning environment more effective. Thanks to HD (highdefinition) visuals and comprehensive contents given by head mounted displays (HMD), learners have been able to study complex and difficult subjects in ways that conventional teaching approach cannot. This paper reviews several learning domains that advance architectural education to benefit the scholars and academicians for usage of immersive VR technologies and its application to design studio. Research on learning benefits, intervention and evaluation action related to the usage of Virtual reality has been lacking. This literature review stresses that it is necessary for the VR's potential to be understood as a pedagogical approach by identifying relevant evaluation methods, intervention features and learning objectives.
Keywords— Virtual Reality (VR); Architectural education; Head mounted display (HMD); Immersive Learning Domains; VR technologies
I. INTRODUCTION
VR is termed as a 3-D computer-based interactive environment that model’s reality. However, the origin of the word virtual reality is unknown. It has been attributed to Damien Broderick's 1982 novel The Judas Mandala, where the context of use differs from what is stated currently [1]. Virtual Reality (VR) is also described as the use of computer simulations and models to assist a person in engaging with a 3D world that is artificial. This 3D virtual environment depicts reality with the use of interactive devices that may transmit and receive data and are worn in the form of headsets, goggles, gloves, or body suits, among other things. Virtual reality, in other terms, is the use of computer animation to mimic physical presence in the virtual environment and to create a realistic-looking world. Virtual reality is interactive and real-time technology, which implies that the device is designed to automatically recognise human input and alter the virtual environment in real time [2]. The traditional method of teaching reveals flaws in the teaching plan and learning processes of architecture. Teaching and learning techniques are often instructor-independent at many colleges that can overcome by using VR.
VR has three distinguishing features as a medium [1]. It is:
1) Immersive; users may interact with the models;

2) Three spatial dimensions are used to represent spatial models; and 3) Real-time response from activities is provided without a notable pause. VR may be categorized based on the methods of visualization that it employs: 1) Immersive Virtual reality with a high level of
involvement and expensive peripheral equipment, such as HMDs; and 2) Non-immersive Virtual reality, also known as desktop VR, is a doorway into a virtual environment that is presented on a computer screen [3]. Blended reality has been characterized as an immersive mixed environment in which the virtual and physical worlds are intimately integrated to serve interaction objectives and communication settings [4].
Fig. 1. Mixed reality
Fig.1 shows how the increased realism and increased virtuality on the physical-virtual continuum are positioned in mixed reality. Using this technology increases interest in studying the given subject, becoming a facilitator of educational factor that leads to the development of capable students, opens possibilities, and is encouraged to invest in technology, and supports its implementation in the class [5-9].
The primary focus of this paper has been focused on Bloom's Taxonomy's Domains of Learning [10-14]. Bloom's taxonomy is a collection of 3 hierarchical frameworks used to categorize educational learning outcomes according to their specificity and complexity that are cognitive [15-39], physiological skills [40-43] and affective [44-48] learning domains.
The possibilities of VR have been demonstrated, but it needs to be seen how and also where such capabilities may be

979-8-3503-1132-7/23/$31.00 @ 2023 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB). Downloaded on February 14,2025 at 09:03:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

effectively utilized to architecture education. As a result, this paper will go through several learning domains that may be used in architectural education. This research will be beneficial to scholars and academicians as it will lead to more research into the usage of immersive VR technologies.
There are six sections in this paper: Section II discusses the VR devices. Section III and IV states the relationship between hypotheses and research design and also review the various methods and learning domains. Section V consists of conclusion.
II. VR TECHNOLOGY DEVICES
Recent research [6] demonstrate the potential provided by such technological developments, since they enable an unique type of reality in which digital and physical surroundings, multimedia, and connections coexist in our daily lives. The usage of immersive experience platforms, in addition, has started to be employed in the educational and professional sectors, since it enables people to be near to that same reproduced area while allowing a quick flow of design modifications performed in actual environments [7]. Devices which are used in VR technologies are shown in Fig.2.

Hypotheses_2: In a basic architecture curriculum, the Virtual Reality class doesn't really increase or build key competencies any faster than the traditional class;
Hypotheses_3: In a basic architecture curriculum, the Virtual reality class helps to develop just a limited set of skills.
The primary focus of this work has been focused on Bloom's Taxonomy's Domains of Learning [10]. Bloom’s taxonomy is the collection of three sequential frameworks for categorizing learning process outcomes according to their specificity and complexity. The 3 lists include cognitive, affective, and physiological motor skills learning domains as displayed in Fig.3.

Fig. 2. Devices used in VR technologies
Analyzing and interpreting 3D environments has traditionally been done via sketches, drawings, illustrations and object models rather than 3D scale models and virtual representations all across the existence of architectural education [8]. Because of intergenerational transition and the continual growth and advancement in technology, worldwide adoption of such new approaches is on the rise [9].
III. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HYPOTHESES AND RESEARCH DESIGN
In particular instructional instruments, the issue in finding the learning domains to meet competence standards can be highlighted as the primary focus of the study. It shows that a number of variables have an influence on student progress, including education methods, tasks and technology instruments. The best way of addressing this problem is to assess different approaches, analyze all elements of it and select the most practical tool for adequate skill development in the learning procedure. The main purpose of the study is to compare how Virtual reality education varies in terms of understanding architecture from the traditional classroom.
As a result, three hypotheses are proposed:
Hypotheses_1: In a basic architecture curriculum, the Virtual Reality class enhances and develops fundamental competencies more than the traditional class;

Fig. 3. Classification of Learning Domains
A. Cognitive Domain
Cognitive domain [12-35] seeks to improve an individual's mental abilities and knowledge acquisition. Most conventional education has focused on cognitive domain taxonomy, which is commonly used to create curriculum learning outcomes, evaluations, and activities. The cognitive domain of learning is split into 6 tiers of goals in the original 1956 edition of taxonomy [45].
B. Psychomotor Skill Domain
Psychomotor skill [36-39] is the capacity to manually operate an instrument / tool, such as hammer or hand. Change

Authorized licensed use limited to: Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB)R. DEoSwEnlMoad2ed02on3February 14,2025 at 09:03:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

and/or growth in behaviour and/or abilities are often the focus of psychomotor skill objectives. Perception, set, directed reaction, mechanisms, complicated observable reaction, adaptability, and genesis are all subdomains of psychomotor. The capacity to adapt sensory input to motor action is referred to as perception [46].
C. Affective Domain
Affective domain [40-44] are usually concerned with increasing awareness and progress in attitudes, emotions, and feelings. Receiving phenomena, reacting to phenomena, valuation, organizing, and characterization are examples of emotional domain categories. Receiving phenomenon is a subdomain that produces awareness of emotions and feelings as well as the potential to use selective attention [47]. This might involve paying attention in class to teachings. The learner's active engagement in class or during group discussion is the next component of replying to phenomena [48].
IV. ANALYSIS OF VARIOUS LEARNING DOMAINS
Several research papers related to VR are reviewed. The analysis of various learning domains including devices used, variables for comparison and their findings have been tabulated in Table I.

TABLE I.

REVIEW ON VR LEARNING DOMAINS

Learning Devices Domains Used
Cognitive Oculus Domain headsets
[12]
Other [13]
Oculus Rift [14]
Google Cardboard [15]
Sony HMZ [16]

Variable for Compariso n

Findings

Desktop / SmartPho ne
3D Physical Model Traditiona l methods
SlideShow Lecture
Lecture

Students'

developed

the ability to examine the

'anatomy' of the structural

foundations of the chosen

typical 3D building

simulation.

I-VR-designed

architectural environments

receive a higher rating

than real models.

In comparison to

traditional

teaching

approaches, I-VR has

been presented to yield

considerably

greater

engineering

subject

attainment. Furthermore,

an HMD-based system

outperformed a CAVE-

based system.

All who acquired

computer programming

via I-VR outperformed

than those who were not

over the course of 16

sessions.

When compared to a

lecture, I-VR yielded

considerably higher exam

Samsung Head Gear [17] Oculus Rift [18]
Oculus Rift [19]
Oculus Rift [20]
VR Samsung Gear [21] Oculus Rift [22]
Samsung Gear VR [23]
HTC Vive [24]
HTC Vive [25]
HTC Vive [26]
HTC Vive [27]
HTC Vive [28]

Desktop VR Online Textbook
No I-VR (lectures only ) Desktop VR
2D Video
Desktop VR Balland-stick method Desktop VR
Textbook 2D Video
Desktop VR (tablet based)
Talk, Hands-on participati on in a serious game Traditiona l didactic teaching
Slideshow

results.

When utilising I-VR for a

knowledge exam, the

results are poorer.

At the before-test, after-

test, and 8 weeks of

followup, there was no

improvement in test

scores.

The individuals fared

much worse than the

control group before the

intervention.

Almost both D-VR and I-

VR were shown to be

incredibly viable learning

modality on an anatomical

skill test.

There is no variation in

knowledge acquisition

between both the

mediums.

I-VR was never more

effective at teaching

astronomy over D-VR or

traditional

approach

display.

Those who studied

geography with I-VR

showed

significantly

superior

educational

outcomes and moderate

memory than others who

studied geography with D-

VR.

The I-VR group did

greater than the traditional

group in memorizing

questions, but there was

no difference in grasping

questions.

Despite the fact that I-VR

and D-VR had the same

exam scores, I-VR was

shown to improve skill

acquisition.

A conventional lecture

generated a lower exam

score than I-VR.

In anatomical and

chemistry examinations, I-

VR was proven to yield

considerably

higher

academic achievements

than individuals who did

not utilise the technology.

On a microbiology test, I-

VR students performed

considerably worse than

Authorized licensed use limited to: Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB)R. DEoSwEnlMoad2ed02on3February 14,2025 at 09:03:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Psycho motor skills

HTC Vive [29]
Mobile VR [30]
Mobile VR [31]
HTC System [32] Oculus Rift [33]
Head Mounted Display (HMD) [34]
Geo VR [35]
Oculus Rift [36]
Oculus Rift [37]
VR Apps [38]
AR apps or

Instructor lesson
Lecturers and lab sessions
Desktop VR
2D system
No I-VR (lectures only)
Independe nt study
Desktop VR
Desktop VR
No I-VR (written material only) Desktop
Mobile Phone

others who learnt via a

standard

PowerPoint

presentation.

I-VR was never more

successful than an

instructor-led class in 6

from out 7 cases.

When comparing to the

few who studied through

lecture and laboratory

sessions, individuals who

have used the I-VR

interface

scored

considerably better on

measures.

Participants who utilised

I-VR had better spatial

abilities than others who

used D-VR.

In I-VR, especially in

comparison to 2D, single

session performed slower.

Students who participated

in I-VR session performed

higher on the final exam

papers than most who did

not.

The ability to see these

updates in real time

enables designers to

conduct an iterative

process of parallel

programming

and

visualisation of the model

that was created in VR,

thereby improving the

project.

Designers can use various

projections, such as top

view and birds eye view,

to monitor design options

and arrive at a final

solution.

When compared to D-VR,

the I-VR condition

completed the functional

analysis task much faster.

In the Multiple Choice

Questions exam, there was

no

significant

differentiation.

Assist in

integrating visual and

other behaviors within the

educational

process in order to link the

new learnt materials with

students'

previous experiences and

knowledge

VR enables organisations

and academic institutions

Affective Domain

gadgets. [39]
Oculus Rift DK1 [40]
NVIS nVisor SX60 [41]
Oculus Rift DK2 [42] Samsung Gear VR [43] HTC Vive [44]

Stereoscop ic desktop VR
3-D room with a threat
3D fire evacuation
3D rooms
3-D art museum

to not only discuss theories, but also the practical implications of theories and novel concepts in an interactive manner, while also remaining at the forefront of technology.

In psychiatric discussion

training, both virtual and

non-virtual modalities

achieved

equivalent

outcomes.

In this paper experiment group felt sensations as they felt the explosions, spiders, gunshots, etc.)

In this paper students went Alertness while going through fire evacuation.

Positive affect can be seen in this case.

Real museums vs 3-D art museums were compared among the two groups. The general validity of environmental simulations is rather high.

V. CONCLUSION
This paper reviews the significance of VR for the advancement of teaching and learning in architecture which will be advantageous to scholars and academicians. According to the recent findings, VR is an effective educational tool for extremely complicated or conceptual issues that needed visualisation and spatial comprehension. The usage of VR in architecture broadens the function of studio evaluations to become more collaborative and interactive. The purpose of this review was to discover which of the learning domains is effective and successful using VR in boosting students’ creativity. The literature shows the effectiveness, utility and prevalence of cognitive domains. VR improves students' comprehension and learning performance. Students get a deeper understanding of their design concepts and solutions. The potential of VR has been demonstrated, but it needs to be seen how and also where such capabilities may be effectively utilised to architecture education. This study will pave the way for further investigation into the implementation of immersive VR technologies and their application to design studio.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Whyte, “Virtual Reality and the Built Environment” , Architectural Press, Oxford, 2002.
[2] R.D. Gandhi and D.S. Patel, “Virtual Reality – Opportunities and Challenges”, International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), vol. 5, no. 1, 2018.
[3] E. Earnshaw, N. Chilton and I. Palmer, “Visualization and virtual reality on the Internet” , The Internet in 3D Information, images and interaction, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 203-222, 1997.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB)R. DEoSwEnlMoad2ed02on3February 14,2025 at 09:03:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

[4] M. Bower, A. Cram and D. Groom, “Blended reality: Issues and potentials in combining virtual worlds and face-to-face classes”, In Proceedings of the ASCILITE 2010: 27th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, Sydney, Australia, pp. 129–140, 2010.
[5] F. Moreira, M.J. Ferreira, C.P. Santos and N. Durão, “Evolution and use of mobile devices in higher education: A case study in Portuguese Higher Education Institutions between 2009/2010 and 2014/2015.” Telemat. Inform., vol. 34, pp. 838–852, 2017.
[6] M. Paranandi and T. Sarawgi,”Virtual Reality In Architecture: Possibilities, Department Of Architecture And Interior Design,” 106-A Alumni Hall, Miami University Oxford, 2001.
[7] X. Calvo, M.S. Sepúlveda, D. Fonseca, N.V.D. Graaf, M. Sans, M. Gené, I. Navarro, S. Villagrasa and E. Redondo, “Qualitative assessment of urban virtual interactive environments for educational proposals,” In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, Salamanca, Spain, pp. 24– 26, 2018.
[8] F. Valls, E. Redondo, D. Fonseca, R.T. Kompen, S. Villagrasa and N. Martí, “Urban data and urban design: A data mining approach to architecture education,” Telemat. Inform. Vol. 35, pp. 1039–1052, 2017.
[9] Anderson, W. Lorin, Krathwohl and R. David, “A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives,” New York: Longman, 2001. ISBN 978-0-80131903-7.
[10] Hoy and A. Woolfolk, “Educational psychology,” Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon, vol. 545, pp. 530–531, 2007. ISBN 9780205459469. OCLC 68694368.
[11] A. Angulo and G.V.D. Velasco, “Immersive simulation of architectural spatial experiences,” Blucher Design Proceedings, vol. 1, pp. 495–499, 2013.
[12] Aso Hajirasouli & Saeed Banihashemi, Augmented reality in architecture and construction education: state of the field and opportunities, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2022.
[13] Kozhevnikov, M., Gurlitt, J., & Kozhevnikov, M. “Learning relative motion concepts in immer- sive and non-immersive virtual environments.” Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22, 952– 962, 2013.
[14] Ray, A. B., & Deb, S. “Smartphone based virtual reality systems in classroom teaching - A study on the effects of learning outcome.” In 2016 IEEE Eighth International Conference on Technology for Education (T4E) (pp. 68–71), 2016.
[15] Webster, R. “Declarative knowledge acquisition in immersive virtual learning environments.” Interactive Learning Environments, 24, 1319– 1333, 2016.
[16] Makransky, G., Terkildsen, T. S., & Mayer, R. E. “Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning.” Learning and Instruction, 60, 225–236, 2017.
[17] Stepan, K., Zeiger, J., Hanchuk, S., Del Signore, A., Shrivastava, R., Govindaraj, S., et al. “Immersive virtual reality as a teaching tool for neuroanatomy.” International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology, 7, 1006– 1013, 2017
[18] Fogarty, J., McCormick, J., & El-Tawil, S. “Improving student understanding of complex spatial arrangements with virtual reality.” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 144, 04017013, 2017.
[19] Moro, C., Štromberga, Z., Raikos, A., & Stirling, A. “The effectiveness of virtual and augmented reality in health sciences and medical anatomy.” Anatomical Sciences Education, 10, 549–559, 2017.
[20] Harrington, C. M., Kavanagh, D. O., Wright Ballester, G., Wright Ballester, A., Dicker, P., Traynor, O., ... Tierney, S. 360° operative videos: “A randomised cross-over study evaluating attentive- ness and information retention.” Journal of Surgical Education, 75, 993–1000, 2018.
[21] Madden, J. H., Won, A. S., Schuldt, J. P., Kim, B., Pandita, S., Sun, Y., ... Holmes, N. G. “Virtual reality as a teaching tool for moon phases and beyond.” In 2018 Physics Education Research Conference, 2018.

[22] Olmos, E., Cavalcanti, J. F., Soler, J.-L., Contero, M., & Alcañiz, M. “Mobile virtual reality: A promising technology to change the way we learn and teach.” In S. M. Bell (Ed.), Mobile and ubiquitous learning: An international handbook (pp. 95–106). Singapore: Springer, 2018.
[23] Allcoat, D., & von Mühlenen, A. “Learning in virtual reality: Effects on performance, emotion and engagement.” Research in Learning Technology, 26, 2140, 2018.
[24] Babu, S., Krishna, S., Unnikrishnan, R., & Bhavani, R. “Virtual reality learning environments for vocational education: A comparison study with conventional instructional media on knowl- edge retention.” In 2018 IEEE 18th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) (pp. 385–389). IEEE, 2018.
[25] Lamb, R., Antonenko, P., Etopio, E., & Seccia, A.. “Comparison of virtual reality and hands on activities in science education via functional near infrared spectroscopy.” Computers and Education, 124, 14–26, 2018.
[26] Liou, W., & Chang, C. “Virtual reality classroom applied to science education.” In 2018 23rd International Scientific-Professional Conference on Information Technology (IT) (pp. 1–4), 2018.
[27] Parong, J., & Mayer, R. E. “Learning science in immersive virtual reality.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 110, 785–797, 2018.
[28] Ostrander, J. K., Tucker, C. S., Simpson, T. W., & Meisel, N. A. “Evaluating the effectiveness of virtual reality as an interactive educational resource for additive manufacturing.” In Volume 3: 20th International Conference on Advanced Vehicle Technologies; 15th International Confer- ence on Design Education, V003T04A018. ASME, 2018.
[29] Akbulut, A., Catal, C., & Yıldız, B. “On the effectiveness of virtual reality in the education of soft- ware engineering.” Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 26, 918–927, 2018.
[30] Molina-Carmona, R., Pertegal-Felices, M., Jimeno-Morenilla, A., & Mora-Mora, H. “Virtual reality learning activities for multimedia students to enhance spatial ability.” Sustainability, 10, 1074, 2018.
[31] Greenwald, S. W., Corning, W., Funk, M., & Maes, P. “Comparing learning in virtual reality with learning on a 2D screen using electrostatics activities.” Journal of Universal Computer Science, 24, 220–245, 2018.
[32] Johnston, A. P. R., Rae, J., Ariotti, N., Bailey, B., Lilja, A., Webb, R. I., ... Parton, R. G. “Journey to the centre of the cell: Virtual reality immersion into scientific data.” Traffic, 19, 105–110, 2018.
* [33] Renata Casteloo-Branco and Antonio Leitao. “Algorithmic Design in Virtual Reality” (pg. 7) , 2022.
[34] . Leenah Fakahani , Sara Aljehani, Rahaf Baghdadi, Abdel-Moniem El-Shorbagy. “The Use and challenges of Virtual Reality in Architecture.” , 2022.
[35] Bharathi, A. K. B. G., & Tucker, C. S. “Investigating the impact of interactive immersive virtual reality environments in enhancing task performance in online engineering design activities.” In ASME 2015 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Informa- tion in Engineering Conference. ASME, 2015.
[36] Sankaranarayanan, G., Wooley, L., Hogg, D., Dorozhkin, D., Olasky, J., Chauhan, S., ... Jones, D. B. “Immersive virtual reality-based training improves response in a simulated operating room fire scenario. Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques”, 32, 3439–3449, 2018.
[37] Smith, S. J., Farra, S. L., Ulrich, D. L., Hodgson, E., Nicely, S., & Mickle, A. “Effectiveness of two varying levels of virtual reality simulation”. Nursing Education Perspectives, 39, 10–15, 2018.
[38] Esra’a Ashgan* , Numayer Moubarki, Malak Saif, Abdel-Moniem ElShorbagy. “Virtual Reality in Architecture.” Department of Architecture, College of Architecture and Design, Effat University, Qasr Khuzam St., Kilo. 2, Old Mecca Road, P.O.BOX 34689, Jeddah 21478, Saudi Arabia, 2022
[39] Nermine A. Fathallah, Rowaida Rashed, Samy Afifi, Ghada Farouk Hassan. “Virtual Reality: A Paradigm Shift in Architecture and Urban Design Education.” Urban Design and Planning, Ains Shams University, Cairo, Egypt, 2023.
[40] Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J., Ferrer-García, M., Pla-Sanjuanelo, J., AndrésPueyo, A., & Talarn-Caparrós, A. “Virtual reality to train diagnostic

Authorized licensed use limited to: Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB)R. DEoSwEnlMoad2ed02on3February 14,2025 at 09:03:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

skills in eating disorders. Comparison of two low cost systems.” Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 219, 75–81, 2015
[41] McCall, C.; Hildebrandt, L.K.; Bornemann, B.; Singer, T. Physiophenomenology in retrospect: “Memory reliably reflects physiological arousal during a prior threatening experience.” Conscious. Cogn. 38, 60–70, 2015.
[42] Zou, H.; Li, N.; Cao, L. “Emotional response—Based approach for assessing the sense of presence of subjects in virtual building evacuation studies.” J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 31, 4017028, 2017.
[43] Banaei, M.; Hatami, J.; Yazdanfar, A.; Gramann, K. “Walking through Architectural Spaces: The Impact of Interior Forms on Human Brain Dynamics.” Front. Hum. Neurosci. 11, 1–14, 2017.
[44] Marín-Morales, J.; Higuera-Trujillo, J.L.; Greco, A.; Guixeres, J.; Llinares, C.; Gentili, C.; Scilingo, E.P.; Alcañiz, M.; Valenza, G. Real vs. immersive-virtual emotional experience: “Analysis of psychophysiological patterns in a free exploration of an art museum.” PLoS ONE, 14, e0223881, 2019.

[45] B. S.; Engelhart, M. D.; Furst, E. J.; Hill, W. H.; Krathwohl, D. R. “Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals.” Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company, 1956.
[46] Sousa, D. A. “How the Brain Works.” Crowin Press, 2016.
[47] Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., Raths, J., Wittrock, M.C. “A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.” New York: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon, 2001.
[48] Cannon, H. M. and Feinstein, A. H. “Bloom Beyond Bloom: Using the Revised Taxonomy to Develop Experiential Learning Strategies, Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning,” Vol. 32, 2005

Authorized licensed use limited to: Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB)R. DEoSwEnlMoad2ed02on3February 14,2025 at 09:03:00 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.