Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality

Ayşe Gül Özaşkın Arslan; Şafak Uluçınar Sağır

doi:10.17275/per.26.55.13.4

Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality

Abstract

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Extended Reality (XR) technologies, including Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), and Mixed Reality (MR), on student achievement in science education. Despite the increasing integration of immersive tools in classrooms, a comprehensive comparative synthesis remains limited. To address this gap, three parallel meta-analyses were conducted on 218 unique studies, yielding 225 independent effect sizes, published between January 2000 and June 2021. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was performed across major electronic databases and academic repositories. Statistical analysis using random-effects models revealed that all three technologies significantly enhanced student academic achievement, with AR and VR showing more pronounced impacts compared to the emerging domain of Mixed Reality. However, high levels of heterogeneity across the results indicate that the success of these tools appears to be highly context-dependent. Moderator analyses suggest that effectiveness varies significantly according to subject discipline, educational level, and specific instructional design features such as simulation types and gamification. These findings were interpreted through the lenses of Cognitive Load Theory, the Gartner Hype Cycle, and Embodied Learning. The results provide robust evidence for the transformative potential of XR in science instruction while highlighting the necessity of sound pedagogical and contextual planning for successful classroom implementation.

Keywords

virtual reality, augmented reality, science education, meta-analysis, immersive learning environments

Supporting Institution

None. The authors did not receive specific institutional or external funding for this study.

Project Number

No project funding

Ethical Statement

This study is a meta-analysis based exclusively on previously published studies. It did not involve any new data collection from human participants or animals, nor the use of identifiable personal data. Therefore, ethical approval and informed consent were not required.

Thanks

The authors thank the editor for the careful handling of the manuscript.

References

Aiello, P., D’elia, F., Di Tore, S., & Sibilio, M. (2012). A constructivist approach to virtual reality for experiential learning. E-Learning and Digital Media, 9(3), 317–324. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/elea.2012.9.3.317.
Ali, A. A., Dafoulas, G., Augusto, J. C., & Ibrahim, S. (2019). Collaborative educational environments incorporating mixed reality technologies: A systematic mapping study. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 12(3), 321–332.
Armstrong, H. E. (1902). The heuristic method of teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 1(8), 395–401.
Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355–385. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355
Barrett, A., Pack, A., Guo, Y., & Terlecki, M. (2015). Constrained interactivity for the enhancement of learning: An empirical study. Computers & Education, 83, 196–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.009
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994). Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics, 50(4), 1088–1101. https://doi.org/10.2307/2533446
Chen, C. C. (2006). Are spatial visualization abilities relevant to virtual reality? E-Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 9(2), 1–16.
Christensen, R., Eichhorn, K., Prestridge, S., Petko, D., Sligte, H., Baker, R., Alayyar, G., & Knezek, G. (2018). Supporting learning leaders for the effective integration of technology into schools. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(3), 457–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9385-9
Chytas, D., Piagkou, M., Demesticha, T., Tsakotos, G., & Natsis, K. (2022). Are extended reality technologies (ERTs) more effective than traditional anatomy education methods? Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy, 44, 1215–1218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-022-02998-5
Clark, R. E. (1985). Confounding in educational computing research. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1(2), 137–148.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cooper, H. (2017). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dede, C. (1998). Introduction. In C. Dede (Ed.), Learning with Technology: The 1998 ASCD Yearbook (pp. v–x). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176933
Egger, M., Davey Smith, G., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ, 315(7109), 629–634. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
Fernández-Cerero, J., Fernández-Batanero, J. M., & Montenegro-Rueda, M. (2025). Possibilities of extended reality in education. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2342996
Field, A. P., & Gillett, R. (2010). How to do a meta-analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 63(3), 665–694.
Garzón, J., & Acevedo, J. (2019). Meta-analysis of the impact of augmented reality on students’ learning gains. Educational Research Review, 27, 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.04.001
Gil Parga, S., Singh, U., Gutierrez, J., & Marks, S. (2024). Pedagogical design in education using augmented reality: A systematic review. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(8), 4219–4236. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2195445
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998). Fixed- and random-effects models in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 486–504.
Hennessy, S., Wishart, J., Whitelock, D., Deaney, R., Brawn, R., La Velle, L., McFarlane, A., Ruthven, K., & Winterbottom, M. (2007). Pedagogical approaches for technology-integrated science teaching. Computers & Education, 48(1), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.02.004
Hu, H., Liu, G., & Xie, T. (2025). Multimodal interaction in virtual reality supported education: A systematic review. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(1), 170–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2342993
Huang, H., & Lee, C. F. (2022). Factors affecting usability of 3D model learning in a virtual reality environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(5), 848–861. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1691605
Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., Birchfield, D., Tolentino, L., & Koziupa, T. (2014). Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion capture environments: Two science studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 86–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034008
Klopfer, E., & Squire, K. (2008). Environmental Detectives—the development of an augmented reality platform for environmental simulations. Education Technology Research and Development, 56, 203–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9037-6
Kozma, R. B. (1994). A reply: Media and methods. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42, 11–14.
Lainema, K., Lainema, T., Hämäläinen, R., & Heinonen, K. (2019). Going beyond technological affordances: Assessing organizational and socio-interactional affordances. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2019) (pp. 323–330). IADIS. https://doi.org/10.33965/celda2019_201911l040
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
McFarlane, A., & Sakellariou, S. (2002). The role of ICT in science education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640220147568
Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students' learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: a meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 70, 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, Trans.). Routledge. (Original work published 1945.)
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2. ed.). SAGE Publications.
Milgram, P., & Kishino, F. (1994). A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Transactions on Information Systems, 77(12), 1321–1329.
Orwin, R. G. (1983). A fail-safe N for effect size in meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics, 8(2), 157–159. https://doi.org/10.2307/1164923
Oubahssi, L., Piau-Toffolon, C., & Mahdi, O. (2024). VR-Peas: A Virtual Reality PEdAgogical Scenarisation tool. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(10), 7212–7229. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2308094
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Ramli, R. Z., Wan Husin, W. Z., Elaklouk, A. M. S., & Sahari @ Ashaari, N. (2024). Augmented reality: A systematic review between usability and learning experience. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(10), 6250–6266. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2255230
Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638–641. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638
Schrum, L., & Levin, B. B. (2009). Leading 21st century schools: Harnessing technology for engagement and achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Shelton, B. E., & Stevens, R. (2004). Using coordination classes to interpret conceptual change in astronomical thinking. In Y. B. Kafai, W. A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon, & F. Herrera (Eds.), Embracing Diversity in the Learning Sciences: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (p. 634). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410611017-133
Statista. (2022). Extended reality (XR): AR, VR, and MR in the United States - statistics & facts. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/topics/7524/extended-reality-xr-ar-vr-and-mr-in-the-us/
Steinert, M., & Leifer, L. J. (2010). Scrutinizing Gartner's hype cycle approach. In PICMET 2010 Technology Management for Global Economic Growth (pp. 1–13). IEEE.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Villena-Taranilla, R., Tirado-Olivares, S., Gutiérrez, R. C., & González-Calero, J. A. (2022). Effects of virtual reality on learning outcomes in K-6 education: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 35, 100434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100434
Wu, B., Yu, X., & Gu, X. (2020). Effectiveness of immersive virtual reality using head-mounted displays on learning performance: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(6), 1991–2005. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13023
Zacharia, Z. C. (2007). Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: An effort to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 120–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00215.x

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Instructional Technologies

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Ayşe Gül Özaşkın Arslan ^*
0000-0002-9018-5525
Türkiye

Şafak Uluçınar Sağır
0000-0003-3383-5330
Türkiye

Publication Date

July 3, 2026

Submission Date

January 19, 2026

Acceptance Date

April 12, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 13 Number: 4

DOI

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.55.13.4

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA88DS46GE

APA

Özaşkın Arslan, A. G., & Uluçınar Sağır, Ş. (2026). Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality. Participatory Educational Research, 13(4), 195-213. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.55.13.4

AMA

1.Özaşkın Arslan AG, Uluçınar Sağır Ş. Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality. PER. 2026;13(4):195-213. doi:10.17275/per.26.55.13.4

Chicago

Özaşkın Arslan, Ayşe Gül, and Şafak Uluçınar Sağır. 2026. “Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality”. Participatory Educational Research 13 (4): 195-213. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.55.13.4.

EndNote

Özaşkın Arslan AG, Uluçınar Sağır Ş (July 1, 2026) Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality. Participatory Educational Research 13 4 195–213.

IEEE

[1]A. G. Özaşkın Arslan and Ş. Uluçınar Sağır, “Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality”, PER, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 195–213, July 2026, doi: 10.17275/per.26.55.13.4.

ISNAD

Özaşkın Arslan, Ayşe Gül - Uluçınar Sağır, Şafak. “Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality”. Participatory Educational Research 13/4 (July 1, 2026): 195-213. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.55.13.4.

JAMA

1.Özaşkın Arslan AG, Uluçınar Sağır Ş. Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality. PER. 2026;13:195–213.

MLA

Özaşkın Arslan, Ayşe Gül, and Şafak Uluçınar Sağır. “Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality”. Participatory Educational Research, vol. 13, no. 4, July 2026, pp. 195-13, doi:10.17275/per.26.55.13.4.

Vancouver

1.Ayşe Gül Özaşkın Arslan, Şafak Uluçınar Sağır. Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality. PER. 2026 Jul. 1;13(4):195-213. doi:10.17275/per.26.55.13.4

27707

Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 International Lisance

download?token=eyJhdXRoX3JvbGVzIjpbXSwiZW5kcG9pbnQiOiJqb3VybmFsIiwib3JpZ2luYWxuYW1lIjoicGVyIHNjb3B1cyBpc3RhdHRpc3Rpay5wbmciLCJwYXRoIjoiOTg5Ni9mN2E1LzU3ZDcvNmEyMmIyZmFlMGJkYjYuMDUyNjIyMDMucG5nIiwiZXhwIjoxNzgwNjYyNTM5LCJub25jZSI6IjcxYzczMjhhOTdkOWYxM2ExZjE2NWExYjQyMzMyOWJhIn0.g4uvJoi6Oy8W0gRoUNW-d5FO9m4u30pEA0l1h8DwzSE

Effectiveness of Immersive Technologies in Science Education: A Meta-Analysis of Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality

Abstract

Keywords

Supporting Institution

Project Number

Ethical Statement

Thanks

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

DOI

IZ

Cite