Research Hotspots and Thematic Evolution in Technology Acceptance for Immersive Mathematics: A Bibliometric Visualization

Year 2026, Volume: 13 Issue: 2, 291 - 316, 08.03.2026

Nur Indah Septia Ningsih , Farid Ahmadi , Ellianawati Ellianawati , Fahrur Rozi

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.26.30.13.2

https://izlik.org/JA85DD28SR

Abstract

The integration of immersive technologies in mathematics education presents significant potential for enhancing learning experiences, yet its successful implementation hinges on user acceptance, a domain predominantly explained by the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). However, the rapid proliferation of research has resulted in a fragmented literature, lacking comprehensive synthesis of its intellectual structure and evolution. This study addresses this gap through bibliometric analysis of 425 Scopus publications (2021-2025) using R Bibliometrix and Biblioshiny. Findings reveal: (1) Intellectual Structure - exponential growth (31.13% annually) with distinct geographical patterns showing Asian productivity leadership versus European citation impact; (2) Conceptual Structure, a fundamental schism between technological clusters (AR/VR) and pedagogical streams, with AI emerging as a bridging theme; (3) Social Structure, moderate international collaboration (24.94%) with limited South-South cooperation; (4) Thematic Evolution, progression from pandemic-responsive research toward AI and Mixed Reality as emerging frontiers. Notably, Mixed Reality remains significantly underexplored compared to AR/VR dominance. The study identifies three critical research trajectories: developing MR-specific TAM extensions, creating integrated technological-pedagogical frameworks, and establishing diversified global research networks. This research provides scholars with a definitive state-of-the-art reference, offers educators evidence-based implementation insights, and guides developers in creating user-centered immersive learning applications, ultimately facilitating more effective adoption of immersive technologies in mathematics education. Overall, these findings underscore that advancing the field requires bridging the persistent gap between technological innovation and pedagogical practice to ensure meaningful, scalable, and sustainable integration of immersive technologies in mathematics learning.

Keywords

Bibliometric Analysis , Educational Technology , Immersive Mathematics Education , Mixed Reality , R-Biblioshiny , Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)

Ethical Statement

This study did not involve any human participants, animals, or personal data. Therefore, ethical approval was not required. The research relied exclusively on bibliometric data retrieved from the Scopus database and complied with all relevant publication ethics and research integrity standards.

Supporting Institution

This study was supported by Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia, which provided academic and technical resources during the research and manuscript preparation.

Thanks

The author gratefully acknowledges the academic support and research environment provided by Universitas Negeri Semarang throughout the completion of this study. Appreciation is also extended to colleagues and reviewers whose valuable feedback helped improve the quality of this manuscript.

References

• Ahmad, N. I. N., & Junaini, S. N. (2022). PrismAR: A mobile augmented reality mathematics card game for learning prisms. International Journal of Computing and Digital Systems, 11(1), 217–225. https://doi.org/10.12785/ijcds/110118
• Almufarreh, A. (2023). Exploring the potential of mixed reality in enhancing student learning experience and academic performance: An empirical study. Systems, 11(6), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11060292
• Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
• Bandyopadhyay, A., Sarkar, A., Swain, S., Banik, D., Hassanien, A. E., Mallik, S., Li, A., & Qin, H. (2023). A game-theoretic approach for rendering immersive experiences in the metaverse. Mathematics, 11(6), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11061286
• Buentello-Montoya, D. A., Lomelí-Plascencia, M. G., & Medina-Herrera, L. M. (2021). The role of reality enhancing technologies in teaching and learning of mathematics. Computers and Electrical Engineering, 94(March), 107287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2021.107287
• Campos, E., Hidrogo, I., & Zavala, G. (2022). Impact of virtual reality use on the teaching and learning of vectors. Frontiers in Education, 7(September), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.965640
• Chiang, Y.-C., & Liu, S.-C. (2023). The effects of extended reality technologies in stem education on students’ learning response and performance. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 22(4), 568–578. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/23.22.568
• Cuder, A., Pellizzoni, S., Di Marco, M., Blason, C., Doz, E., Giofrè, D., & Passolunghi, M. C. (2024). The impact of math anxiety and self-efficacy in middle school STEM choices: A 3-year longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 1091–1108. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12707
• Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13(3), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
• Dimitrijević, S., & Devedžić, V. (2021). Utilitarian and experiential aspects in acceptance models for learning technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(2), 627–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-09970-x
• Elmalı, F., Kılıç, M., & Aksoy, H. S. (2025). Teaching mathematics in early childhood classrooms: From beginning to end. Participatory Educational Research, 12(5), 255–274. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.25.72.12.5
• English, L. D. (2023). Ways of thinking in STEM-based problem solving. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 55(7), 1219–1230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01474-7
• Granić, A., & Marangunić, N. (2019). Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12864
• Hoang, A. D. (2025). Evaluating bibliometrics reviews: A practical guide for peer review and critical reading. Evaluation Review, 49(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X251336839
• Hobbs, M. H., & Holley, D. (2022). A radical approach to curriculum design. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 14(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.313595
• Holly, M., Pirker, J., Resch, S., Brettschuh, S., & Gütl, C. (2021). Designing VR experiences – expectations for teaching and learning in VR. Educational Technology and Society, 24(2), 107–119. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27004935
• Huang, W., Walkington, C., & Nathan, M. J. (2023). Coordinating modalities of mathematical collaboration in shared VR environments. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 18(2). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-023-09397-x
• Kuhail, M. A., Elsayary, A., Farooq, S., & Alghamdi, A. (2022). Exploring immersive learning experiences: A survey. Informatics, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics9040075
• Kuncoro, K. S., Hidayat, A., Nadzeri, M. B., Hendriyanto, A., Meirani, F., & Juandi, D. (2025). Thinking beyond the equations: A deep dive into reflective thinking for mathematics learning. Participatory Educational Research, 12(5), 310–334. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.25.75.12.5
• Kusherbaevna, U. S., Bolshevikovna, K. G., Nurtayevna, K. S., Kaskatayeva, B., Bakytovna, O. N., & Zhumabekovna, K. A. (2025). The effect of virtual reality applications in mathematics classes on student attitudes. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 15(7), 1347–1354. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2025.15.7.2336
• Lindner, C., Rienow, A., Otto, K. H., & Juergens, C. (2022). Development of an app and teaching concept for implementation of hyperspectral remote sensing data into school lessons using augmented reality. Remote Sensing, 14(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14030791
• Marrero-Galván, J. J., & Hernández-Padrón, M. (2022). La trascendencia de la realidad virtual en la educación STEM: Una revisión sistemática desde el punto de vista de la experimentación en el aula [The importance of virtual reality in STEM education: A systematic review from the point of view of experimentation in the classroom]. Bordon. Revista de Pedagogia [Bordon. Journal of Pedagogy], 74(4), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.13042/Bordon.2022.94179
• McNerney, E., Faull, J., Brown, S., McNerney, L., Foley, R., Lonergan, J., Rickard, A., Doganca Kucuk, Z., Behan, A., Essel, B., Mensah, I. O., Castillo Campo, Y., Cullen, H., Ffrench, J., Abernethy, R., Cleary, P., Byrne, A., & Cahalane, C. (2023). SatelliteSkill5—An augmented reality educational experience teaching remote sensing through the un sustainable development goals. Remote Sensing, 15(23), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15235480
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., Antes, G., Atkins, D., Barbour, V., Barrowman, N., Berlin, J. A., Clark, J., Clarke, M., Cook, D., D’Amico, R., Deeks, J. J., Devereaux, P. J., Dickersin, K., Egger, M., Ernst, E., Gøtzsche, P. C., … Tugwell, P. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
• Murala, D. K., & Panda, S. K. (2023). The role of immersive reality (AR/VR/MR/XR) in metaverse. In A. Chandrashekhar, S. H. Saheb, S. K. Panda, S. Balamurugan, & S. Peng (Eds.), Metaverse and immersive technologies (1st ed., pp. 159–189). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781394177165.ch6
• Palacios, A., Pascual, V., & Moreno-Mediavilla, D. (2022). El papel de las nuevas tecnologías en la educación STEM [The role of new technologies in STEM education]. Bordon. Revista de Pedagogia [Bordon. Journal of Pedagogy], 74(4), 11–21. https://doi.org/10.13042/Bordon.2022.96550
• Pellas, N., Dengel, A., & Christopoulos, A. (2020). A scoping review of immersive virtual reality in STEM education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13(4), 748–761. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2020.3019405
• Rodríguez, J. L., Romero, I., & Codina, A. (2021). The influence of neotrie vr’s immersive virtual reality on the teaching and learning of geometry. Mathematics, 9(19), 17–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9192411
• Schnyder, S., Dubach, J., Dall’Olio, L., Tempelmann, S., Cacchione, T., & Martarelli, C. S. (2025). Are primary schools ready for immersive virtual reality? Resistance among stakeholders. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05702-1
• Schutera, S., Schnierle, M., Wu, M., Pertzel, T., Seybold, J., Bauer, P., Teutscher, D., Raedle, M., Heß-Mohr, N., Röck, S., & Krause, M. J. (2021). On the potential of augmented reality for mathematics teaching with the application cleARmaths. Education Sciences, 11(July). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080368
• Shaw, P. A., Traunter, J. E., Nguyen, N., Huong, T. T., & Thao-Do, T. P. (2021). Immersive-learning experiences in real-life contexts: Deconstructing and reconstructing Vietnamese kindergarten teachers’ understanding of STEAM education. International Journal of Early Years Education, 29(3), 329–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2021.1933920
• Shu, Y., & Huang, T.-C. (2021). Identifying the potential roles of virtual reality and STEM in Maker education. The Journal of Educational Research, 114(2), 108–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2021.1887067
• Smith, K., Maynard, N., Berry, A., Stephenson, T., Spiteri, T., Corrigan, D., Mansfield, J., Ellerton, P., & Smith, T. (2022). Principles of problem-based learning (PBL) in STEM education: Using expert wisdom and research to frame educational practice. Education Sciences, 12(October). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100728
• Sontay, G., & Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2025). Bibliometric analysis of studies on the concept of digital strategy with VOSviewer. Achieving Business Excellence Through Triple Transformation, 12(September), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-9435-9.ch001
• Stanney, K. M., Nye, H., Haddad, S., Hale, K. S., Padron, C. K., & Cohn, J. V. (2021). Extended reality (XR) environments. In G. Salvendy & W. Karwowski (Eds.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics (5th ed., pp. 782–815). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119636113.ch30
• Tan, A.-L., Ong, Y. S., Ng, Y. S., & Tan, J. H. J. (2023). STEM problem solving: inquiry, concepts, and reasoning. Science & Education, 32(2), 381–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00310-2
• Tene, T., Marcatoma Tixi, J. A., Palacios Robalino, M. de L., Mendoza Salazar, M. J., Vacacela Gomez, C., & Bellucci, S. (2024). Integrating immersive technologies with STEM education: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 9(June). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1410163
• Tjostheim, I., & Waterworth, J. A. (2022). Feeling present in virtual environments. In I. Tjostheim & J. A. Waterworth (Eds.), The psychosocial reality of digital travel (pp. 51–72). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91272-7_33
• Topkaya, Y., Doğan, Y., Batdı, V., & Aydın, S. (2025). Artificial intelligence applications in primary education: A quantitatively complemented mixed-meta-method study. Sustainability, 17(7), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17073015
• Velázquez, F. D. C., & Méndez, G. M. (2021). Systematic review of the development of spatial intelligence through augmented reality in stem knowledge areas. Mathematics, 9(23). https://doi.org/10.3390/math9233067
• Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
• Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model : Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
• Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
• Villena-Taranilla, R., Tirado-Olivares, S., Cózar-Gutiérrez, R., & González-Calero, J. A. (2022). Effects of virtual reality on learning outcomes in K-6 education: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 35(February), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100434
• Wu, C. H., Tang, Y. M., Tsang, Y. P., & Chau, K. Y. (2021). Immersive learning design for technology education: A soft systems methodology. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(December), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.745295
• Yegorina, D., Armstrong, I., Kravtsov, A., Merges, K., & Danhoff, C. (2021). Multi‐user geometry and geography augmented reality applications for collaborative and gamified STEM learning in primary school. Review of Education, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3319
• Yi-Ming Kao, G., & Ruan, C.-A. (2022). Designing and evaluating a high interactive augmented reality system for programming learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 132(July), 107245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107245
• Zapata, M., Ramos-Galarza, C., Valencia-Aragón, K., & Guachi, L. (2024). Enhancing mathematics learning with 3D augmented reality escape room. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 7, 100389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2024.100389
• Zhu, C., Leung, C. O. Y., Lagoudaki, E., Velho, M., Segura-Caballero, N., Jolles, D., Duffy, G., Maresch, G., Pagkratidou, M., & Klapwijk, R. (2023). Fostering spatial ability development in and for authentic STEM learning. Frontiers in Education, 8(April), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1138607