Comparing the Efficacy of Virtual Reality Training, Augmented Reality Instruction and Traditional Paper-Based Instruction Methods for Assembly Tasks

Open Access
Article
Conference Proceedings
Authors: Md AbdullahVibhav NirmalMahmudur Rahman

Abstract: The landscape of instructional methods is continually evolving, driven by advancements in technology. Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented reality (AR) are emerging technologies offering innovative approaches to training and providing real-time assistance. In order to compare the efficacy of these methods in assembly tasks, in this study, 24 participants were randomly assigned to three groups: one group used paper-based instructions, while another used instruction displayed through the HoloLens 2.0 (AR), and the remaining group was trained in a fully immersive VR environment and were asked to perform the same assembly task afterward. The participants were tasked with assembling a monster truck Lego set, and their performance was measured using objective metrics such as completion time and the number of errors made. Subjective measures were obtained through the NASA Task Load Index (TLX) questionnaire, which assessed the perceived workload of each instructional method. Participants using paper-based instructions completed the task in an average of 5.92 minutes, which was significantly faster than those using AR (average completion time of 8.21 minutes), and those using VR training (average completion time of 7.23 minutes). The number of errors was highest with the VR training, averaging 2 errors per participant, compared to the paper-based instructions (0.625 errors) and AR (1.25 errors). Subjectively, participants rated the AR experience slightly higher, with an average NASA TLX score of 23.26, compared to 26.25 for VR training. Paper-based instructions had the lowest workload value, with a mean NASA TLX score of 17.60. The findings suggest that while VR and AR offer advanced learning experiences, they may not always outperform traditional paper-based instructions in terms of task completion time and error rates. These results emphasize the need to consider task complexity and user experience when evaluating instructional methods. Further research is needed to explore the benefits of VR and AR in different contexts.

Keywords: Augmented reality, virtual reality, instructional methods, assembly task

DOI: 10.54941/ahfe1005670

Cite this paper:

Downloads
7
Visits
47
Download