Impact of Environmental Education with VR Equipment on Learning Performance and Environmental Identity

  • Zhao YuEmail author
  • Xun Lin
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1147)


For the goals of environmental education, people should be encouraged to contact with the natural and increase the awareness and knowledge. Nowadays, immersive virtual reality (VR) devices provide people with a way to visualize the natural environment. Users can use it to create a real experience in the environment, not just the images they see. This empirical study suggests that an environmental education programs by VR and normal environmental films can be effective in helping to improving learning performance and environmental identity. The method of analysis is quantitative analysis, combined with qualitative. The experimental group used VR equipment to view VR video clips while the control group used a desktop computer to observe the same video clips. The subjects were given the same questionnaire after video viewing. The questionnaire included environmental knowledge related to video clips and a CNS scale. The results answered the research questions well and supported these hypotheses: (1) The use of VR equipment will affect the learning performance of the subjects. (2) The use of VR equipment could improve the environmental identity of the subjects. Compared with the control group, CNS scale in the experimental group showed a higher level of environmental identity.


Immersive environments Learning effectiveness Connectedness to nature scale Environmental education 



We would like to thank to the students from Shanghai Jiao Tong University for their help as the subjects.


  1. 1.
    Alam, A., Ullah, S., Ali, N.: The effect of learning-based adaptivity on students’ performance in 3D-virtual learning environments. IEEE Access 6, 3400–3407 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Soga, M., Gaston, K.J.: Extinction of experience: the loss of human-nature interactions. Front. Ecol. Environ. 14(2), 94–101 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Briede-Westermeyer, J., Leal, I., Cereceda, G.: The teaching/learning process of observation in the design career. Interciencia 44, 171–177 (2019)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Na, L., Jianping, W.: Revise of the connectedness to nature scale and its reliability and validity. China J. Health Psychol. 24(9), 1347–1350 (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Slater, M., Wilbur, S.: A Framework for Immersive Virtual Environments (FIVE): Speculations on the Role of Presence in Virtual Environments. MIT Press, Cambridge (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Caicedo, M., Camacho, R., Cordero, F.F., García, F., Torres, H.: Virtual research and learning communities in latin America: the CEVALE2VE case. Interciencia 42(11), 733–738 (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buttussi, F., Chittaro, L.: Effects of different types of virtual reality display on presence and learning in a safety training scenario. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 24, 1063–1076 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cho, Y., Lee, D.: “Love honey, hate honey bees”: reviving biophilia of elementary school students through environmental education program. Environ. Educ. Res. 24, 445–460 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Duerden, M.D., Witt, P.A.: The impact of direct and indirect experiences on the development of environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 30(4), 379–392 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of DesignShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations