Effect of immersive visualization technologies on cognitive load, motivation, usability, and embodiment

Wenk, Nicolas; Penalver-Andres, Joaquin; Buetler, Karin A.; Nef, Tobias; Müri, René M.; Laura Marchal–Crespo · 2021 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.1007/s10055-021-00565-8

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the impact of different visualization technologies on cognitive load, motivation, usability, and embodiment during virtual reality (VR)-based motor training. The research is motivated by the limitations of standard 2D computer screens, which lack stereoscopic depth cues and require visuospatial transformations that may increase cognitive load and reduce immersion. The authors hypothesized that head-mounted displays (HMDs), specifically immersive VR (IVR) and augmented reality (AR), would offer superior user experiences compared to 2D screens, potentially enhancing motor learning outcomes through improved embodiment and motivation. The experimental design involved 20 healthy participants who performed a dual-task protocol consisting of a 3D motor reaching task and a parallel cognitive counting task. Participants used three different visualization technologies: an IVR HMD (HTC Vive), an AR HMD (Meta 2), and a standard 2D computer screen. The study focused on subjective measures collected via questionnaires, specifically assessing cognitive load, intrinsic motivation, system usability, and sense of embodiment. This analysis complements previous findings from the same group, which reported improved movement quality with IVR compared to 2D screens. The results indicated that self-reported cognitive load did not differ significantly across the three visualization technologies. However, IVR was rated as significantly more motivating and usable than both AR and the 2D screen. Regarding embodiment, both IVR and AR elicited higher levels of body ownership and integration compared to the 2D screen, though no significant difference was found between the two HMD conditions. These findings suggest that while HMDs do not necessarily reduce the perceived cognitive effort of the task, they substantially improve the user’s engagement and sense of presence within the virtual environment. The significance of these findings lies in supporting the clinical adoption of IVR HMDs for motor rehabilitation. The study concludes that IVR is more suitable than common 2D screens for training 3D movements due to its superior motivation and usability profiles, which are critical for patient adherence and therapeutic efficacy. While AR also improved embodiment over 2D screens, it did not match IVR in terms of motivation and usability. The authors note that the lack of additional benefits for AR over 2D screens may stem from technical limitations of the specific device used rather than the AR modality itself. Overall, the paper provides evidence that immersive visualization technologies enhance the psychological and experiential aspects of VR-based therapy, even if cognitive load remains constant.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• hud ar windshield