Virtual Reality (VR) Technology Integration in the Training

Environment Leads to Behaviour Change

Amy Rosellini

Department of Information Science, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, U.S.A.

People Operations, New Western, Irving, TX, U.S.A.

Keywords: Virtual Reality, Knowledge Transfer, Behaviour Change, Adult Learning, Training.

Abstract: Virtual Reality technology provides a more effective, cost-saving learning solution to firms, however more

research is needed to understand how VR technology transfers to real world behaviour change. Current studies

measure the impact of VR technology in a training environment without integration of adult learning theory

that benefit all learning styles. To measure the effectiveness of VR technology in the training environment,

industries like healthcare and aviation are studied at a greater rate because of their knowledge management

systems and high stakes need for learning. A flight attendant study conducted within a training environment

takes a new approach measuring the impact of VR technology on behaviour outcomes. This study relies on

post-training behaviours rather than survey or assessments. With over three years of VR integration blended

into a formal training environment, early evidence supports the utilization of VR technology to teach flight

safety to flight attendants. Initial findings show an improvement in new flight attendant scores measuring

behaviour change in a series of safety tasks performed post-training. In addition, early research provides

unanticipated evidence of the impact on knowledge transfer when some workers are not utilizing VR

technology and others do utilize VR technology in the same environment.

1 INTRODUCTION

Knowledge is a competitive advantage for

organizations, and virtual reality (VR) technology is

increasingly a source of knowledge transfer in firms

(Ahn & Chang, 2004; Kuah & Wong, 2011; Alfalah

et al., 2019). In 2018, Wal-Mart utilized VR

technology with over 1 million employees (Incao,

2018). Verizon has utilized VR technology to teach

safety to retail workers in case of armed robbery.

Stanford tested VR technology with football players

to help them understand player movement on the

virtual field (Noguchi, 2019). As the usage of VR

technology spans new fields and training

environments, more testing is needed to understand

how VR technology is utilized.

VR technology requires higher upfront costs with

long-term cost-saving. As a learning solution to firms,

research in VR technology is relatively new and more

research is needed to understand how VR technology

transfers to real world behaviour change (Gabajova et

al., 2019; Jia-Ye et al., 2021). The gap in current VR

technology research in the training environment is the

lack of comparison to equally sophisticated learning

environments. Current studies tend to compare poor

training to enhanced training with VR technology

rather than comparing robust training environments

where VR technology is integrated into an already

sophisticated knowledge transfer training program.

Before proving the impact of VR technology,

researchers must understand the nature of the training

environment, how adult learning is maximized in the

training environment, and the benefit the current

training environment brings to different learning

styles.

2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Adult Learning Theory

Investigating VR technology in the formal training

environment requires an understanding of adult

learning theory. For adults to accept knowledge

transfer and allow the knowledge to impact

behaviour, they must be given the opportunity to learn

beyond the explicit knowledge resources. Adult

workers transfer tacit knowledge through

200

Rosellini, A.

Virtual Reality (VR) Technology Integration in the Training Environment Leads to Behaviour Change.

DOI: 10.5220/0011552100003335

In Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (IC3K 2022) - Volume 3: KMIS, pages 200-207

ISBN: 978-989-758-614-9; ISSN: 2184-3228

 2022 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All r ights reserved

socialization, experiences in the training

environment, and problem-solving interactions to

build new tacit knowledge (Knowles, Holton, &

Swanson, 2005). As firms incorporate more adult

learning practices into the formal training

environment, they improve knowledge transfer.

Training in firms relies on the proper execution of

adult learning theory, which determines an adult’s

willingness to learn and change behaviour (Kolb,

1984; Rosellini, 2017). Adult learning, as in Kolb’s

model of experiential learning, considers the need of

adult learners and providing training that allows

results in behaviour change. Through concrete

experience, Kolb identifies the need for workers to

perform tasks while also allowing time for reflective

observation. As reflective observation becomes

abstract conceptualization, the adult worker applies

learning by experimenting new behaviours to create

concrete experiences on the job.

2.2 Learning Styles

The reviewing the literature of VR technology and its

proven success in the literature, Jai-Ye et al. (2021)

identified that more research is needed to understand

how knowledge transfer is impacted with the different

learning styles that interact with VR technology.

Learning style is the behaviours that a person adopts

to navigate the learning environment, as shown by

their habits and preferences (Messick, 1976).

Gardner’s (1985) work became associated with

identifying seven learning styles that he called

intelligences through the theory of Multiple

Intelligences. Gardner saw a problem with

intelligence testing in schools in that they historically

measured school success, rather than addressing all

types of intelligence success potential. Born from

Gardner’s work, the seven learning styles identify

individuals’ preferred methods for the learning and

processing information. Identifying learning styles

allow trainers in knowledge management systems to

tweak or adjust training to reach the highest number

of learners.

The learning styles are: interpersonal,

intrapersonal, kinesthetic, visual, logical, and

auditory (Gardner, 1985).

Throughout the remainder of the study, the term

sophisticated training environment is used to describe

a training environment that utilizes adult learning

theory and one that integrates all learning styles into

its training environment. In the next section, multiple

studies cite proof of the superiority of VR technology

throughout knowledge transfer systems.

2.3 Virtual Reality Technology

VR technology is defined as a computer simulated

three-dimensional environment that creates a virtual

world (Garb, 1987). Virtual Reality studies are

concentrated in the medical field with some

application across manufacturing, academic and other

industries (Salsabeel et al., 2019; Chang et al., 2019).

VR technology is superior to other training

approaches because of its ability to impact different

learning styles (Sitzmann, 2011).

The end of this section will include a review of

VR technology in the medical and aviation field, and

other industries.

2.3.1 VR Technology across Industries

In the manufacturing environment, Gabajová et al.

(2019) completed an assembly study with individuals

who were aided by an instruction manual compared

to individuals aided by VR technology. On average,

VR technology saved individuals 36.16% of the

seconds required to complete an assembly task.

Gabajová et al.’s study inadequately describes how

limited printed materials impact adult learning prior

to VR integration. The VR technology is capable of

appealing to all seven learning styles in a way the

instruction manual cannot. Comparing VR

technology with an instruction manual does not

demonstrate superiority of VR technology. Rather it

shows the ineffectiveness of instruction manuals in

adult learning and knowledge transfer. (Gabajová, et

al., 2019).

VR technology shows evidence of improved

knowledge transfer in the medical field (Chang et al.,

2019; Salsabeel, 2019). Chang et al. (2019)

conducted a nursing study where students in Taiwan

received either VR technology or an instructor-led

training with video instruction to learn childbearing

techniques. The study found that VR technology

increased knowledge transfer because the students

were better able to gain a well-rounded experience

that was not provided with a two-dimensional video

and instructor-led training. Results from the study

showed that the nursing students who received

training through VR technology demonstrated greater

expertise post-training than the students receiving

instructor-led and video training.

The comments of participants in the Chang et al.

study shared that video instruction lacked the

inclusion of multiple video angles to allow learners to

visualize the full anatomy and childbearing process,

proving that all learning styles were not considered in

initial training.

A mining study introduced a VR-based game to

train workers on safety hazards, proving that VR

technology is more effective than previous training

Virtual Reality (VR) Technology Integration in the Training Environment Leads to Behaviour Change

201

methods that include training manuals and videos

(Liang, Zhou, & Gao, 2019). The mining study

provides another example where VR technology is

compared to a training environment that does not

consider equal learning styles.

2.3.2 VR Technology in Healthcare

The medical field adapts superior training. VR

technology in the medical field provides more

accurate studies of the effectiveness of VR

technology due to the high quality of the training

environment pre- and post-VR implementation.

Medical studies prove that VR technology best

transfers skills when health professionals interval

train for short periods over an extended time

(Gallagher et al., 2005).

A study out of Jordan that simulates a heart

provides a more accurate comparison to how groups

might benefit similarly from VR and simulation. The

virtual model received higher satisfaction from

medical students implying greater learning; a

limitation of this study is that effectiveness is based

on survey rather than behaviour change (Salsabeel et

al., 2019).

Kyaw et al. (2019) conducts a meta-analysis of

virtual reality technology studies educating health

professionals. The cumulative review of research

spanning 1990 to 2017 found that VR technology

shows evidence of improving knowledge and

cognitive skills in health professionals. Behaviour

change is not reviewed or understood as to how it is

impacted by VR technology.

A Hong Kong study develops VR technology as

part of an interactive training program to aid in

procedures related to patient diagnostics. The study

finds value in the VR technology to transfer

knowledge, but like many studies before it, fails to

measure behaviour change post-training (Tang et al.,

2020).

New research in the medical field provides the

possibility of measuring brain activity during VR

technology simulation to understand how the brain

responds in virtual worlds Gillian, 2019). The

immersion of this technology provides additional data

points to measure the effectiveness of VR technology,

however post-VR technology performance is still a

critical step in understanding how VR technology in

the training environment aids in behaviour change

post-training. Unfortunately, VR technology studies

in the medical field continue to present a gap from

effectiveness in the training environment to proven

behaviour change in the field (Papanikolaou et al.,

2019). Before discussing behaviour change in greater

detail, the next section investigates current VR

technology studies in the aviation industry.

2.3.3 VR Technology in Aviation

The aviation industry, like the medical field, adopts

sophisticated training that includes testing and

verification of the training environment to maximize

knowledge transfer. In a study of 310 aviation

students across ten United States institutions, students

identify VR technology as useful, enjoyable, and

positively impacting learning (Fussell & Truong,

2021).

A 2017 study chronicles the efficacy of different

VR technology display screens utilized in the aviation

training environment to understand the effectiveness

of VR technology (Buttussi & Chittaro, 2018).

Regardless of VR technology utilizing two-

dimensional or three-dimensional images through

either a desktop monitor or head mounted hardware,

Buttussi and Chittaro’s study finds that knowledge

and self-efficacy improve utilizing all types of VR

technology regardless of monitor type through

rigorous examination of workers prior to training,

post-training, and two weeks after training (2018).

A German aviation study compared VR

technology flight simulation to hardware flight

simulators to compare speed and accuracy of pilots in

the two environments. In this study, pilots spent more

time in VR technology to engage cockpit

instrumentation than they did in the hardware flight

simulation (Oberhauser et al., 2018).

More recent studies on aircraft pilots determine

the efficacy of VR technology as a training tool. A

pilot training study shows VR technology leading to

higher test scores for pilots (Dymora et al., 2021).

Another pilot study demonstrates that VR technology

is effective in measuring cognitive ability, situational

awareness, and prospective memory (Van Benthem &

Herdman, 2021).

In both pilot studies, the data did not compare

similar training environments: one with VR

technology and one without VR technology, which

would have allowed the VR technology to serve as

the true differentiator in the success of the training.

Throughout aviation studies, recent analyses link

the time spent in VR technology and the ability of the

firm to integrate the VR technology as factors in

effective utilization. Time spent with VR technology

requires further study, but there is evidence that firms

who better integrate the VR technology into their

training environment see enhanced results of VR

technology utilization (Buttussi & Chittaro, 2018;

Oberhauser et al., 2018; Dymora et al., 2021)

KMIS 2022 - 14th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems

202

2.4 Cynefin Framework

Use Snowden’s (2002) Cynefin Framework provides

perspective of how to view the growing issue with VR

technology studies that compare sophisticated VR

technology with poor training in an unsophisticated

learning environment. In many of the studies

discussed here, the control group functioned without

VR technology in an environment that did not

implement adult learning theory, nor benefit an equal

number of learning styles.

To better understand the current problem with

VR technology, the Cynefin Framework (Figure 1) is

reviewed through different domains to identify where

current studies lack the perspective of how to make

decisions and understand the full impact of VR

technology.

The virtual reality studies examined here reflect

a Simple (bottom domain) approach to the impact of

VR technology in training. Ranging from surveys

where workers preferred VR hearts versus physical

replica hearts to manufacturing a product through VR

versus an instruction manual, the studies take a linear

approach to understanding the impact of VR

technology without considering the whole

environment or the needs of stakeholders. The Simple

domain accounts for linear cause and effect

relationships which some VR technology studies

claim. The assumption that VR technology can be

proven by comparing current status of training to

adding a VR technology is an oversimplification that

does not investigate the learner behaviours or state of

the environment where VR technology is inserted.

Figure 1: Cynefin Framework from A leader’s framework

for decision making, by D. Snowden & M. Boone, 2007.

The Complicated domain (right domain)

represents an issue or decision that may have several

paths to the correct answer. It is possible that VR

technology in training is complicated in nature. While

several paths forward may exist qualifying how VR

technology should and should not be used, the sense-

analyze-respond steps do not ring true in this context.

The initial understanding of VR technology should

include a more thorough investigation before sensing

can take place. The failing of current studies is the

lack of investigation into understanding the training

environment before the insertion of VR technology.

In the Chaotic domain (left quadrant), no

relationship exists between the circumstances, which

does not apply to the effectiveness of VR technology

in the training environment.

The Complex domain (top quadrant) is where the

VR technology issues lie in most firms. In order to

form a more complete understanding of how VR

technology stands to benefit the firm, probe and

analysis must first take place to decipher the level of

adult learning theory in place with the current training

as well as the learning styles that benefit from current

training. Once a thorough understanding of the

training environment is reached, researchers can

sense the best path forward to measure the impact of

VR technology and act.

2.5 Behaviour Change

In the automotive and airline industries, previous

studies integrated knowledge management models

and synthesized them into the Knowledge Transfer

Measurement Model (KTMM) (Figure 2). KTMM

demonstrates the different ways firms can measure

the success of knowledge transfer while identifying

direct relationships between training and business

results (Rosellini 2017, 2019).

Figure 2: Knowledge Transfer Measurement Model from

Knowledge measurement model to measure the impact of

formal training on firms, by Rosellini, 2017.

Formal training environments provide learning to

workers in a way that allows them to capture both

explicit and tacit knowledge, then put the knowledge

into practice through behaviour change. KTMM

outlines measurement tools that help measure the

progress of the knowledge transfer process. While

Virtual Reality (VR) Technology Integration in the Training Environment Leads to Behaviour Change

203

assessments are valuable tools to understand if

knowledge has been transferred, observation of

behaviour change is a superior measure of success for

knowledge management systems (Rosellini, 2019;

Rosellini & Hawamdeh, 2020).

When measuring safety over sales, the current

study utilizes observation by a third-party to answer

the following questions: How does the addition of VR

technology impact post-training behaviour in

identical environments that adopt adult learning

theory? How does the VR technology’s impact

change over time?

3 METHODOLOGY

At a U.S.-based airline, flight attendants are spend

time in both VR technology and in-person instructor-

led training to learn essential safety behaviors. This

particular airline was selected because of the superior

training environment provided to its workers. Details

of the training environment cannot be shared in this

study, in order to maintain the confidentiality.

This study is presenting new data at the early

stages of analysis. Data sets include flight attendants

scores from three time periods: 2021-2022 represents

results for both a non-VR and VR flight attendant

scores; 2019 represents the same populations; 2017

represents scores prior to VR launch.

3.1 Sample Size

To protect company data, the population of total flight

attendants is not shared publicly. The sample size is

statistically significant and includes over 26,600

flight attendant scores from drills assessed by a

supervisor.

The pre-VR technology data set includes a

statistically significant population of flight attendant

scores to compare flight attendant behaviours prior to

and after introducing VR technology into the training

environment (Table 1).

Table 1: Population Comparison of participating flight

attendant scores in VR Technology study.

Date Range

Control

Group

(no VR)

Test

Group

(with VR)

October 2021 -

February 2022

543 8,332

January 2019 -

Decembe

2019

5,370 6,633

January 2017 –

Decembe

2017

5,723 -

The second time frame selected (2019) was

shortly after VR technology integration began.

Except for the VR technology, control groups and test

groups receive the same training in the same time

frame. The third time period includes flight attendant

drill scores prior to VR technology integration.

3.2 Testing

After the completion of flight attendant training and

prior to completing flight attendant certification, the

airline assesses flight attendants on a series of

behaviour drills. The behaviour drills are measured

one-on-one by a member of the training staff.

Behaviour drills allow the firm to assess the

capability of the flight attendant to pass safety and

regulatory behaviours required to complete

certification. Based on KTMM, testing of the research

questions includes observations of behaviour change

post-training, rather than survey or assessment. The

benefit of studying behaviour change post-training is

that firms can begin to understand the outcomes they

can expect from VR technology integration.

To test the impact of VR technology integration

in a sophisticated training environment, this study

utilizes an Independent Samples Test of the one-on-

one observation scores of behaviour drills. The

behaviour drill scores are compiled in three different

time periods: prior to VR technology integration,

upon initial adoption of VR technology integration,

and after two years utilizing VR technology. For the

time periods when the firm is utilizing VR

technology, both a control group and test group were

used to compare average scores both with and without

VR technology integration.

The scores of behaviour drills include a 5-point

range where scores of 4-5 are considered passing

scores. For seasoned flight attendants with in-flight

experience at the airline, scores of 3-5 are considered

passing.

4 RESULTS

The results of the Independent Samples Test show an

increase in behaviour outcomes with VR technology

integration in the learning environment. The sample

size of the population tested immediately after VR

technology integration provides the greatest

significance into the effectiveness of VR technology

integrated into the sophisticated training

environment.

KMIS 2022 - 14th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems

204

Graph 1: Population Comparison of Flight Attendants

scores with non-VR integration and VR integration.

4.1 VR Technology Impacts Behaviour

Change

As a result of VR integration, the scores of behaviour

drills increased in the test group. Graph 1 illustrates

the increase in score from 4.3201 with the non-VR

technology users to 4.3774 with the VR technology

users. With a p value < .001, the mean score of VR-

users compared to non-VR users is statistically

significant.

4.2 Behaviour Stabilizes Post-VR

Technology Integration

According to previous research, firms benefit from

the utilization of VR technology over time as they

learn to integrate the software into the current training

environment. In the experiential training environment

that utilizes adult learning theory and integrates

learning styles, VR technology results in an increase

in knowledge transfer behaviour change. Graph 2

shows how the population scored prior to VR

technology integration with timeline comparison of

how average scores changed with initial VR

technology rollout and two years after VR

integration.

Although this study is early in analysis, initial

findings illustrate how the populations’ average

scores improved with VR initial integration, then

maintained similar average score after two years of

utilizing VR technology in the training environment.

The initial results point to consistent results of VR

technology improving behaviour change regardless

of the firms’ experience with VR technology.

Graph 2: Comparison of flight attendant scores prior to VR

integration (2017), immediately after VR integration

(2019), and 2 years after VR integration (2021-2022).

4.3 Firm VR Technology Integration

Produces Mixed Results for Non-

VR Users

An unintended result of this study was decrease in

average score of non-VR users after the firm

integrated VR technology into the training

environment.

Graph 3: Mean Score Comparison of non-VR participating

Flight Attendants prior to VR technology integration (2017)

and post-VR technology integration (2019).

In the populations of Graph 3, all participants

completed experiential training and did not

participate in VR technology integration. Despite no

change in the flight attendant group’s training, the

later group experienced a decrease in average scores

after the firm integrated VR technology with other

flight attendant groups. More analysis into this

anomaly will be conducted and this decrease is

discussed more in the Conclusion.

4,3915

4,4375 4,437

2017 2019 2021-2022

4,3915

4,3398

2017 2019

4,3201

4,3774

Control Group,

Non-VR Users

Test Group,

VR-users

< .001

Virtual Reality (VR) Technology Integration in the Training Environment Leads to Behaviour Change

205

4.4 Limitations

The study is not intended to compare the capability of

different VR technologies, rather to explore how a

experiential learning environment compares to a

virtual experience. Failing to explore how the

different VR technologies play a role in learning,

while intentional, is a limitation of this study.

In the control group, the control group that did not

integrate VR technology included flight attendants

that had the most in-flight experience and whose

previous training did not include VR technology. The

years’ experience is a limitation in the study because

the years of in-flight experience is significantly

different between the control and test groups. The test

groups were new flight attendants in the firm,

attending training at the airline for the first time.

While it is possible members of the test group worked

for other airlines and had some in-flight experience,

the significant difference in years’ experience is a

limitation of the results of the study. Additional

limitation of the control group is that the control

group in the seasoned VR technology timeframe

represented less than 7.0% of the total population

tested, limiting the usefulness of data from this

sample population.

The study was unable to compare and measure the

work history of flight attendants in the test groups.

Additional research should be conducted to

understand how previous in flight experience impacts

of neutralizes the effectiveness of VR technology

when integrated into a sophisticated training

environment.

Lastly, a limitation in this study was that flight

attendants were not surveyed to understand their

previous experience with VR technology. It is

possible that the consistent results of training with VR

integration is also linked to the average age of the test

group and likelihood that they have previous

experience with VR technology. Further testing will

enable researchers to isolate previous VR technology

experience either in leisure or a professional setting

to understand its impact on VR technology

integration in the training environment.

5 CONCLUSIONS

The integration of VR technology blended with

sophisticated training allows firms to maximize the

learning styles of individuals while improving overall

behaviour change of workers. Given the

concentration of VR technology research in the last

five years, more data must be collected and analysed

to understand how VR technology impacts behaviour

change to a greater or similar degree to classroom

simulations.

5.1 Implications for Knowledge

Management Systems

The implication of knowledge management systems

is that VR technology continues to spread in new

industries, but how it impacts knowledge transfer and

ultimately behaviour change must be considered in

light of training environments that are its equal in how

they adapt to different learning styles. Current studies

lead practitioners to believe that VR technology

improves learning and knowledge transfer. There is

not sufficient evidence to support that VR technology

is more effective than Kolb’s model of adult learning

theory utilized in the training environment; however,

the study suggests that VR technology when used in

tandem with a sophisticated training environment

results in improved knowledge transfer behaviour

change.

An unexpected result of the initial analysis was the

decrease in average scores of non-VR users when VR

technology was integrated into the firm. A possible

explanation is that training resources in the firm were

deployed to support the new VR technology,

changing the training environment in a way that

decreased knowledge transfer and resulted in

decreased learning. Further research into the data and

follow-up with the firms is critical to understand what

changed for non-VR users when VR technology was

integrated into the training environment.

As learning technology increases in the aviation

and other industries, the benefits in behaviour change

provide a positive indication of the future use of VR

technology.

REFERENCES

Ahn, J. & Chang, S. (2004). Assessing the contribution of

knowledge to business performance: the KP3

methodology. Decision Support Systems 36(4): 403-

416. DOI: 10.1016/S0167-9236(03)00029-0

Buttussi, F. & Chittaro, L. (2018). Effects of Different

Types of Virtual Reality Display on Presence and

Learning in a Safety Training Scenario. IEEE

Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics,

24(2):1063-1076. DOI: 10.1109/TVCG.2017.2653117

Chang, C., Sung, H., Guo, J., Chang, B. & Kuo, F. (2022).

Effects of spherical video-based virtual reality on

nursing students’ learning performance in childbirth

education training. Interactive Learning Environments,

KMIS 2022 - 14th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems

206

30(3,) 400-416. DOI: 10.1080/10494820.2019.16618

Dymora, P., Kowal, B., Mazurek, M., & Romana, S.

(2021). The effects of virtual reality technology

application in the aircraft pilot training process. IOP

Conference Series. Materials Science and Engineering,

1024(1): 1-9. DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/1024/1/012099

Fussell, S. & Truong, D. (2021) Accepting virtual reality

for dynamic learning: an extension of the technology

acceptance model. Interactive Learning Environments,

Ahead of Print: 1-18. DOI: 10.1080/10494820.2021.

2009880

Gabajová, G., Furmannová, B., Medvecká, I., Krajčovič,

M., & Furmann, R. (2019). Virtual training application

by use of augmented and virtual reality under university

technology enhanced learning in slovakia.

Sustainability, 11(23), 6677. doi:https://doi-

org.libproxy.library.unt.edu/10.3390/su11236677

Gallagher, A. G., Ritter, E. M., Champion, H., Higgins, G.,

Fried, M. P., Moses, G., Smith, C. D., & Satava, R. M.

(2005). Virtual reality simulation for the operating

room: proficiency-based training as a paradigm shift in

surgical skills training. Annals of surgery, 241(2): 364–

372. DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000151982.85062.80

Garb, Y. (1987). Virtual reality computers encourage

substitution of symbols for the world. Whole Earth

Review, 57, 118–125.

Gardner, H. (1985). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple

intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Incao, J. (2018). How VR is transforming the way we train

associates. Retrieved from: walmart.com

Jia-Ye, C., Ruo-Fan, W., Cui-Yu, W., Xin-Dong, Y., &

Xiao-Zhi, L. (2021). The influence of learners’

cognitive style and testing environment supported by

virtual reality on english-speaking learning

achievement. Sustainability, 13(21): 11751. DOI:

10.3390/su132111751

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the

source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Knowles, M., Holton, E., & Swanson, R. (2005). The Adult

Learner, 6

edition. London: Routledge. DOI:

10.4324/9780080481913

Kuah, C.T., & Wong, K.Y. (2011). Knowledge

management performance measurement: A review.

African Journal of Business Management, 5(15): 6021–

6027.

Kyaw, B.M., Saxena, N., Posadzki. P., Vseteckova, J.,

Nikolaou, C.K., George, P.P., Divakar, U., Masiello, I.,

Kononowicz, A.A., Zary, N., & Car, L.T. (2019).

Virtual Reality for Health Professions Education:

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital

Health Education Collaboration. Journal of Medical

Internet Research 21(1): 12959. DOI: 10.2196/12959.

PMID: 30668519; PMCID: PMC6362387.

Liang, Z., Zhou, K., & Gao, K. (2019). Development of

virtual reality serious game for underground rock-

related hazards safety training. IEEE Access 7: 118639-

118649. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934990

Messick, S. (1976). Personality consistencies in cognition

and creativity. In S. Messick (Ed.), Individuality in

learning: 4–23. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Noguchi, Y. (2019). Virtual reality goes to work, helping

train employees. Retrieved from: https://www.npr.org/

2019/10/08/767116408/virtual-reality-goes-to-work-

helping-train-employees

Oberhauser, M., Dreyer, D., Braunstingl, R., & Koglbauer,

I. (2018). What’s real about the virtual reality flight

simulation? Comparing the fidelity of a virtual reality

with a conventional flight simulation environment.

Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors, 8(1):

27-34. DOI: 10.1027/2192-0923/a000134

Papanikolaou, I.G., Haldopoulos, D., Paschopoulos, M.,

Chatzipapas, I., Loutradis, D., & Vlahos, N.F. (2019).

Changing the way we train surgeons in the 21st

Century: A narrative comparative review focused on

box trainers and virtual reality simulators. European

Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive

Biology 235: 13-18. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.01.0

16.

Rosellini, A. (2017). Knowledge transfer model to measure

the impact of formal training on sales performance. In

D.G. Alemneh, J.M. Allen, & S. Hawamdeh (Eds.),

Knowledge Discovery and Data Design Innovation, pp.

127–144). World Scientific. http://doi.org/10.1142/

sikm1793-153310.1142/10832

Rosellini, A. (2019). Effective knowledge transfer and

behavioural change in a training environment. Journal

of Information & Knowledge Management, 18(4): 1–

14. DOI: 10.1142/S0219649219500497

Rosellini, A. & Hawamdeh, S. (2020). Tacit knowledge

transfer in training and the inherent limitations of using

only quantitative measures. Proceedings of the

Association of Information Science Technology 2020

57(1): 272-280. DOI: 10.1002/pra2.272

Salsabeel, F.M.A., Falah, J.F.M., Alfalah, T., Elfalah, M.,

Muhaidat, N., & Falah, O. (2019). A comparative study

between a virtual reality heart anatomy system and

traditional edition.

Sitzmann, T. (2011). A meta-analytical examination of the

instructional effectiveness of computer-based

simulation games. Personnel Psychology, 64(2): 489-

528. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01190.x

Tang, Y.M., You Ng, G.W., Chia, N.H., Kwong So, E.H.,

Wu, C.H., Ip, W.H. (2020). Application of virtual

reality (VR) technology for medical practitioners in

type and screen (T&S) training. Journal of Computer

Assisted Learning 37(2): 359-369. DOI:

10.1111/jcal.12494

Van Benthem, K., & Herdman, C. M. (2021). A virtual

reality cognitive health screening tool for aviation:

Managing accident risk for older pilots. International

Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 85: 103169.

Virtual Reality (VR) Technology Integration in the Training Environment Leads to Behaviour Change

207