Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In education and training, Mixed Reality (MR) is a thriving technology leveraged to enhance engagement and collaboration, and to maximize learning outcomes. However, there is no consensus among researchers on how to evaluate these systems, causing fragmentation in the methodological approaches and the aspects addressed in the appraisal of educational MR. This constraint limits cross-study comparisons and hampers the consolidation of design guidelines that incorporate the students’ perception into the creation of MR systems. This systematic literature review analyzes User eXperience (UX) evaluation methods applied in educational MR over the past five years. Main findings indicate a lack of a theoretical UX model specific to educational MR, an overreliance on self-reported questionnaires, limited use of physiological measurements, and scarce integration of educational theories into MR studies. Additionally, heuristic evaluation and early-stage qualitative techniques (i.e., Wizard of Oz, Think Aloud) remain underutilized. Although the HoloLens series dominates MR research, its continuity is unclear as of the search date, considering Microsoft discontinued its development toolkit. Other headsets and novel displays found in literature (i.e., projector-based, HTC Vive) remain understudied. Addressing these challenges will enhance the role of MR in education through the generation of new instruments tailored to evaluate this technology from the user’s perspective, thus promoting evaluation consistency and encouraging the integration of learning outcomes. This review highlights gaps in standardized evaluation instruments and proposes methodological recommendations for future appraisal of MR in the context of education programs. This paper contributes practical recommendations for educators to align the development of MR systems to the ever-changing needs of students, thereby promoting the design of student-centered MR systems.
García-Saldes et al. (Mon,) studied this question.