Quasi-experimental study shows virtual reality increases academic performance in psychology students, highlighting the role of ICTs.
The growing number of students in higher education has raised challenges in inclusion and equity due to the diversity of students’ backgrounds and entry-level skills. Educational institutions must adapt teaching-learning strategies to ensure the achievement of learning outcomes. In this context, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), combined with gamification, offer tools like Labster™, which enable interactive scientific simulations and promote active learning. This study used a quasi-experimental design with self-selected participation to evaluate the impact of Labster in a “Biological Foundations of Psychology” course across nine nationwide sections. The sample consisted of 315 first-year Psychology students, 237 in the experimental group and 78 in the control group. Given the non-normal distribution of academic data (Shapiro-Wilk test, p < 0.05), non-parametric tests were applied. A Kruskal-Wallis test on learnng gain (final minus initial grade) showed that students using Labster achieved significantly greater academic improvement than the control group ( H = 12.347, p = 0.00004). A multiple linear regression, controlling for baseline performance (cat_1, ej_1, ta_1), confirmed that participation in the intervention predicted higher final grades (β = 0.3891, p = 0.0053; adjusted R 2 = 0.216). No significant differences were found between the two types of simulations used (Kruskal-Wallis, p = 0.2814). A perception survey was administered to 237 Labster users, of whom 87 responded (response rate: 36.7%). The results revealed positive evaluations regarding usability, academic relevance, and motivational impact. In summary, Labster-based virtual simulations enhance academic performance and individual progress in scientific learning among psychology students, especially in diverse and non-science-oriented populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carrasco et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: