Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Immersive virtual reality (IVR) is increasingly used for scientific data visualization, with the expectation that greater immersion will enhance both engagement and understanding. However, prior research suggests a potential trade‐off: IVR can heighten affective responses while impairing cognitive learning due to increased cognitive load. To examine this tension in abstract scientific visualization, we conducted a between‐subjects study (N=84) comparing head‐mounted display (HMD) VR with traditional desktop displays as participants explored three climate datasets on an interactive 3D globe. We measured cognitive and affective learning outcomes after each exploration trial and at a two‐week follow‐up. We additionally logged patterns of visualization exploration during trials, and measured user experience post‐study and at two‐week follow‐up. Results reveal systematic divergences: desktop displays led to significantly higher recall accuracy and promoted more systematic exploration patterns, while HMD‐based VR produced stronger short‐term increases in climate concern and higher satisfaction ratings. Critically, affective changes largely reverted to baseline at follow‐up regardless of modality. We further identify five distinct exploration strategies that emerge differentially across modalities and relate directly to learning outcomes. Overall, our findings highlight how modality choice should align with visualization goals, and offer actionable insights into designing effective scientific visualizations that balance cognitive and affective learning objectives. All data and materials are available at: https://osf.io/24w7s/ .
Arunkumar et al. (Tue,) studied this question.