Professional experience and subjective evaluation of multimodal virtual training for underground loader operation

Subjective evaluations of occupational virtual training may depend on whether participants represent its intended professional users. This study examined experience-group differences within two multimodal underground-loader training configurations: head-mounted-display (HMD) inspection with visual and auditory presentation and handheld interaction, and cabin operation combining visual and auditory presentation, authentic physical controls, and vestibular motion cues. One hundred and twenty male participants formed four independent groups of 30, comprising novices and experienced operators in each configuration. After one training exposure, participants completed assessments of presence, acceptance, workload, stress state, usability, and training/work experience; simulator sickness was measured before and after exposure. Two-sided, tie-adjusted Mann–Whitney tests used Benjamini–Hochberg false discovery rate control at q = 0.05 in two separate families of 28 outcomes. One HMD and seven cabin comparisons survived adjustment. HMD operators reported lower self-location. Cabin operators reported lower simulator sickness scores, sickness change, suspension-of-disbelief scores, and mental demand, and higher spatial situation modelling, adequacy/relevance, and self-rated task completion. Effect-size magnitudes ranged from r = 0.35 to 0.51; a dependence-robust sensitivity analysis retained four contrasts. Usability differences did not survive adjustment. These differences support including professional target users in multidimensional evaluations of occupational training interfaces. However, because the two configurations involved different tasks and the outcomes were immediate self-reports, the study cannot isolate sensory-modality effects or establish training transfer.