][]  
Article  
Virtual Reality and Its Main Characteristics: A Beginner’s  
Guide  
Realidad Virtual y sus principales características: una guía  
para principiantes  
Mauricio Vásquez-Carbonell 1∗ and Soraya Saad-Arcón 2  
1
Faculty of Engineering, Systems Engineering Program, Universidad Simón Bólivar, Barranquilla, 111321, Colombia;  
mauricio.vasquez@unisimon.edu.co  
Faculty of Science, Education, Art, and Humanities, Graphic Design Program, Institución Universitaria de Barranquilla,  
2
Barranquilla, 11100, Colombia; sorayasaad@unibarranquilla.edu.co  
∗
Correspondence: mauricio.vasquez@unisimon.edu.co  
Citation: Vásquez, M.; Saad, S. Virtual Reality and Its Main Characteristics: A Beginner’s Guide. OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2.  
https://doi.org/10.70554/OBJK2025.v01n01.07  
Received: 24/02/2025, Accepted: 30/04/2025, Published: 03/06/2025  
DOI: https://doi.org/10.70554/OBJK2025.v01n01.07  
Abstract: Virtual Reality (VR) is a transformative technology that simulates environments through computer-generated  
imagery, aiming to replicate real-world experiences. Defined by three main characteristics: immersion, perception,  
and interactivity, VR has great potential in various fields, particularly in education and therapy. Despite its promise,  
it has not achieved the level of adoption anticipated, often due to technological and economic barriers. This article  
provides an introductory guide for beginners, explaining the sensory roles in VR and how these elements contribute  
to creating immersive experiences. It also explores VR’s applications, including its role in training and education, its  
motivational benefits, and therapeutic uses. Additionally, the article discusses the challenges that hinder VR’s widespread  
implementation, such as high costs, cognitive load, and lack of essential applications. The aim is to shed light on the  
importance of VR as a powerful educational tool while highlighting the factors impeding its broader adoption.  
Keywords: Immersion; Interactivity; Massification; Perception; Senses; Virtual Reality  
Resumen: La Realidad Virtual (RV) es una tecnología transformadora que simula entornos a través de imágenes  
generadas por computadora, con el objetivo de replicar experiencias del mundo real. Definida por tres características  
principales: inmersión, percepción e interactividad, la RV tiene un gran potencial en diversos campos, particularmente en  
educación y terapia. A pesar de su promesa, no ha alcanzado el nivel de adopción esperado, debido a menudo a barreras  
tecnológicas y económicas. Este artículo ofrece una guía introductoria para principiantes, explicando los roles sensoriales  
en la RV y cómo estos elementos contribuyen a crear experiencias inmersivas. También explora las aplicaciones de la RV,  
incluida su función en la capacitación y educación, sus beneficios motivacionales y sus usos terapéuticos. Además, se  
abordan los desafíos que dificultan la implementación generalizada de la RV, como los altos costos, la carga cognitiva  
y la falta de aplicaciones esenciales. El objetivo es destacar la importancia de la RV como una poderosa herramienta  
educativa, al mismo tiempo que se resaltan los factores que impiden su adopción más amplia.  
Palabras clave: Inmersión; Interactividad; Masificación; Percepción; Realidad Virtual; Sentidos  
OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2.  
https://revistasescuelanaval.com/obk/  
© 2026 by authors.  
Licensed by Escuela Naval de Cadetes "Almirante Padilla", COL.  
This article is freely accessible and distributed under the terms and conditions  
of Creative Commons Attribution (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).  
OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2  
2 of 10  
1. Introduction  
In today’s era, technology has become an outstanding tool for creating new types of experiences. It can  
be confidently stated that scenario simulation holds some of the greatest potential among these innovations.  
Among the various technologies available, Virtual Reality (VR) is undoubtedly the most recognized, as it  
offers levels of immersion that other technologies are unable to match.  
First mentioned in the 1960s by Ivan E. Sutherland, VR has evolved over time, giving rise to new  
experiences across different fields. Although the term “Virtual Reality” was coined in 1989 by Jaron Lanier, a  
former Atari employee and executive at VPL Research Inc., the concept has existed under various names that  
share the same core idea: offering an experience that differs from the user’s physical surroundings. Terms  
such as Telepresence, Virtual Environments, Artificial Reality, and Synthetic Environment have all been used  
to describe this technology and are still used today [12;39].  
VR presents endless opportunities across a wide range of fields; however, it has not yet achieved the  
level of widespread adoption once anticipated. Several factors may have influenced this limited reach, and  
understanding them is essential to contextualizing the development and current state of the technology.  
Likewise, clarifying fundamental concepts such as immersion, perception, interactivity, and the role of  
sensory input contributes to a clearer understanding of VR and its potential uses across different domains.  
This article is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the main contributions of the study, outlining  
the key insights and objectives. Section 3 details the methodology used to gather and analyze information  
about Virtual Reality (VR). Section 4.1 introduces the fundamental concepts of VR, including its history and  
defining characteristics. Sections 4.2 and 4.3 explore VR’s applications in education and therapy, as well as its  
role as a motivational tool. Section 4.4 distinguishes VR from related technologies such as Augmented Reality  
and Mixed Reality. Sections 4.5 and 4.6 discuss the importance of the senses in VR and the relationship  
between immersion, perception, and interactivity. Section 4.7 reviews the positive and negative aspects of  
VR, while Section 4.8 examines the factors hindering its widespread adoption. Finally, Section ?? present the  
conclusions and suggestions for future research.  
2. Contributions  
This work provides a comprehensive introductory overview of Virtual Reality (VR), aimed at clarifying  
fundamental concepts for readers new to the technology. The main contributions include:  
i.  
A clear explanation of VR’s defining characteristics; immersion, perception, and interactivity, high-  
lighting their interrelations and importance for creating engaging virtual experiences.  
An analysis of the role of human senses in VR, emphasizing how sensory stimulation enhances  
immersion and influences user experience.  
A detailed review of VR’s educational and therapeutic applications, illustrating its unique ability to  
simulate unlikely scenarios and support task repetition in controlled environments.  
An evaluation of both positive and negative aspects of VR, including motivational benefits and  
challenges such as cognitive load and cybersickness.  
ii.  
iii.  
iv.  
v.  
Identification and discussion of the key factors hindering VR’s widespread adoption, such as device  
costs, technological unfamiliarity, and the lack of indispensable applications.  
vi.  
The presentation of this knowledge in a structured, beginner-friendly manner to support wider  
understanding and potential future adoption of VR technologies in education and other sectors.  
3. Methodology  
This study employs a descriptive and analytical approach to present the foundational concepts and  
current status of Virtual Reality (VR) technology. It is based on an extensive review of relevant literature,  
including seminal works and recent advances related to VR’s core characteristics, sensory involvement,  
educational applications, and challenges to widespread adoption.  
   
OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2  
3 of 10  
The methodology encompasses a thorough literature review, conceptual analysis of sensory engagement  
in VR, a survey of its practical applications in education and therapy, and identification of barriers to mass  
adoption through market and user experience evaluations. The synthesized findings are organized to offer a  
clear and accessible introduction for beginners, emphasizing both the opportunities and limitations of VR  
technology.  
4. Results  
4.1. What is Virtual Reality?  
From its inception, concepts such as simulation and telepresence have been associated with this tech-  
nology. Initially, Ivan E. Sutherland discussed the possibility of emulating the real world, with all its  
characteristics, through the use of electronic devices such as displays and computers, which would later  
become known as Virtual Reality (VR) [12]. Not long after, Myron Krueger also contributed to the field with  
the development of responsive environments. However, the term "Virtual Reality", which became the most  
widely used name for the technology, was coined in 1989 by Jaron Lanier, a former employee of Atari and  
VPL Research [27].  
In 1992, Fuchs emphasized the importance of concepts like immersion in simulated environments and  
also used terms such as Virtual Environment. He noted that while the technology might go by various names,  
the core objective remained the same: to create a simulated world [12].  
By analyzing the evolving definitions over time, Virtual Reality can be broadly defined as a computer-  
based system designed to simulate the characteristics of the real world. Although definitions may differ in  
certain aspects, most of them consistently emphasize three fundamental elements: immersion, perception,  
and interactivity [2;6;9].  
4.2. VR in education and treatment of patients  
In the present day, technology has significantly enhanced the process of knowledge transfer between  
teachers and students. Recognizing the educational potential of Virtual Reality (VR), numerous researchers  
have begun experimenting with this tool. This interest is largely driven by VR’s ability to simulate uncommon  
scenarios and support the easy repetition of tasks [1;26;33].  
A common example is the creation of virtual environments to support medical education. By simulating  
operating rooms and other clinical facilities, VR enables students to practice surgical procedures without  
the risk of harming real patients [11;30]. This reduces the cognitive load on students, while increasing their  
confidence and competence. These benefits tend to improve over time as learners engage in repeated practice  
within VR settings [7;18;45].  
Researchers such as Frank Biocca, Jack Loomis, and Jim Blascovich also recognized VR’s potential,  
particularly within the social sciences, and conducted numerous studies utilizing the technology [4;25].  
Blascovich even founded the first research center dedicated to exploring the use of VR in this field during the  
1990s. This milestone led to the development of a new form of therapy that employs virtual environments to  
simulate real-life situations that patients might otherwise avoid. Today, these therapeutic approaches remain  
widely used, as VR, like in education, offers a controlled, monitorable setting where users can engage in  
activities repeatedly and safely [16;41].  
4.3. VR as a motivational tool  
Virtual Reality (VR) offers numerous benefits, but its ability to motivate students and maintain their  
engagement in learning activities is particularly remarkable [10;35;44]. For this reason, VR is commonly  
used in educational and training contexts, as it allows learners to repeat tasks without the pressure of severe  
consequences in case of mistakes or failures.  
However, several factors must be considered when applying VR in educational settings. One notable  
concern is the high cognitive load often associated with its use. Therefore, it is crucial to assess whether  
VR is suitable for a given learning situation [24]. When implemented appropriately, VR can serve as an  
     
OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2  
4 of 10  
outstanding motivational tool, further enhancing its advantages when used to complement traditional  
educational methods [17].  
4.4. Differences between Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality and Mixed Reality  
In 1964, Ivan E. Sutherland proposed the creation of an artificial world that would emulate the character-  
istics of the real world. This vision would be realized through the use of electronic devices, such as computers  
and related technologies [40]. Over time, advancements in electronic devices have brought this idea closer to  
reality, enabling the development of unique and immersive virtual experiences. The core principle of Virtual  
Reality (VR) is to deceive the user’s senses and create the illusion of being in a different environment.  
In contrast, in 1990, Thomas Caudell introduced the concept of Augmented Reality (AR) to describe a  
new type of technology that, unlike VR, does not aim to create an entirely new reality, but rather to enhance  
the user’s perception of the real world [15]. This enhancement is achieved by overlaying digital elements,  
such as text, images, and 3D polygons, onto the physical environment. AR is widely used today, including in  
educational contexts.  
Another technological variation is Mixed Reality (MR), a term introduced in 1994 by Paul Milgram and  
Fumio Kishino. MR represents a hybrid of AR and VR, where real and virtual elements coexist and interact  
in real time [31;32]. Figure 1 illustrates the origin dates of VR, AR, and MR technologies.  
Figure 1. Birthdates of VR, AR and MR.  
Source: The authors.  
4.5. Senses in VR  
Without a doubt, the role of vision in Virtual Reality (VR) cannot be overstated. As the primary gateway  
to the virtual experience, it is widely regarded as the most crucial sense in the stimulation of VR environments.  
For this reason, visual input must be carefully considered to deliver a truly immersive experience. Vision  
is also classified as one of the key "external factors" that contribute to immersion in VR. Although other  
senses may not play as central a role as sight, they still significantly enhance the immersive quality of VR  
experiences [19;43].  
In reality, the process of creating immersive environments is more complex than it may initially appear.  
In the real world, we rely on all our senses to interpret and interact with our surroundings. As Sekuler and  
     
OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2  
5 of 10  
Blake noted, the brain serves as our main interface with external reality [  
5
]. Whether in a real or virtual  
environment, we receive sensory feedback that helps us make decisions based on context. In virtual settings,  
vision is often prioritized, followed by touch. While this focus is not inherently flawed, it differs significantly  
from real-life perception, where all senses, though used in varying degrees, contribute to the experience. This  
underscores the strong connection between sensory stimulation and immersion.  
Currently, immersion in VR can be classified into three levels. The first is Desktop VR, considered the  
most basic form of simulation. It typically involves standard monitors and lacks specialized devices for  
sensory stimulation, such as headsets or haptic controllers. The second level is Fish Tank VR, which employs  
more advanced technologies but relies on limited or basic sensory stimulation tools. These setups often  
provide moderate immersion and minimal interactivity. Finally, Immersive Systems represent the highest  
level of VR experience, utilizing advanced devices that offer rich multisensory engagement and the deepest  
levels of immersion [29].  
4.6. Immersion, Perception and Interactivity  
There are three core elements that are widely recognized as the main characteristics of Virtual Reality  
(VR): immersion, perception, and interactivity.  
The first is immersion, which refers to the ability of a simulation to recreate an environment, scenario,  
or situation, including the user, through the stimulation of the senses. Immersion enhances the realism of the  
experience and is essential for establishing a strong sense of engagement.  
Immersion, in turn, can lead to perception, often described as the feeling of “being there.” It refers to  
the user’s subjective experience of being physically present in a virtual environment, despite being located  
elsewhere in the real world. This concept is also commonly known as presence.  
The third element is interactivity, which is closely linked to immersion. Interactivity refers to the user’s  
ability to interact with the virtual environment and receive appropriate feedback based on their actions  
[5;9;37;43].  
As illustrated in Figure 2, immersion, perception, and interactivity work in synergy to create an engaging  
and convincing virtual experience, one that enables the user to feel truly transported to a different scenario.  
Figure 2. Immersion, perception and interactivity relationship.  
Source: The authors.  
4.7. Positives and negatives aspects of VR  
As previously mentioned, Virtual Reality (VR) is an excellent teaching tool that motivates students and  
enhances their engagement. Its educational effectiveness increases even further when used in combination  
with traditional instructional methods. Moreover, VR facilitates the transfer of knowledge between teachers  
and students, and supports skill acquisition through repeated practice in supervised environments [20].  
However, effective implementation of VR is essential, along with a thorough understanding of the  
context in which it will be applied. The use of VR can impose a high cognitive load on users [24], so it  
is important to assess whether its use is appropriate for a given situation. Research shows that in certain  
contexts, traditional educational methods can be equally or even more effective than VR-based approaches  
[13;22;34].  
     
OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2  
6 of 10  
Additionally, this technology may not be suitable for all users. Studies suggest that 25% to 40% of users  
may experience cybersickness, a condition triggered by movement in virtual environments, which can lead  
to symptoms such as dizziness and nausea [14] (see Table 1).  
Table 1. Positives and negatives aspects of VR  
Positives  
Negatives  
Motivational tool  
Students’ engagement  
High cognitive load  
Sometimes VR is not as efficient as tra-  
ditional educational methods  
High effectiveness when used along tra- Cybersickness  
ditional educative methods  
Facilitate skill acquisition  
Source: The authors.  
4.8. What is hindering the expansion of VR?  
Over time, Virtual Reality (VR) technology has advanced significantly, enabling the development of  
more sophisticated devices with enhanced features. Additionally, new, more accessible options, such as  
Google Cardboard, have emerged. While researchers have long recognized the educational benefits of VR,  
these technological trends have encouraged further experimentation with its applications [20;38].  
Despite these developments, it is accurate to state that VR has not yet achieved widespread adoption.  
Several factors contribute to this limited diffusion. The first major barrier is cost. Although VR devices  
are now more affordable than in the 1990s and early 2000s, they are still considered expensive for a large  
segment of the population [20]. Beyond the head-mounted display (HMD), users often need to purchase a  
compatible high-performance computer to achieve a quality experience. Both the computer and HMD must  
meet advanced technical requirements [3;38].  
Another factor is the lack of familiarity with VR technology and its benefits, which prevents users  
from fully leveraging its potential [23]. In addition, resistance to technological change remains a common  
obstacle. Within organizations, some personnel, particularly among older generations, are hesitant to adopt  
new technologies. This reluctance is often observed even among teaching staff, who may struggle to adapt to  
the requirements of VR [42].  
A further concern is the potential for cybersickness, a condition characterized by symptoms such as  
dizziness and nausea when interacting in virtual environments [36]. This can result in a negative user  
experience and is relatively common, affecting an estimated 25  
Moreover, VR has yet to establish itself through an application, program, or use case deemed essential,  
as seen with mobile phones and communication technologies. Despite offering considerable educational  
advantages and being viewed as an innovative tool, no VR-based solution has reached a level of necessity  
that compels widespread adoption.  
In fact, studies have shown that in some cases, the use of VR is not recommended due to the high  
cognitive load it can generate. In such scenarios, traditional teaching methods may prove equally effective,  
or even superior, to VR-based approaches [8;21;24;28;46]. These limiting factors are summarized in Table 2.  
5. Conclusions  
Virtual Reality (VR) is a technology designed to provide users with immersive experiences by "tricking"  
their senses. Through the use of electronic devices, the level of immersion is becoming increasingly close to  
reality. Although the conceptual understanding of VR has evolved over time, its core characteristics have  
remained consistent: immersion, perception, and interactivity. This document has explored both the positive  
and negative aspects of VR, as well as its influence on the senses and how sensory stimulation contributes to  
its intended effect.  
   
OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2  
7 of 10  
Table 2. Hindering Causes for VR Adoption.  
Hindering Causes  
Higher prices for optimal devices.  
Lack of VR knowledge (benefits, devices, prices, etc.).  
Rejection of technological changes.  
Cybersickness.  
Lack of must-have app.  
Cognitive load.  
Source: The authors.  
The main conclusion drawn from this work is that VR has not yet achieved the expected level of  
widespread adoption. In fact, its primary use continues to be concentrated in the entertainment industry,  
despite its enormous potential as a powerful educational tool. Further studies are needed to validate this  
observation and explore its broader implications. It is clear, however, that several factors continue to hinder  
the expansion of VR, chief among them being the lack of a widely adopted, essential application or program.  
Replicating many VR-based educational experiences requires substantial financial investment, which  
few institutions can afford, especially in developing countries. To promote broader adoption, efforts should  
focus on highlighting the benefits of VR in contrast with the costs of implementation. Its capacity to prepare  
students and professionals through repetitive, hands-on learning is unparalleled, and educational institutions  
are encouraged to explore its integration, particularly in fields that demand frequent practice and procedural  
repetition.  
Future research should focus on developing essential VR applications that can drive wider adoption  
across education, industry, and entertainment. Efforts to reduce cognitive load and cybersickness through  
improved hardware and software design are critical to enhance user comfort and accessibility. Additionally,  
making VR technology more affordable and accessible, especially in developing regions and educational  
settings with limited resources, remains a key priority.  
Expanding the use of VR in tailored educational curricula and training modules will help validate its  
effectiveness and promote integration into mainstream learning. Furthermore, increasing user awareness  
and training can address resistance to technological change, while longitudinal studies are needed to better  
understand the long-term cognitive, social, and educational impacts of VR. Addressing these areas will be  
vital for unlocking VR’s full potential and supporting its mass adoption.  
Author Contributions: Mauricio Vásquez: Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Writing – review &  
editing, Supervision, Project administration. Soraya Saad: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Visualization,  
Data curation, Writing – original draft, Funding acquisition.  
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Please refer to the CRediT taxonomy for the  
definitions of the terms. Authorship is limited to those who have made substantial contributions to the reported work.  
Funding: This research received no external funding.  
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable, since the present study does not involvehuman personnel or  
animals.  
Informed Consent Statement: This study is limited to the use of technological resources, so nohuman personnel or  
animals are involved.  
Conflicts of Interest: Under the authorship of this research, it is declared that there is no conflict of interest with the  
present research.  
Informed Consent Statement: This study is limited to the use of technological resources, so nohuman personnel or  
animals are involved.  
 
OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2  
8 of 10  
References  
1. Altukhaim, S., Sakabe, N., Nagaratnam, K., Mannava, N., Kondo, T., and Hayashi, Y. (2025). Immersive virtual reality  
enhanced reinforcement induced physical therapy (everest). Displays, 87:102962.  
2. Bailenson, J. N., Yee, N., Merget, D., and Schroeder, R. (2006). The effect of behavioral realism and form realism  
of real-time avatar faces on verbal disclosure, nonverbal disclosure, emotion recognition, and copresence in dyadic  
interaction. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 15(4):359–372.  
3. Beck, D. (2019). Special issue: Augmented and virtual reality in education: Immersive learning research. Journal of  
Educational Computing Research, 57(7):1619–1625.  
4. Biocca, F. (1992). Communication within virtual reality: Creating a space for research. Journal of Communication,  
42(4):5–22.  
5. Biocca, F. (1997). The cyborg’s dilemma: Progressive embodiment in virtual environments. In Second International  
Conference on Cognitive Technology, pages 1–29.  
6. Bohil, C. J., Alicea, B., and Biocca, F. A. (2011). Virtual reality in neuroscience research and therapy. Nature Reviews  
Neuroscience, 12(12).  
7. Bohmeier, B., Cybinski, L. M., Gromer, D., Bellinger, D., Deckert, J., Erhardt-Lehmann, A., Deserno, L., Mühlberger, A.,  
Pauli, P., Polak, T., and Herrmann, M. J. (2025). Intermittent theta burst stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal  
cortex has no additional effect on the efficacy of virtual reality exposure therapy for acrophobia. a randomized  
double-blind placebo-controlled study. Behavioural Brain Research, 476.  
8. Chiquet, S., Martarelli, C. S., Weibel, D., and Mast, F. W. (2023). Learning by teaching in immersive virtual reality –  
absorption tendency increases learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 84.  
9. Cipresso, P., Giglioli, I. A. C., Raya, M. A., and Riva, G. (2018). The past, present, and future of virtual and augmented  
reality research: A network and cluster analysis of the literature. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(November):1–20.  
10. David, R., Lemos, C., Daniela, M., Restrepo, C., Santiago, O., and Montaño, P. (2020). Enterprise architecture learning  
through virtual reality software prototype. case study. Revista Educación En Ingeniería, 15(30):9–17.  
11. Fourman, M. S., Ghaednia, H., Lans, A., Lloyd, S., Sweeney, A., Detels, K., Dijkstra, H., Oosterhoff, J. H. F., Ramsey,  
D. C., Do, S., and Schwab, J. H. (2021). Applications of augmented and virtual reality in spine surgery and education:  
A review. Seminars in Spine Surgery, 33(2):100875.  
12. Fuchs, H., Bishop, G., Bricken, W., Brooks, F., Brown, M., Burbeck, C., Durlach, N., Ellis, S., Green, M., Lackner, J.,  
McNeill, M., Moshel, M., Pausch, R., Robinett, W., Srinivasan, M., Sutherland, I., Urban, D., and Wenzel, E. (1992).  
Research directions in virtual environments. In NSF Invitational Workshop.  
13. Fuchs, L., Kluska, A., Novak, D., and Kosashvili, Y. (2022). The influence of early virtual reality intervention on pain,  
anxiety, and function following primary total knee arthroplasty. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 49.  
14. Fulvio, J. M., Ji, M., and Rokers, B. (2021). Variations in visual sensitivity predict motion sickness in virtual reality.  
Entertainment Computing, 38.  
15. Garzón, J. and Acevedo, J. (2019). Meta-analysis of the impact of augmented reality on students’ learning gains.  
Educational Research Review, 27:244–260.  
16. Gorini, A. and Riva, G. (2008). Virtual reality in anxiety disorders: The past and the future. Expert Review of  
Neurotherapeutics, 8(2):215–233.  
17. Hall, A. J. and Walmsley, P. (2022). Technology-enhanced learning in orthopaedics: Virtual reality and multi-modality  
educational workshops may be effective in the training of surgeons and operating department staff. Surgeon.  
18. Han, Y., Yang, J., Diao, Y., Jin, R., Guo, B., and Adamu, Z. (2022). Process and outcome-based evaluation between  
virtual really-driven and traditional construction safety training. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 52.  
19. Heilig, M. L. (1992). El cine del futuro: The cinema of the future. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments,  
1(3):279–294.  
20. Kanade, S. G. and Duffy, V. G. (2024). Exploring the effectiveness of virtual reality as a learning tool in the context of  
task interruption: A systematic review. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 99.  
21. Korzeniowski, P., Plotka, S., Brawura-Biskupski-Samaha, R., and Sitek, A. (2022). Virtual reality simulator for  
fetoscopic spina bifida repair surgery. In IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pages 401–406.  
22. Kuznetcova, I., Glassman, M., Tilak, S., Wen, Z., Evans, M., Pelfrey, L., and Lin, T. J. (2023). Using a mobile virtual  
reality and computer game to improve visuospatial self-efficacy in middle school students. Computers and Education,  
192.  
23. Lin, H. K., Hsieh, M., Wang, C., Sie, Z., and Chang, S. (2011). Establishment and usability evaluation of an interactive  
ar. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(4):181–187.  
24. Lo, Y. T., Yang, C. C., Yeh, T. F., Tu, H. Y., and Chang, Y. C. (2022). Effectiveness of immersive virtual reality training  
in nasogastric tube feeding education: A randomized controlled trial. Nurse Education Today, 119.  
                                               
OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2  
9 of 10  
25. Loomis, J. M., Blascovich, J. J., and Beall, A. C. (1999). Immersive virtual environment technology as a basic research  
tool in psychology. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(4):557–564.  
26. Loup, G., Serna, A., Iksal, S., and George, S. (2016). Immersion and persistence: improving learners’ engagement  
in authentic learning situations. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial  
Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), volume 9891 LNCS, pages 410–415.  
27. Machover, C. and Tice, S. E. (1994). Virtual reality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 14(1):15–16.  
28. Mayne, R. and Green, H. (2020). Virtual reality for teaching and learning in crime scene investigation. Science and  
Justice, 60(5):466–472.  
29. Mazuryk, T. and Gervautz, M. (2013). Virtual reality history, applications, technology and future. Digital Outcasts,  
63:92–98.  
30. Mellal, A., González-López, P., Giammattei, L., George, M., Starnoni, D., Cossu, G., Cornelius, J. F., Berhouma, M.,  
Messerer, M., and Daniel, R. T. (2025). Evaluating the impact of a hand-crafted 3d-printed head model and virtual  
reality in skull base surgery training. Brain and Spine, 5.  
31. Milgram, P. and Kishino, F. (1994). A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Transactions on Information and  
Systems, E77-D(12):1–15.  
32. Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., and Kishino, F. (1994). Mixed reality (mr) reality-virtuality (rv) continuum.  
In Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering, volume 2351 of Telemanipulator and Telepresence  
Technologies, pages 282–292.  
33. Reiners, T., Wood, L. C., and Gregory, S. (2014). Experimental study on consumer-technology supported authentic  
immersion in virtual environments for education and vocational training. In Proceedings of ASCILITE 2014 - Annual  
Conference of the Australian Society for Computers in Tertiary Education, pages 171–181.  
34. Saunders, J., Bayerl, P. S., Davey, S., and Lohrmann, P. (2019). Validating virtual reality as an effective training  
medium in the security domain. In 2019 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces, pages 1908–1911.  
35. Shoshani, A. (2023). From virtual to prosocial reality: The effects of prosocial virtual reality games on preschool  
children’s prosocial tendencies in real life environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 139.  
36. Simón-Vicente, L., Rodríguez-Cano, S., Delgado-Benito, V., Ausín-Villaverde, V., and Delgado, E. C. (2022). Cy-  
bersickness. a systematic literature review of adverse effects related to virtual reality. Neurologia. Spanish Society of  
Neurology.  
37. Slater, M., Usoh, M., and Steed, A. (1994). Depth of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and  
Virtual Environments, 3(2):130–144.  
38. Soliman, M., Pesyridis, A., Dalaymani-Zad, D., Gronfula, M., and Kourmpetis, M. (2021). The application of virtual  
reality in engineering education. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 11(6).  
39. Steuer, J. (1992). Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence, communication in the age of virtual  
reality. Journal of Communication, 42(4):73–93.  
40. Sutherland, I. E. (1968). A head-mounted three dimensional display. In Proceedings of the December 9-11, 1968, Fall  
Joint Computer Conference, Part I, page 757.  
41. Turner, W. A. and Casey, L. M. (2014). Outcomes associated with virtual reality in psychological interventions: where  
are we now? Clinical Psychology Review, 34(6):634–644.  
42. Vásquez-Carbonell, M. (2021). A systematic literature review of educational apps: What are they up to? Journal of  
Mobile Multimedia, 18(2).  
43. Vásquez-Carbonell, M., Patiño-Saucedo, J. A., and Paez-Logreira, H. (2023). Prototyping approach to test and  
evaluate a 3d brain model for psychology teachers and students. Virtual Creativity, 13(1):69–86.  
44. Wong, C. L., Li, C. K., Choi, K. C., So, W. K. W., Kwok, J. Y. Y., Cheung, Y. T., and Chan, C. W. H. (2022). Effects of  
immersive virtual reality for managing anxiety, nausea and vomiting among paediatric cancer patients receiving their  
first chemotherapy: An exploratory randomised controlled trial. European Journal of Oncology Nursing, 61.  
45. Zeng, Y., Zeng, L., Cheng, A. S. K., Wei, X., Wang, B., Jiang, J., and Zhou, J. (2022). The use of immersive virtual  
reality for cancer-related cognitive impairment assessment and rehabilitation: A clinical feasibility study. Asia-Pacific  
Journal of Oncology Nursing, 9(12).  
46. Zou, X., O’Hern, S., Ens, B., Coxon, S., Mater, P., Chow, R., Neylan, M., and Vu, H. L. (2021). On-road virtual reality  
autonomous vehicle (vrav) simulator: An empirical study on user experience. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging  
Technologies, 126.  
                                           
OnBoard Knowledge Journal 2025, 1, 2  
10 of 10  
Authors’ Biography  
Mauricio Vásquez-Carbonell Is a full-time professor at the Universidad Simón Bolívar in  
Barranquilla, Colombia. He holds a degree in electronic engineering and has earned a master’s  
degree in engineering. Currently, he is pursuing a doctorate in information and communication  
technologies (ICT), focusing on software development and technology applied to education,  
including virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and mobile apps.  
Soraya Saad-Arcón Is a full-time professor at the Institución Universitaria de Barranquilla in  
Colombia. She is a graphic designer and holds a master’s degree in education with an emphasis  
on media applied to education.  
Disclaimer/Editor’s Note: Statements, opinions, and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual  
authors and contributors and not of the OnBoard Knowledge Journal and/or the editor(s), disclaiming any responsibility  
for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions, or products referred to in the  
content.