Student Perceptions of an AI-Enhanced Virtual Reality University Office Environment: An Observation-Based Empirical Study

Résumé fourni par la source

There is a growing trend of merging artificial intelligence (AI) with virtual reality (VR) in higher education, and there is a lack of research on students' perceptions of an AI-enhanced VR office environment. This study employed a mixed-methods approach. Here, 58 students participated in a pre-session questionnaire concerning their exposure to technologies. Furthermore, 29 students observed a live demonstration of an AI-integrated VR university office and completed a post-session questionnaire. The post-session survey was designed to measure five constructs (observation quality, presence and realism, AI feature perception, usability and adoption intent, and future readiness). We used items adapted from well-established technology-acceptance and presence scales (the Technology Acceptance Model and its VR-specific extensions, and the Witmer & Singer presence questionnaire), which exhibit good internal consistency with Cronbach’s alpha values ranging from 0.86 to 0.97 for each cluster. There was a significant difference between the level of technology familiarity with the participants, in that they were more likely to be using AI tools extensively (M = 4.26/5) than they were to use VR (M = 1.88/5). High accuracy of perceived AI (M = 4.48/5) and clarity of observation (M = 4.39/5), but more moderate ratings of comfort in relying on AI (M = 3.83/5) and privacy concerns (M = 3.24/5) were noted after the session, indicating a competence-trust gap. AI was seen as a helpful administrative tool, and there were some concerns about data privacy and dependency, with a general trend of conditional implementation of AI. These results are preliminary, as they are observation-based, single-institution, and come from a relatively small sample size after the sessions, but they do provide some early, concrete insights regarding the design of VR spaces that incorporate AI technology in higher education.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.