The Effectiveness of Virtual Digital Human Pedagogical Agents in Virtual Reality Learning Environments: A Meta-Analysis of 36 Empirical Studies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71204/6p1ny979Keywords:
Virtual Reality, Virtual Digital Human, Pedagogical Agent, Meta-analysis, Learning Outcomes, Cognitive Load, Social Presence, Educational TechnologyAbstract
Virtual Digital Human Pedagogical Agents (VDHPAs) have emerged as vital tools in online and blended learning environments. However, the extent to which they improve learning outcomes in Virtual Reality (VR) environments remains inconclusive. This meta-analysis synthesizes findings from 36 empirical studies conducted between 2013 and 2023 to examine the effectiveness of VDHPAs in VR-based learning. Specifically, we analysed two process-oriented variables—cognitive load and social presence—and three outcome-oriented variables—retention, transfer, and other assessment types. The results indicate that while VDHPAs do not significantly reduce cognitive load (g = -0.084), they significantly enhance learners’ social presence (g = 0.402). Additionally, VDHPAs were found to improve retention (g = 0.451), transfer (g = 0.288), and other test scores (g = 0.423). Moderator analyses revealed that the effects vary depending on agent design features (e.g., gestures, voice, facial expression), content characteristics (e.g., subject domain, knowledge type), and learner attributes (e.g., education level, prior knowledge). This review further discusses the implications of agent embodiment, the "uncanny valley" in affective response, and challenges in long-term outcome assessments. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of how to optimise VDHPAs for immersive learning experiences and highlights directions for future interdisciplinary research in educational technology and digital arts.
References
Abril, T., Oliveira, J., & Gamito, P. (2022). Construction and effect of relationships with agents in a virtual reality environment. Virtual Reality, 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-022-00669-9
Ba, S., Stein, D., Liu, Q., et al. (2021). Examining the effects of a pedagogical agent with dual-channel emotional cues on learner emotions, cognitive load, and knowledge transfer performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(6), 1114–1134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633121992421
Barrett, A., Pack, A., Monteiro, D., et al. (2023). Exploring the influence of audience familiarity on speaker anxiety and performance in virtual reality and real-life presentation contexts. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2023.2186145
Beege, M., Schneider, S., Nebel, S., et al. (2017). Ageism–Age coherence within learning material fosters learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 510–519. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.042
Bringula, R. P., Fosgate Jr, I. C. O., Garcia, N. P. R., et al. (2018). Effects of pedagogical agents on students’ mathematics performance: A comparison between two versions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(5), 701–722. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117722494
Bu, C., Guo, J., Li, Q., et al. (2021). Does teacher presence in online video instruction promote learning? A meta-analysis of 33 empirical studies. Journal of Distance Education, 39(3).
Carlotto, T., & Jaques, P. A. (2016). The effects of animated pedagogical agents in an English-as-a-foreign-language learning environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 95, 15–26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.06.001
Castro-Alonso, J. C., Wong, R. M., Adesope, O. O., et al. (2021). Effectiveness of multimedia pedagogical agents predicted by diverse theories: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 989–1015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09587-1
Chen, Z. H., & Chen, S. Y. (2014). When educational agents meet surrogate competition: Impacts of competitive educational agents on students' motivation and performance. Computers & Education, 75, 274–281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.014
Chiquet, S., Martarelli, C. S., Weibel, D., et al. (2023). Learning by teaching in immersive virtual reality–Absorption tendency increases learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 84, 101716. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101716
Craig, S. D., & Schroeder, N. L. (2017). Reconsidering the voice effect when learning from a virtual human. Computers & Education, 114, 193–205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.003
Dai, L., Jung, M. M., Postma, M., et al. (2022). A systematic review of pedagogical agent research: Similarities, differences and unexplored aspects. Computers & Education, 104607. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104607
Davis, R. O., & Vincent, J. (2019). Sometimes more is better: Agent gestures, procedural knowledge and the foreign language learner. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 3252–3263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12732
Davis, R., & Antonenko, P. (2017). Effects of pedagogical agent gestures on social acceptance and learning: Virtual real relationships in an elementary foreign language classroom. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 28(4), 459–480.
Dinçer, S., & Doğanay, A. (2017). The effects of multiple-pedagogical agents on learners’ academic success, motivation, and cognitive load. Computers & Education, 111, 74–100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.04.005
Fountoukidou, S., Ham, J., Matzat, U., et al. (2019). Effects of an artificial agent as a behavioral model on motivational and learning outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 97, 84–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.013
Goldberg, B., & Cannon-Bowers, J. (2015). Feedback source modality effects on training outcomes in a serious game: Pedagogical agents make a difference. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.008
Grivokostopoulou, F., Kovas, K., & Perikos, I. (2020). The effectiveness of embodied pedagogical agents and their impact on students learning in virtual worlds. Applied Sciences, 10(5), 1739. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app10051739
Guo, Y. R., & Goh, D. H. L. (2015). Affect in embodied pedagogical agents: Meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(1), 124–149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115588774
Guo, Y. R., & Goh, D. H. L. (2016). Evaluation of affective embodied agents in an information literacy game. Computers & Education, 103, 59–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.013
Guo, Y. R., Goh, D. H. L., Luyt, B., et al. (2015). The effectiveness and acceptance of an affective information literacy tutorial. Computers & Education, 87, 368–384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.015
Horovitz, T., & Mayer, R. E. (2021). Learning with human and virtual instructors who display happy or bored emotions in video lectures. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106724. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106724
Huang, X., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Benefits of adding anxiety-reducing features to a computer-based multimedia lesson on statistics. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 293–303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.034
Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., & Reisslein, M. (2015). Supporting multimedia learning with visual signalling and animated pedagogical agent: Moderating effects of prior knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(2), 97–115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12078
Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., Moreno, R., et al. (2013). Pedagogical agent signaling of multiple visual engineering representations: The case of the young female agent. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(2), 319–337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20009
Johnson, W. L., & Lester, J. C. (2016). Face-to-face interaction with pedagogical agents, twenty years later. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 25–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0065-9
Kwiatkowski, A., Alvarado, E., Kalogeiton, V., et al. (2022). A survey on reinforcement learning methods in character animation. Computer Graphics Forum, 41(2), 613–639. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.14504
Kyrlitsias, C., & Michael‐Grigoriou, D. (2018). Asch conformity experiment using immersive virtual reality. Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds, 29(5), e1804. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cav.1804
Li, W., Wang, F., Mayer, R. E., et al. (2019). Getting the point: Which kinds of gestures by pedagogical agents improve multimedia learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(8), 1382. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000352
Liew, T. W., Zin, N. A. M., Sahari, N., et al. (2016). The effects of a pedagogical agent’s smiling expression on the learner’s emotions and motivation in a virtual learning environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(5), 248-266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i5.2350
Lin, L., Ginns, P., Wang, T., et al. (2020). Using a pedagogical agent to deliver conversational style instruction: What benefits can you obtain? Computers & Education, 143, 103658. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103658
Makransky, G., Wismer, P., & Mayer, R. E. (2019). A gender matching effect in learning with pedagogical agents in an immersive virtual reality science simulation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(3), 349–358. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12335
Martha, A. S. D., & Santoso, H. B. (2019). The design and impact of the pedagogical agent: A systematic literature review. Journal of Educators Online, 16(1), n1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9743/jeo.2019.16.1.8
Mousavinasab, E., Zarifsanaiey, N., Kalhori, S. N., et al. (2021). Intelligent tutoring systems: A systematic review of characteristics, applications, and evaluation methods. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(1), 142–163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1558257
Nielen, T. M. J., Smith, G. G., Sikkema-de Jong, M. T., et al. (2018). Digital guidance for susceptible readers: Effects on fifth graders’ reading motivation and incidental vocabulary learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(1), 48–73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117708283
Nye, B. D., Pavlik, P. I., Windsor, A., et al. (2018). SKOPE-IT (Shareable Knowledge Objects as Portable Intelligent Tutors): Overlaying natural language tutoring on an adaptive learning system for mathematics. International Journal of STEM Education, 5, 1–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0109-4
Osman, K., & Lee, T. T. (2014). Impact of interactive multimedia module with pedagogical agents on students’ understanding and motivation in the learning of electrochemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 395–421. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9407-y
Ospina-Bohórquez, A., Rodríguez-González, S., & Vergara-Rodríguez, D. (2021). On the synergy between virtual reality and multi-agent systems. Sustainability, 13(8), 4326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084326
Schmidt, S., Bruder, G., & Steinicke, F. (2019). Effects of virtual agent and object representation on experiencing exhibited artifacts. Computers & Graphics, 83, 1–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2019.06.002
Schroeder, N. L., & Gotch, C. M. (2015). Persisting issues in pedagogical agent research. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(2), 183–204. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115597625
Schroeder, N. L., Adesope, O. O., & Gilbert, R. B. (2013). How effective are pedagogical agents for learning? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(1), 1–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.49.1.a
Schroeder, N. L., Romine, W. L., & Craig, S. D. (2017). Measuring pedagogical agent persona and the influence of agent persona on learning. Computers & Education, 109, 176–186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.02.015
Seymour, M., Yuan, L. I., Dennis, A., et al. (2021). Have we crossed the uncanny valley? Understanding affinity, trustworthiness, and preference for realistic digital humans in immersive environments. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 22(3), 9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00674
Shalmani, H. B., & Branch, R. (2021). On the comparison of the effects of conventional and agent-based multimedia instruction on the learning of English speech acts among Iranian EFL learners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 128–157.
Sinatra, A. M., Pollard, K. A., Files, B. T., et al. (2021). Social fidelity in virtual agents: Impacts on presence and learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 114, 106562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106562
Soliman, M. (2022). Pedagogical intelligence in virtual reality environments. In Learning with Technologies and Technologies in Learning: Experience, Trends and Challenges in Higher Education (pp. 285–302). Springer International Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04286-7_14
Soliman, M., & Guetl, C. (2010). Intelligent pedagogical agents in immersive virtual learning environments: A review. In The 33rd International Convention MIPRO (pp. 827–832). IEEE.
Tai, T. Y., Chen, H. H. J., & Todd, G. (2022). The impact of a virtual reality app on adolescent EFL learners’ vocabulary learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(4), 892–917. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1752735
Tegos, S., & Demetriadis, S. (2017). Conversational agents improve peer learning through building on prior knowledge. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(1), 99–111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_11-1
Vaughan, N., Gabrys, B., & Dubey, V. N. (2016). An overview of self-adaptive technologies within virtual reality training. Computer Science Review, 22, 65–87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2016.09.001
Wang, F., Li, W., Xie, H., & Liu, H. (2017). Are pedagogical agents effective in multimedia learning? A meta-analysis. Advances in Psychological Science, 25(1), 12–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2017.00012
Wang, X., Qiao, Y., Wang, Y., Cheng, Y., & Li, H. (2022). How do educational agents influence learners’ emotions and learning outcomes? A meta-analysis of 39 experimental studies. Modern Educational Technology, 32(8), 59–66.
Ward, W., Cole, R., Bolaños, D., et al. (2013). My science tutor: A conversational multimedia virtual tutor. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031589
Webster, R. (2016). Declarative knowledge acquisition in immersive virtual learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(6), 1319–1333. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.994533
Xie, H., Wang, F., Zhou, Z., & Wu, P. (2016). A meta-analysis of cueing effects in multimedia learning. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 48(5), 540–555. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2016.00540
Yan, M., Shi, L., Zhang, D., et al. (2020). White paper on the development of virtual digital humans [White paper]. China Artificial Intelligence Industry Development Alliance & Digital Human Working Committee, Zhongguancun Smart Intelligence Alliance.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Chuan Zhang, Lan Mo (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles published in this journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are properly credited. Authors retain copyright of their work, and readers are free to copy, share, adapt, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial use, as long as appropriate attribution is given.
How to Cite
