Virtual Reality in Professional Training:
An Example from the Field of Bank Counselling
Michael D. Kickmeier-Rust
University of Teacher Education
Insttitute for Educational Assessment
St. Gallen, Switzerland michael.leitner@create.at
michael.kickmeier@phsg.ch
Abstract—Virtual Reality has become a mature and
widespread technology in many application fields, including
design, industry, defense, health care, and gaming. Also, in
education, the potential of immersive technologies is
acknowledged more commonly. Evidence-based insights in the
mechanisms and impacts of VR trainings are still sparse,
however. This paper introduces a VR-based professional
training solution for bank counsellors, where soft skills,
communication skills, attention, and awareness are in the focus.
In a study, we compared a VR-based training solution with a
face-to-face presence training covering the same domain. The
results show that the VR solutions excelled the expectations of
participants and that learning motivation was higher as opposed
to the conventional presence training. In the perceived
effectiveness, the VR condition achieved equal results than the
face-to-face training condition. The results provide some
evidence that VR solutions are an appropriate and effective
solution in professional training. Moreover, the study revealed
distinct characteristics that make VR-based training more
accepted and satisfying than conventional trainings.
Index Terms—virtual reality, serious games, professional
training, vocational training
I. INTRODUCTION
Finding a possibility, a method, a technology that
facilitates human learning has been in the focus of educational,
psychological, and technological research for a very long time.
A famous metaphor for this endeavor is the “Nuremberg
funnel”, a jocular description of a mechanical way of learning:
if one could find only the right method, instrument, or
technology, people could swiftly absorb new knowledge and
learn everything in no time and almost without effort. The
knowledge could be literally “poured into the human brain
through a funnel” [1]. Certainly, educational and
psychological research has told us, that this vision cannot
come true. However, research has also demonstrated that some
methods and technologies can substantially facilitate learning
and teaching processes and are superior to others. Specifically
recording, analyzing, and understanding of information about
individual learners and their learning processes (learning
analytics, in other words) turned out to have a high impact on
learning outcomes [2]. As another example, digital games
demonstrated their potential to engage and motivate learners,
leading to a better, deeper, and more permanent learning [3].
Finally, research has demonstrated that the presentation of
multiple sensory modalities and novel perspectives facilitates
learning processes. In contrast, conventional educational
methods (e.g., ex-cathedra lectures) are not necessarily
effective [4], specifically when it comes to understanding and
applying concepts (as opposed to a simple recall of facts).
Students often lose interest in the topics if a traditional
educational approach, characterized by little to no interaction,
978-1-7348995-0-4/20/$31.00 ©2020 Immersive Learning Research Network
6th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN 2020)
Online, June 21-25, 2020.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Wollongong. Downloaded on August 09,2020 at 22:11:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Michael Leitner Philipp Hann
Create 21st Century University of Graz
Vienna, Austria Department of Psychology
Graz, Austria
philipp.hann@edu.uni-graz.at
activity, or practical relevance, is maintained [5]. One way to
increase the learners’ arousal and interest is to address
multiple cognitive channels (e.g., vision, haptics, audio) and
multiple cognitive systems (e.g., spatial cognition or emotion).
Today’s Virtual Reality (VR) technologies have opened a new
dimension of combining different cognitive processes,
perceptual channels, and depth of interaction and helped
achieving a next level of immersion with digital contents and
environments [6]. These characteristics, undoubtedly, are key
factors for a successful and deep learning and understanding.
VR-based learning and training scenarios allow students to
grasp objects, to change the parameters of the world, to replace
and expand the real world, and to make invisible things visible
– all combined with a strong sense of feeling physically and
socially present [7], [8].
The history of VR originates from the entertainment
industry of the 1960’s [9]. Pioneers like Morton Heilig
developed machines such as the Sensorama Simulator, a
motorcycle simulator that played a 3D movie along with stereo
sound, aromas, and wind in order to create an immersive
sensory environment. In the recent years, VR has gained a lot
of attention in various fields of research such as gaming and
education [10]. In the 1980s flight simulator training and
exercises used VR technologies to train future pilots, in the
early 1990s the use of VR entered K-12 and higher education
[11]. There existed many limitations that made a broader use
of the technology in schools impossible, for example, the high
costs of the required devices. However, the higher level of
immersion that is provided by VR was considered to increase
students’ motivation and learning benefits [12]. As it was the
case for many other new technologies, VR and the related field
of Augmented Reality (AR) have received advance laurels and
raised high expectations, however, to date the implementation
of VR in education is still at an early stage. Educators, still
need to understand the underlying pedagogical mechanisms
and identify design strategies to enhance learning experiences
for broader use effectively. Finally, there is a clear lack of
empirical evidence for the educational value that was expected
from VR solutions [8]; this is a characteristic that VR shares
with many other technologies, for example, serious games.
In the literature, there is typically a separation between low
immersion and high immersion VR. Low immersion VR
usually refers to a virtual environment, which is displayed on
a computer screen with sound coming through speakers. The
interaction with the virtual world is controlled through typical
computer devices (e.g., gamepad or mouse) [8]. Most studies
that investigated educational benefits of VR focused on this
type of low immersion VR [6]. Even though desktop VR
cannot provide a fully immersive virtual experience, their
photorealistic computer graphics demonstrated their capacity
to enhance engagement and motivation of the learners [13].
210
The use of low immersion VR is much cheaper because of the
drastic reduction in the costs of devices. There are some
empirical studies and meta-analyses that have shown that
desktop VR results in better cognitive outcomes and attitudes
toward learning than more traditional teaching methods [14]
and that they have a greater motivational value [15].
High immersion VR is characterized by the use of a head-
mounted-display called VR headset, which provides room-
scale virtual reality and 360° coverage immersion experience
[16], so the interaction in the virtual environment is controlled
through head motions. This approach is closer to the real world
than controlling a scene solely through typical computer
devices. There is less empirical evidence that high immersion
VR increases cognitive and motivational outcomes beyond
desktop VR, but there are still studies that have found positive
results favoring high immersion VR [17], [18]. However,
research findings are limited and inconclusive whether more
immersion leads to higher levels of presence and therefore
better learning outcomes and a better knowledge transfer than
desktop VR.
Although VR technology has been studied in the
educational context for many years now, it is still a long way
to bring it into the mainstream classrooms [16]. VR might be
used as a means to engage and motivate students, decrease the
time to achieve skill mastery, cut down on material usage, and
improve final performance outcomes in various fields of study
like surgery, construction management [19], professional
skills training [20] and military training [21]. In a recent study,
nursing students who practiced in VR environments were
more engaged, more focused, and spent more time practicing
than the students who practiced traditionally [22]. It should be
noted that all the aforementioned studies focused on acquiring
and practicing physical/motor skills; only few studies exist
that focus on learning social skills and how to interact with
other people in specific situations, amongst them studies on
cultural awareness (e.g., in military operations, distance
counselling, or interpersonal problem solving [23]).
The aim of the present study is to investigate the effects of
a game-based VR training solution in a field where “soft”,
interpersonal skills in combination with acquiring declarative
knowledge are in the focus. This domain is rather novel to VR
research in education, yet, it is a domain that might
substantially benefit from the characteristics (and potential
advantages) of VR. The training solution is compared to a
conventional face-to-face (F2F) training solution in form of a
presence workshop. This comparison was made since personal
coaching can be considered the gold standard of developing
interpersonal skills. Moreover, such workshops are the most
frequently used professional training method in this domain.
We hypothesize that the participants who use VR training will
be more motivated to learn and will learn more than the
participants who use the traditional F2F training. Moreover,
we hypothesize that VR training is considered more effective
in the sense of a lower time consumption to carry out the
training.
II. STUDY DESCRIPTION
A. Participants
In total, 46 bank counsellors of an Austrian bank
participated in the study. The participants were recruited in
cooperation with the bank. Essentially, we recruited
professionals undergoing a standard training in the domain
“customer dialogues” in the institution’s training academy.
978-1-7348995-0-4/20/$31.00 ©2020 Immersive Learning Research Network
6th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN 2020)
Online, June 21-25, 2020.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Wollongong. Downloaded on August 09,2020 at 22:11:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This and other trainings are part of the vocational training
protocols of the bank, meaning that all counselors undergo
such trainings on a frequent basis. The population, therefore,
is the group of bank counsellors of this bank. One group (34
participants) was trained traditionally with a face-to-face one-
day presence workshop (F2F group). This workshop is
mandatory for counsellors of this bank. A second group (12
participants) was trained using a high immersion VR training
game (VR group). The VR session was conducted prior any
other trainings in the domain. The 12 participants of the VR
group attended the regular workshop after their participation
in this study. The 12 participants were recruited on a voluntary
basis and in accordance with the head of the training academy.
The different group sizes resulted from practical constraints in
the recruitment. Participants were between 19 and 54 years old
(M = 26.56, SD = 8.84) and there was no age difference
between the two groups (t = -.73, p = .467). In the F2F group,
19 participants were female and 15 participants were male, in
the VR group, 9 participants were female and 2 participants
were male. The participants of the VR group had more work
experience in their current job (M = 9.18, SD = 10.27) in
comparison to the participants in the F2F group (M = 3.24, SD
= 3.77; t = -2.91, p = .006) but the two groups did not differ in
their general working experience in the banking sector (t =
0.146, p = .885). On average, the working experience was 7
years.
B. Materials and Procedures
The participants of the study attended a general
professional training program, organized by the bank institute.
Create 21st century is a company specialized in developing
professional multimedia learning solutions. Create 21st
century was contracted by the bank to develop and evaluate a
prototype VR training solution in the domain of customer
dialogues (i.e., attention to customers, engagement strategies,
negotiation techniques, cross selling, and sales talk skills). The
VR training was evaluated in the course of this study, prior to
its practical application for professional training. Both groups
(F2F, VR) had to complete a post-experience questionnaire
after the training sessions, asking for personal information
including media use, personal preferences, and biographic
information. The F2F group attended a conventional face-to-
face workshop on the same domain. The F2F workshop was
composed of ex-cathedra teaching/lecturing elements as well
as interactive elements such as role-plays. Typically, a
workshop is attended by 15 to 16 professionals. The VR group
was trained by using high immersion game-like VR solution
composed of interactive 360° videos (Fig. 1). The videos were
filmed in a typical bank, the bank clerk and customers in the
videos were played by professional actors. In the VR
experience, the trainees could observe real situations in a bank,
for example, overserving a customer entering the bank or
observing a bank clerk starting a conversation, etc.). Similar
to an interactive game, the trainees could intervene in the
scenes and make certain pre-defined decisions (e.g., selecting
responses of the bank clerk to certain customer questions or to
directing the attention of the bank clerk to specific customers).
The entire procedures and materials were supervised and
approved by the head of the bank’s training academy. The
details of the training cannot be disclosed. Technically, the
solution was realized in Unity3D for the Oculus Rift headset
and touch controllers (www.oculus.com/rift-s). The VR
training took place in the VR laboratory of Create 21st century.
Each session lasted for about 30 to 40 minutes. As part of the
211
 TABLE II. LEARNING PREFERENCES
YouTube Search Personal
Books Videos
tutorials engines contact
strongly 15 13 11 32 15
agree (32.6%) (28.3%) (23.9%) (69.6%) (32.6%)
8 7 8 16
agree 6 (13%)
(17.4%) (15.2%) (17.4%) (34.8%)
14 10 10
undecided 6 (13%) 3 (6.5%)
(30.4%) (21.7%) (21.7%)
8 11
disagree 4 (8.7%) - 1 (2.2%)
(17.4%) (23.9%)
str. 8
Fig. 1. Screen capture of the 360° video: a bank counsellor having a sales 3 (6.5%) 3 (6.5%) - 1 (2.2%)
disagree (17.4%)
talk with the customer.
missing 4 (8.7%) 4 (8.7%) 3 (6.5%) 3 (6.5%) 3 (6.5%)

post-experience questionnaire, the participants completed the

BFI-10 personality scale [24] to assess their personality
profile, based on the so-called “big five” (i.e., extraversion,
agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness, and neuroticism).
The BFI-10 was selected because it is a reliable standard short
(ten items) scale available in German language. In addition,
scales for motivation and estimated training effectiveness
were completed.
III. STUDY RESULTS
First, we looked into the media use and media affinity of
participants. Overall, the majority of the participants use
digital media quite often at work and in their private life (see
Table .). Also, the participants strongly believed that
digitization has – and will increasingly have – a significant
impact on their work (M = 2.05 on the 5-point Likert-scale;
SD = 1.06). As shown in Table ., the most preferred and
most commonly used method for acquiring necessary
professional skills and knowledge is using (unguided) search
engine queries on their smartphones (almost 90%). About
60% of participants preferred personally engaging with other
experts and teachers. About 40% of the participants indicated
that they like to learn by watching videos and movies or
acquiring knowledge by reading books. Approximately the
same number of participants liked to watch tutorials on
YouTube. FThere was no difference between the F2F and the
The most important results concern the expectations and
the experiences with both trainings. While the majority of
participants stated that their expectations regarding the
training session were satisfied or even excelled (see Fig. 2),
there was a significant difference between the F2F group and
the VR group (t = 4.34, p < .001). The VR group was
significantly more satisfied with the training session (M =
2.46, SD = 0.45) than the traditional group was (M = 2.09, SD
= 1.18). The self-assessed effectiveness was slightly higher in
the F2F group, this difference was not statistically significant,
however (p = .135). The most distinct finding was that the VR
condition significantly clearer met and excelled the trainees’
expectations (t = 3.22, p < .001). Moreover, as shown in Table
., there were significant differences between the F2F group
and the VR group in their motivation (t = 2.38, p = .022) and
their impressions about the effectiveness of the training
method (t = 4.82, p < .001). The VR group perceived the
training as more motivating (M = 1.48, SD = 0.36) than the
F2F group (M = 1.89, SD = 0.55). The VR group also
perceived their training as generally more positive and
satisfying (M = 1.43, SD = 0.33) than the traditional group (M
= 2.52, SD = 0.75).
4
VR F2F
3

VR group regarding these preferences (t = 1.76, p = .087). In

turn, many participants were undecided regarding the question 2

if they see the future of further training in the digital or virtual 1

world - a large part agreed with this statement. There was a
significant difference between the traditional group and the 0
Expectations met Satisfaction Effectiveness
VR group (t = 4.40, p < .001). The VR group (after the VR
training experience) agreed more with the statement that they
see the future of further training in the digital or virtual world Fig. 2. Comparison of VR and F2F groups.
(M = 1.42, SD = 0.90) than the traditional group (M = 3.20,
As shown in Table ., there were no significant
SD = 1.28). This result speaks for a certain potential VR
differences between the F2F group and the VR group in any
learning experience.
of the personality traits (extraversion: t = 1.79, p = .080;
TABLE I. DIGITAL MEDIA USAGE agreeableness: t = 0.31, p = .755; conscientiousness: t = .35, p
= .732; neuroticism: t = 0.18, p = .857; openness: t = 0.562, p
Private Digital Digital Media use Internet = .577). Thus, there is no reason to believe that any of the other
Media use at work usage
identified differences between the two groups in this study are
34 the result of personality differences between the traditional
very often 26 (56.5%) 21 (45.7%)
(73.9%)
group and the VR group.
9
often 17 (37%) 10 (21.7%)
(19.6%) A remarkable finding concerned the estimated amount of
3 time the participants reported to have spent on actually
moderate 3 (6.5%) 10 (21.7%)
(6.5%) relevant and important tasks (reported as percentages). While
sparsely - 4 (8.7%) - the F2F group reported that they had spent about 47.5% on
never - 1 (2.2%) - important and relevant tasks, the VR group reported 70%.

978-1-7348995-0-4/20/$31.00 ©2020 Immersive Learning Research Network 212

6th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN 2020)
Online, June 21-25, 2020.

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Wollongong. Downloaded on August 09,2020 at 22:11:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IV. DISUCSSION AND CONCLUSION interpretation of the results. As it holds for most educational
The aim of this study was to investigate whether a high measures, an open question is the transferability of training
immersive VR training solution is a viable method for effects to the real world (by our example the business world of
professional training in the banking sector. The comparison bank counsellors). Since the participants of the present study
between a traditional educational training method, that is, a had to undergo the face-to-face workshop a while after the VR
face-to-face presence workshop and a VR training game was session, no thorough follow-up analysis is possible.
realized. Participants who used VR training were generally REFERENCES
more satisfied with their training, were more motivated to
[1] H. Recknagel, and R. Veit, “Wagenseils Nürnberger Trichter. Zur
learn, and perceived their learning outcomes as greater than Geschichte einer Redensart. “ [Wagenseils Nuremburg funnel. On the
the participants who used the traditional training method. history of an idiom]. Mitteilungen der Altnürnberger Landschaft e.V.,
Since the results did not reveal differences between the two 2001, 1, 571–581.
groups in personality traits or background variables, we [2] C. Lang, G. Siemens, A. Wise, and D. Gašević, (Eds.), “Handbook on
assume that the difference in motivation and training scores Learning Analytics (2nd Edition)”. Society of Learning Analytics
can be attributed to the different training methods. A distinct Research., 2017.
finding was that persons, [3] R. Dörner, St. Göbel, M. D. Kickmeier-Rust, M. Masuch, and K.
Zweig, “Entertainment Computing and Serious Games.” Berlin:
Springer, 2016.
TABLE III. LEARNING PREFERENCES
[4] R. E. Mayer, “The promise of multimedia learning: using the same
Group N Mean SD instructional design methods across different media.” Learning and
instruction, 2003, 13(2), 125-139.
BFI Extraversion F2F 33 2,1970 1,03787 [5] D. N. E. Phon, M. B. Ali, and N. D. A. Halim, “Collaborative
VR 12 1,6250 ,60772 Augmented Reality in Education: A Review.” In Proceedings of the
2014 International Conference on Teaching and Learning in
BFI Agreeableness F2F 33 2,7121 ,67350 Computing and Engineering (pp. 78-83). 2014, IEEE Computer
Society.
VR 12 2,7917 ,94046
[6] Z. Merchant, E. T. Goetz, L. Cifuentes, W. Keeney-Kennicutt, and T.
BFI Conscientiousness F2F 33 1,7424 ,67455 J. Davis, “Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students'
learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis.”
VR 12 1,6667 ,57735 Computers and Education, 2014, 70, 29-40.
BFI Neuroticism F2F 32 3,5313 ,77186 [7] T. De Jong, “Instruction based on computer simulations and virtual
laboratories”. In R. E. Mayer, and P. A. Alexander (Eds.). Handbook
VR 12 3,5833 1,04083 of research on learning and instruction, 2nd edition (pp. 502-521).
New York: Routledge, 2017.
BFI Openness F2F 32 2,9531 ,97020
[8] G. Makransky, L. Lilleholt, and A. Aaby, “Development and validation
VR 12 2,7500 1,30558 of the multimodal presence scale for virtual reality environments: a
confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory approach”.
Motivation Score F2F 32 1,8862 ,55205 Computers in Human Behavior, 2017, 72, 276-285.
VR 12 1,4762 ,36209 [9] M. Heiling, Sensorama simulator. Patented August, 28, 1962.
[10] J. Blascovich, and J. Bailenson, “Infinite reality.” New York: Harper-
Training Score F2F 34 2,5204 ,75262 Collins, 2011.
VR 12 1,4328 ,32844 [11] C. Youngblut, “Educational uses of virtual reality technology.”
Alexandria, VA: Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA Document D-
2128), 1998.
even those working in a highly interactive and customer- [12] M. Bodekaer, “The virtual lab will revolutionize science class.
“Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_
oriented sector such as banking, perceived the typical F2F bodekaer_this_virtual_lab_will_revolutionize_science_class, 2016.
workshop elements, specifically role-playing acts, as [13] M. D. Dickey, “Teaching in 3D: pedagogical affordances and
sometimes embarrassing or displeasing. They felt constraints of 3D virtual worlds for synchronous distance learning.”
uncomfortable when being requested to perform a role-play Distance Education, 2013, 24(1), 105–121.
with others, mostly strangers. We argue that this effect might [14] D. B. Clark, E. E. Tanner-Smith, and S. S. Killingsworth, “Digital
be one strengths of virtual trainings. User might act and react games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis.”
more relaxed and unconstrained. When shifting displeasing or Review of educational research, 2016, 86(1), 79-122.
disruptive elements of a training into the virtual world, the [15] G. Makransky, M. W. Thisgaard, and H. Gadegaard, “Virtual
simulations as preparation for lab exercises: Assessing learning of key
educational advantages can be maintained while laboratory skills in microbiology and improvement of essential non-
psychological barriers can be reduced. cognitive skills.” PloS one, 2016, 11(6).
In conclusion, it appears that VR training method is an [16] M. Thisgaard, and G. Makransky, “Virtual learning simulations in high
school: Effects on cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes and
appropriate way of professional education and training, even implications on the development of STEM academic and career
though these technologies are (still) more expensive than choice.” Frontiers in Psychology, 2017, 8, 805.
traditional training methods. An important finding is that VR [17] Y. Zhou, S. Ji, T. Xu, and Z. Wang, “Promoting Knowledge
training is perceived more condensed and focused as opposed Construction: A Model for Using Virtual Reality Interaction to
to long-winding full day presence workshops, covering the Enhance Learning.” Procedia Computer Science, 2018, 130, 239-246.
same domain. In a medium to long-term perspective, VR and [18] D. Passig, D. Tzuriel, and G. Eshel-Kedmi, “Improving children's
AR will become a serious part of the educational landscape. cognitive modifiability by dynamic assessment in 3D Immersive
Virtual Reality environments.” Computers and Education, 2016, 95,
With the present study, we could contribute certain empirical 296–308.
evidence for the advantageous characteristics of VR solutions.
[19] R. Webster, “Declarative knowledge acquisition in immersive virtual
A clear limitation, however, is the still narrow degree of learning environments.” Interactive Learning Environments, 2016,
freedom in the presented VR scenario. Also, the relatively 24(6), 1319–1333.
small number of participants is a limiting factor in the

978-1-7348995-0-4/20/$31.00 ©2020 Immersive Learning Research Network 213

6th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN 2020)
Online, June 21-25, 2020.

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Wollongong. Downloaded on August 09,2020 at 22:11:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[20] R. Sacks, A. Perlman, and R. Barak, “Construction safety training using
immersive virtual reality.” Construction Management and Economics,
2013, 31(9), 1005-1017.
[21] R. T. Stone, K. P. Watts, P. Zhong, and C. S. Wei, “Physical and
cognitive effects of virtual reality integrated training.” Human factors,
2011, 53(5), 558-572.
[22] K. K. Bhagat, W. K. Liou, and C. Y. Chang, “A cost-effective
interactive 3D virtual reality system applied to military live firing
training.” Virtual Reality, 2013, 20(2), 127-140.
[23] E. Prasolova-Forland, M. Fominykh, R. Darisiro, and A. I. Morch,
“Training cultural awareness in military operations in a virtual Afghan
village: A methodology for scenario development.” In 2013 46th
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 903-912).
IEEE.
[24] B. Rammstedt, C. J. Kemper, M. C. Klein, C. Beierlein, and A.
Kovaleva, “Eine kurze Skala zur Messung der fünf Dimensionen der
Persönlichkeit: Big-Five-Inventory-10 (BFI-10)“, 2012.

978-1-7348995-0-4/20/$31.00 ©2020 Immersive Learning Research Network 214

6th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN 2020)
Online, June 21-25, 2020.

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Wollongong. Downloaded on August 09,2020 at 22:11:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.