Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-022-00679-7

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Training in virtual reality enables learning of a complex sports

movement
Stefan Pastel1 · K. Petri1 · C. H. Chen1 · Ana Milena Wiegand Cáceres1 · M. Stirnatis1 · C. Nübel1 · L. Schlotter1 ·
K. Witte1

Received: 10 January 2022 / Accepted: 4 July 2022 / Published online: 22 July 2022
© The Author(s) 2022

Abstract
Despite the increased use in sports, it is still unclear to what extent VR training tools can be applied for motor learning
of complex movements. Previous VR studies primarily relate to realize performances rather than learning motor skills.
Therefore, the current study compared VR with video training realizing the acquisition of karate technique, the Soto Uke
moving forward in Zenkutsu Dachi, without being accompanied by a trainer or partner. Further analyses showed whether a
less lavished forearm compared to a whole-body visualization in VR is necessary to acquire movements’ basics sufficiently.
Four groups were tested: 2 groups conducted VR training (VR-WB: whole-body visualization, and VR-FA having only
visualized the forearms), the third group passed through a video-based learning method (VB), and the control group (C) had
no intervention. In consultation with karate experts, a scoring system was developed to determine the movements’ quality
divided, into upper- and lower body performance and the fist pose. The three-way ANOVA with repeated measurements,
including the between-subject factor group [VR-WB, VR-FA, VB, C] and the within-subject factors time [pre, post, reten-
tion] and body regions [upper body, lower body, fist pose], shows that all groups improved significantly (except for C) with
the similar course after four training sessions in all body regions. Accordingly, VR training seems to be as effective as video
training, and the transfer from VR-adapted skills into the natural environment was equally sufficient, although presenting
different body visualization types. Further suggestions are made related to the features of future VR training simulations.

Keywords Virtual reality · Motor learning · Head-mounted display · Karate kumite · Combat sports · Body visualization

1 Introduction assessment and training situations despite technical restric-

Virtual reality (VR) has been inserted in many differ-
ent fields and has established itself as a valuable tool for
improvement of performances or skill acquisition (Hüls-
mann et al. 2019; Michalski et al. 2019; Petri et al. 2019b,
2019c). VR becomes more attractive since it enables to
expand the psychological and sport training applications due
to the possibility of controlling and manipulating the process
or interaction of the participants in the virtual scene (Har-
ris et al. 2019; Hoffmann et al. 2014; Mueller et al. 2007).
Previous research emphasizes the usability of VR for players
and coaches and confirmed the possibility to develop reliable
* Stefan Pastel
stefan.pastel@ovgu.de
1
Department of Sports Engineering and Movement Science,
Institute III: Sports Science, Otto-Von-Guericke-University,
Magdeburg, Germany
tions such as latencies or cybersickness (Faure et al. 2020).
Generally, a simulation of scenes or a reproduction of
images that are difficult to realize in the real environment
allows multifaceted usability. For example, different task
constraints can be varied (Gray 2017), or feedback informa-
tion can be generalized, which is challenging to realize in
real-world scenarios (Sigrist et al. 2015). In previous VR
scenarios, additional benefits have been crystallized, such
as the interaction with each desired object (Fox et al. 2009),
the conduction of experiments or training, which are ques-
tionable because of the risk of injuries under real conditions,
and the possibility for people to train without needing to
access the sporting environment or multiple training part-
ners (Michalski et al. 2019). The importance of monitor-
ing participants’ performances and developing their skills
when constantly challenged is increasingly emphasized in
VR interventions (Farley et al. 2020; Khan et al. 2019). This

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
524
process can be supported by adjusting the difficulty level
depending on the users’ skill level (Gray 2017).
Thinking about using VR as a training tool, different
types of VR applications have been considered in which
multiple applications emerge (Huang et al. 2019; Jackson II
2021). A popular system is a head-mounted display (HMD),
which is smaller and more practical/portable (wearable and
some even wireless) compared with others, such as the
CAVE (Neumann et al. 2018). It has reached the commercial
market, and the application has been extended to different
fields such as healthcare and education (Nor et al. 2020).
Especially for sports, benefits have been crystallized elicited
through this system because natural locomotion could take
place ensuring an increased immersion (Kallioniemi et al.
2017).
2 Background and current issues
Currently, only a few studies compared the quality of visual
perceptional cues in VR to natural conditions or discussed
how VR training could be conceptualized to effectively
acquire complex sensorimotor skills in the real world (Harris
et al. 2019). To realize a more realistic VR training, different
measurement systems have been included in or combined
with VR applications, for example, eye-tracking (Pastel et al.
2020a), EEG (Tauscher et al. 2019), and motion capturing
systems realizing the whole-body visualization (WB) (Pastel
et al. 2020b). Those approaches are necessary to expand
the translation of physical actions into virtual sports per-
formances (Neumann et al. 2018). Currently, differences in
perception and the transfer from VR-adapted skills into real-
world conditions can still be detected (Pastel et al. 2020a).
Therefore, it is necessary to investigate how VR training
recommendations or conceptions should be made leading
to a positive transfer to reality.
A few studies focused on the use of VR in sports (for
review, see Neumann et al. 2018). Especially, the assump-
tion that the learned skills and experiences can be trans-
ferred to real-world conditions has not yet been satisfacto-
rily answered. An improvement after training sessions in
VR could be observed, such as in juggling (Lammfromm
and Gopher 2011), karate (Petri et al. 2019a), throwing
darts (Tirp et al. 2015), and baseball batting (Gray 2017).
Michalski et al. (2019) stated that participants significantly
improved their real-world table tennis performance when
only a VR training was completed. Conclusions of positive
transfer effect from VR-adapted skills into real-world can
be drawn indirectly since representative real-world tennis
was developed, and the authors suggested the potential of
performance transfer (Le Noury et al. 2021). Although VR
simulators are supposed to be for the positive transfer of
adapted skills into the real world, their validity and fidelity
13
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540
must be explored before its adoption as a suitable training
device (Wood et al. 2021).
The basis of the aforementioned studies helps in under-
standing the possible integration of VR applications into
sports scenarios. Summarizing the content, we see some
missing points for presenting a conceptual design regarding
sport interventions in VR. In some studies, the transfer of
the newly learned skill into the real world is missing. An
improvement of performances was often observable within
the VR environment, but the transfer to the real world is
not considered. Although studies exist comparing different
technologies in supporting the learning progress of complex
motor skills (Burns et al. 2011), a lot has happened regard-
ing possibilities appearing through new devices and their
software development.
Apart from a few exceptions, for example (Liu et al.
2020), which dealt with both, most of the previous enumer-
ated studies examined the execution of motoric tasks. The
natural locomotion realizable within HMD-based VR sce-
narios ensures relative natural body movements (taking one
step forward leads to an adequate positional shifting in VR),
essential considering sports activities. Also crucial for learn-
ing new movements is perceiving the body via kinesthetic,
proprioceptive, vestibular, and visual cues (Wong et al.
2012). Since the participants complete natural movements
during the perception of the VR environment with an HMD,
they rely on similar feedback to real-world muscle tension
and stretching, or from the vestibular system, although pos-
sible differences should not be ruled out (for example, the
weight of HMD, 500 g in average). Furthermore, only a few
studies have examined how much of the body must be visu-
ally presented within VR to ensure adequate performance
compared to real-world conditions. Pastel et al. (2020a, b)
could show that the WB visualization is not necessary to
ensure high performance during the execution of different
motoric tasks but emphasized the importance of having at
least one body part visualized, which is in line with other
findings (Kim et al. 2018; Lugrin et al. 2018). However,
the body visualization was examined to ensure movement
execution and not test whether different body visualization
types could impact the acquisition of previously experienced
movements.
In sports training, improving motor skills by visual feed-
back of the own performance compared to the superlative
is often preferred since the athletes can detect and correct
errors (see Rhoads et al. 2014; Vaziri et al. 2006). The
authors presented the benefits of visual feedback on motor
learning in many kinds of sports but also warned against
implementing it in the coaches’ learning methods without
hesitations since research findings do not show visual feed-
back as the most efficient. They also discussed the usage of
visual feedback concerning the athletes’ level since minor
improvements in performances could be crucial to become
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540
the best (Rhoads et al. 2014). When talking about visual
feedback, several forms are considered. It can show the ath-
letes videos of experts’ movement execution or their per-
formances to acquire a better imagination of basic move-
ment patterns. In another context, it is often associated with
the persistent visual feedback of the own body leading to
significantly greater accuracy for visuomotor tasks than
non-persistent ones (Unell et al. 2021). The reason why the
provision of visual feedback could not be established as a
crucial tool at the current state may be the type of present-
ing. The athletes were often shown only videos instead of
being in a fully immersive environment to get feedback on
their performances or better movements’ imagination, where
the perspectives can be freely chosen by them to ensure a
three-dimensional impression. Here, we see VR as a great
potential to fulfill such requirements since realistic training
scenarios could be perceived via the first-person perspective.
Currently, the VR applications became more commer-
cial and are available for the majority due to low costs and
practical use. In the next decade, most of the population will
probably never have their motion capturing system allowing
a reliable visualization of the WB. Instead, other hardware
components tracking one’s body could solve the problem
of private learning sessions accompanied with WB such as
HTC Vive Tracker (HTC Corporation, Taiwan) allowing
to visualize single body parts or objects. Further questions
arise regarding how important it is to visualize the WB for
motor learning or which body parts have to be prioritized.
Concerning the practical use, the controllers are often used
for visualization of the forearms for helping the participant
to orientate themselves in VR scenes or to interact with
objects (Lougiakis et al. 2020). The VR use during a new
skill acquisition could accelerate and support the learning
process and automatically help the participants get used to
it. Besides integrating VR additionally into the training, the
importance of standalone training is increased associated
due to rising stress levels and other daily charges (Pan et al.
2012). In this context, video-based training could also be
helpful to enable motor learning compared to VR (Yu et al.
2020), but which of these methods is the more effective
could not be answered yet sufficiently. Both forms can be
used as an additional training tool that amplifies the pos-
sibility of motor learning for private uses. People are often
reluctant to participate in new sports because they feel inse-
cure comparing their performances with those with inter-
mediate skills. To accelerate learning progress or clean out
individual mistakes, VR can generate additional and indi-
vidualized feedback that supports motor learning (Thurlings
et al. 2013).
Previous research has examined the use of VR application
for motor learning and different kind of sports have been
considered, such as golf (Harris et al. 2020) or squat training
(Hülsmann et al. 2019). In the current study, a sport-specific
525
technique related to combat sports has been chosen to be
tested. The Soto Uke in Zenkutsu Dachi is a defensive tech-
nique from karate kumite and is a complex movement for
a beginner or someone without martial arts experience. We
chose this movement to test whether VR or videos can be
used as a practical learning tool in acquiring skills, since
the majority did not collect any experience (except the com-
bats sports athletes). Furthermore, the movement does not
require any jumps or fast rotations that could be harmed by
the technical hardware components (weight of the HMD).
So far, no study emerges from the research dealing with a
comparison of different degrees of body visualization in the
context of movement learning concerning the quality of the
movement to be learned and draws a comparison between
a WB and partial visualization. Previous studies only dealt
with the effect of the visibility of body parts during move-
ment execution and not with movement learning. Likewise,
the influence of different observation perspectives or differ-
ent forms of representation of the avatar in a WB visualiza-
tion on movement learning has been investigated, but not the
substantial impact of those different visualization types. The
predominant body of research concerning motor learning
took place in controlled laboratory settings and was driven
by theoretical-driven examinations by using simple move-
ment tasks (Farrow and Robertson 2017).
In the current study, the main goal was to examine
whether VR can be used to acquire a special combat tech-
nique, the Soto Uke in Zenkutsu Dachi. Four different
groups were formed: a VR training group perceiving the
whole-body visualization (VR-WB) and one in which only
the forearms were visualized during the intervention (VR-
FA), a video training group representing a conventional
training (VB), and a control group (CG) with no interven-
tion. A comparison of the training groups was made to
determine whether training in VR can lead to adequate
outcome performances compared to a video-based learning
program. Therefore, the study aimed to examine whether
learning a combat technique with a VR training tool is as
successful as adequate video-based training. A secondary
aim was whether the visualization of the forearms by using
the controller is sufficient for adequate learning without
any loss of acquisition quality. Due to the high immer-
sion within the VR scenario and the three-dimensional
presentation of each partial movement, we assume that
VR could lead to more efficient learning acquisition than
video-based learning. Since visual feedback is essential
for motor learning (Park et al. 2018), we assume perceiv-
ing the whole body leads to a more remarkable improve-
ment than those with less visual feedback of their body,
especially for body parts that are not visually perceivable.
Although the learning content is similar between the con-
ditions (virtual reality and video-based training), it should
be investigated whether the skills to be learned can be
13
526 Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540

acquired equally in a virtual environment. Hereby, further

statements can be made whether movements in VR are
equally visual perceivable and whether learning content
can proceed similar to real condition, resulting in addi-
tional suggestions realizing future VR training sessions.

3 Methods

Four groups were tested and went through a different kind of

intervention. A pretest was conducted to determine the start-
ing level of the participants’ performances. After the indi-
vidual intervention for each group, the post- and retention
tests were carried out. The retention test has to be completed
by the participants after 2 days’ pause, which consisted of
the same procedure as the pre- and post-test (see Fig. 2). The
approval of the Ethics Committee of the Otto-von-Guericke
University at the Medical Faculty and University Hospital
Magdeburg was obtained under the number 132/16.

3.1 Technique description Soto Uke in Zenkutsu

Dachi

The Soto Uke (SU) in Zenkutsu Dachi (ZD) is a defense

technique from karate kumite (see Fig. 1). It consists on the
one hand of the step position, which can be executed forward
(zenkutsu dachi) or backward in ZD or also in other karate
stands (Wichmann and Seer 2005). Additionally, an arm
movement (Soto Uke) is also performed, which is intended
to block an attack by the opponent. With the ZD, the direct
distance of the heels is about two shoulder widths. The main
weight rests on the front leg, which is strongly bent. The
outer edge of the front foot is positioned so that it points
straight forward. The back leg is extended to give a firmer
grip on the ground and a stable stance (Wichmann and Seer
2005). With the SU (sometimes also called Soto-Ude-Uke),
attacks are repelled laterally by the shortest route. Both arms
are included within this form of movement, the attack can
be parried from both sides. To execute the basic defense,
one must first lunge with the arm with which one wishes to
ward off the attack and place the fist at eye level to the side
of the head (Wichmann and Seer 2005). The inside of the
fist is turned out so that the thumb points forward. The upper
arm is horizontal, and the forearm is vertical (90°). This is
the starting position from which the blocking movement is
initiated. The other arm is extended, and a fist position is
assumed at the opponent’s chin level. This movement was
chosen since it includes the movement of each body part,
and it is less likely that the participants were confronted with
such kind of movement except for karate athletes. Thinking
about using VR for movement learning for all different body
Fig. 1  Illustration of the Soto Uke in Zenkutsu Dachi. The first row
(a) indicates the arm movement (Soto Uke), the second row (b)
shows the leg movement (Zenkutsu Dachi) from the frontal and lat-
eral perspective, and the third row (c) visualizes the complete tech-
nique including both arm- and leg movements (Soto Uke in Zenkutsu
Dachi)
parts, the chosen karate technique could be representative of
such kinds of movements.
3.2 Experimental apparatus for both studies
3.2.1 Hardware
A wireless HTC Vive Pro Eye (HTC, Taiwan) was chosen
with a field of view of 110°. To execute the VR environ-
ment smoothly, a high-performance desktop equipped with
Intel i7 CPU, 16 GB memory, 512 GB SSD, and Nvidia
GTX 1080 8 GB graphics card was used. A motion capture
system (Vicon Shogun, Oxford, UK), including 13 cam-
eras with a sampling rate of 200 Hz, was used to visual-
ize the WB (including finger tracking) in VR. With this,

13
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540
Fig. 2  Test design of the current
study
another computer was connected to the previous one to
run Vicon Shogun (equipped with Intel i7 CPU, 32 GB
memory, 512 GB SSD, and Nvidia Quadro K2200 4 GB
graphic card). To ensure the synchronization with the
individual skeleton to the virtual avatar’s ones, 63 mark-
ers were placed on the participants’ bodies, which was
included in the group with whole-body visualization. The
two controllers of the HTC Vive system were used to vis-
ualize the forearms for the other virtual reality training
group (see Fig. 3). Two synchronized cameras (GoPro 6
and Casio Exilim EX-F1, 1920 × 1080 pixels, 60 Hz) were
used to record the movement from the lateral and frontal
perspective in the pre-, post-, and retention test.
3.2.2 Software
To create an environment of high fidelity preventing the
participants from a conflict between the real-word and the
virtual environment, the virtual room was created with
Blender (version 2.79) using the scales and the textures
of the objects in the real world. The test room was also
used during the experiment for all other training groups
(video-based and control group). The created virtual envi-
ronment was then imported into Unity3D (version 2019.1),
and the SteamVR (version 2.5.0) was used to enable users
527
to interact in the virtual reality. Visual Studio 2017 was
used for implementing the C# program for Unity3D to
control the studies.
3.2.3 Participants and experimental setup
Eighty-three young sports students (33 females and 50
males, age 22.92 ± 3.11) participated in this experiment vol-
untarily with normal or corrected to normal vision, no report
of the eye or neurological impairment. A Power analysis
was done (using the software G-Power, version 3.1.9.7) for
the within–between interaction (time and group) by con-
sidering the number of participants, the number of groups,
the used statistical method, the number of measurements,
the expected effect (we assumed at least a medium effect
size: f = 0.25, since the control group conducted no train-
ing and improved performances after training interven-
tion was expected), and the alpha error probability (0.05),
whereas a Power was measured at 0.99 (1 − β error prob-
ability). The participants gave their written consent after
fully understanding the aim and the procedure of the study.
48.2% of participants had already gained VR experience,
but none of them possessed their own VR application. VR
experience was noted down when the participants had either
taken part in at least one VR study or had ever participated
in a VR gaming session. We classified the VR experiences
13
528
as marginal since more than just participation is needed
for being schooled within virtual environments, which
is unlikely when it could not be used at home. Sixty-one
percentage of participants regularly played video games
(M = 7.87 h per week, SD = 7.80). Even among the partici-
pants who have gained game experiences, there are large
deviations within the weekly hours (VR-WB: 2.73 ± 6.20;
VR-FA: 6.18 ± 9.58; VB: 4.10 ± 5.76; C: 6.14 ± 6.34). Most
participants did not report owning a VR device for private
uses (VR-WB: 100%; VR-FA: 90.9%; VB: 100%; C: 95.2%).
In addition, no experiences regarding combat sports, in gen-
eral, have been made by 40% in VR-WB, 32% in VR-FA,
70% in VB, and 38% in C. Taking a closer look at this var-
ied distribution of prior experiences, it turned out that more
people in VR-WB, VR-FA, and C participated in the judo
course at the university, which we did not count to combat
experiences, since it is made for beginners, and contains
other demanded technical components. The division into
groups was prioritized by ensuring the same VR experi-
ences crystallized through the ownership of VR devices for
private uses and the combat level, which was also the same
for all groups.
3.2.4 Procedure
Before starting the experiment, each participant had to read
or sign the participant information, the consent form, and
a self-created questionnaire about possible pre-experiences
in VR or combat sport. Participation was canceled if pre-
experiences in karate kumite or other combat sport existed
for at least six months. An overview of the procedure is
shown in Fig. 2. In the VR part of the study, the HMD was
calibrated by the investigator using the official built-in cali-
bration protocol from SteamVR. For the group that visually
perceived the whole body during the interventions, a subject
calibration including the attachment of the markers on the
motion suit took place before starting the VR scenario. The
investigator explained the study’s procedure and measured
the subjects’ interpupillary distance to ensure a clear visual
input from the HMD. The participants could look and walk
around in the VR scene during this 1-min adjustment phase.
After the adjustment phase, the formal study started. Before
starting the tests and interventions, the participants were
instructed to warm up for at least 5 min.
3.2.5 Pre‑test, post‑test, and retention test
The participants were instructed to observe the movement on
the monitor three times. Two cameras were placed at fixed
locations (distance, high, inclination angle) that remained
the same during the whole study to ensure valid and reli-
able data for the video analysis. The perspective of the first
camera was in the front, and the second one was placed
13
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540
laterally with sufficient distance to capture the whole move-
ment. After the observation, the participants were asked
to reconstruct the observed movement as best as they can.
They should start with the right leg and stop when the left
leg’s step was completed (in total, two steps had to be taken
forward). The tests were conducted in the laboratory, so a
transfer from virtual training into a real-world setting could
be investigated after the interventions.
3.2.6 Intervention
An overview of the content of each training session is pre-
sented in Table 1. Different requirements of the VR tool
were set up, such as autodidactic learning without an exter-
nal trainer, home-based training, and mainly visual informa-
tion processing took place within the learning sessions. The
three-dimensional observation from different perspectives
(also free chosen), the additional information of technical
details and auditive signals, the controlled attention steering
minimizing the distractors within the VR scenes can emerge
as possible advantages to support the learning process. For
the forearm group (VR-FA), there were some limitations
regarding the fist pose’s learning process due to the static
posture of the controller. This part was skipped, and they just
regarded the fist pose to imagine the correct posture. Those
limitations were considered through the whole intervention
phase; further restrictions did not take place. Generally, the
units were split into observation and executions phases. Dif-
ferent execution velocities were chosen during the phases
to introduce the participants to the movement to be learned
as comfortably as possible. Before starting with the new
unit, the main contents from the previously conducted unity
were repeated within 5 min. During the sessions, a board
with additional information in written form about the correct
execution of the sub-movement was displayed to provide
another form of details. Each session lasted approximately
between 15 and 20 min. Although the participants received
additional information about the key points of movement via
written notes on a virtual board, they did not get individual
feedback about their movement which is comparable to other
studies in which the participants’ level still improved (Petri
et al. 2019a, b, c). Table 1 shows the learning contents of
each training session and the methods that have been used.
The groups differentiated in the following points:
Group 1 (VR-WB)
For this group, the whole body was visualized in VR by
wearing the motion suit that allows synchronizing the
participants’ motion with the avatar’s body, including
finger tracking (see Fig. 3). To avoid differences in per-
ceiving the body proportions, we chose between female
and male avatar skin surfaces. During the intervention,
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540 529

Table 1  Overview of the contents for each training sessions

Intervention Content Method

1. Session Warm-up 5-min individualized exercises

Zenkutsu Dachi (stand and moving forward) 5 observations from each perspective of the avatar’s movement for the right and
left side (front, lateral, free chosen)
Imitation of the movement at a leisurely pace (10 repetitions for each side
accompanied with the avatar’s movement)
Get additional information on movements’ key points
2 observations from each perspective (frontal, lateral, free chosen) of the ava-
tar’s movement for the forward movement (starting with the right leg followed
by the left side)
Imitation of the movement at a leisurely pace (10 repetitions for each side
accompanied with the avatar’s movement 50% slowed)
Imitation of the movement (10 repetitions for each side accompanied with the
avatar’s movement 25% slowed)
5 repetitions for moving forward (starting with the right leg) under a virtual
height border. An auditive signal appeared when they exceeded the height
Auxiliary lines were shown so that the stance did not diverge more than
shoulder-width apart in the frontal plane
Zenkutsu Dachi backwards 3 observations from each perspective of the avatar’s movement for the right side
(front, lateral, free chosen)
Imitation of the movement accompanied with and without avatar (3 repetitions,
25% slowed)
2. Session Warm-up 5 min individualized exercises
Short repetition of the first session (2 observations of ZD in stand for each side,
and 2 observations of the ZD during moving forward)
Fist pose Observation of the movement from the lateral and frontal perspective (3 repeti-
tions)
Imitations of the movement accompanied with and without virtualized fist (each
for three times)
Soto Uke (arm that blocks) 3 observations from each perspective of the avatar’s movement for the right and
left side (front, back, free chosen)
Get additional information on movements’ key points
Imitation of the movement with different speed (50%, 75%, 100%) accompanied
with avatar for the left and right side (each 5 repetitions)
Hikite (pulled close to the hip) 5 observations from each perspective of the avatar’s movement for the right and
left side (front, lateral, free chosen)
Imitation of the movement with different speed (50%, 75%, 100%) accompanied
with avatar for the left and right side (each 5 repetitions)
Combined arm movement (Soto Uke and Hikite) 5 observations from each perspective of the avatar’s movement for the right and
left side (front, lateral, free chosen)
Imitation of the movement with different speed (50%, 75%, 100%) accompanied
with avatar for the left and right side (each 5 repetitions)
3. Session Warm-up 5 min individualized exercises
Short repetition of the second session (Fist pose, Soto, Hikite and both arm
movements together, 2 observations for each side)
Combined arm movement (Soto Uke and Hikite) 3 observations from each perspective of the avatar’s movement for the right and
left side (front, lateral, free chosen)
Get additional information on movements’ key points
Frozen highlights of the movement (participants could compare their move-
ments with those from the avatar)
Imitation of the movement with different speed (50%, 75%, 100%) accompanied
with avatar for the left and right side (each 10 repetitions)
Practicing without avatar, mirror adjustment possible (10 per side)
Arm movement in Zenkutsu Dachi 3 observations from each perspective of the avatar’s movement for the right and
left side (front, lateral, free chosen)

13
530
Table 1  (continued)
Intervention Content
4. Session Warm up
Soto Uke in Zenkutsu Dachi
Soto Uke in Zenkutsu Dachi backwards
The content written in italics could only be realized in VR
The Zenkutsu Dachi was first learned in the stand. In the following learning sessions, this had to be applied while moving forward
the participants perceived the WB, which can be used to
adjust their movements in the virtual mirror.
Group 2 (VR-FA)
The training for this group also took place in the virtual
room. The participants were equipped with the Vive-
Controllers, which enabled the body’s forearm’s visu-
alization (see Fig. 3).
Group 3 (video-based, VB)
This group trained by video-based acquisition. The par-
ticipants were placed in front of a monitor where the
movements from different perspectives and speeds were
presented. The learning content was equally compared
with the training sessions in VR (see Tab. 1).
Group 4 (control group, C)
This group underwent no intervention and just con-
ducted the pre-, post-, and retention test.
3.2.7 Proposed VR application
The supervisor guided the current VR application by fol-
lowing a protocol. There was no User Interface in which
the participants could choose between, for example,
perspective, avatar’s movements, speed, etc. The pro-
cess should be standardized for all groups, and no delay
should occur within each training session. Therefore, the
supervisor guided each participant by activating specific
visual cues by simply clicking (for example, colored lines
indicating the next position that should be taken) or by
verbally instructing the number of repetitions for each
13
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540
Method
Get additional information on movements’ key points
Imitation of the movement with different speed (50%, 75%, 100%) accompanied
with avatar starting with the right leg (each 10 repetitions)
5 min individualized exercises
Short repetition of the third session (combined arm movement without ZD, 2
repetitions starting with each side); combined upper and lower body move-
ment (2 repetitions)
Frozen highlights of the movement (participants could compare their move-
ments with those from the avatar)
Imitation of the movement with different speed (75%, 100%) accompanied with
avatar starting with the right side (each 20 repetitions)
Movement execution without avatar at a freely chosen pace (20 repetitions)
5 observations from each perspective of the avatar’s movement starting with the
right leg putting backward (front, lateral, free chosen)
Imitation of the movement (speed 75%) accompanied with avatar
movement that should be completed. Starting different
movements was realized through public arrays, in which
the different movements could be chosen by clicking on
them. To get an impression of the participants’ view, dif-
ferent scenes are presented in Fig. 4.
3.2.8 Data analysis and statistics
The movement quality was compared by using the obtained
scores of the expert’s rating system. The rating system was
constructed by two experts having many years of experience
and graduation of the second and the fourth Dan (Deutscher
Karate Verband e.V.). The scoring system consisted of 42
items, whereas 8 different items described the movement of
the upper and 8 items described the movement execution
level of the lower body. Although the upper body, the lower
body and the fist movement consist of 8 criteria, each of
them was multiplied by a factor emphasizing the importance
of the learning progress for beginners (less important = 0.5,
important = 1, very important = 1.5). Since both movements
were rated two times, more scores could be collected [in
total 32 items]. Five items were reporting the quality of the
starting movement in the hip-width stance. To analyze the
smooth transition of the upper- and lower body movements,
another 5 items were developed. The raters were instructed
by the experts and were aware of the distribution of points.
A maximum of 2 points per item was possible to give, and
specific rules had to be considered of the raters depend-
ing on the positioned markers on participants’ bodies. The
raters were not informed about the time point (pre-, post-,
or retention test) the video was captured. Their ratings were
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540 531

Fig. 3  Overview of the groups:

a whole-body visualization
(participants had to wear the
motion suit), b forearms visu-
alization, the user is holding the
controller instead of wearing the
motion suit and c video-based
training from the first-person
perspective (1PP) and the third-
person perspective (3PP) in the
real-world setting (RW). A mir-
ror was implemented in front of
the participants within the VR
scene, ensuring visual feedback
or awareness of their posi-
tion. The control group is not
presented in this graph because
the participants completed no
intervention. In the VR sce-
narios, the left avatar shown in
the virtualized mirror indicates
the virtual trainer (transparent
blue field), and the right one is
the user’s avatar (transparent red
field) (color figure online)

made independently from each other. To measure the qual-
ity of ratings between the raters, the intraclass correlations
coefficient (ICC) was calculated using the definition created
by Koo and Li (2016). We calculated the ICCs for the upper
(0.924) and lower body (0.882) movements and the fist pose
(0.825) separately. In addition, the ICC for the total score
was determined. An ICC of 0.877 turned out to be an accept-
able value for using the data for statistical analysis (Koo
and Li 2016). The lowest ICC 0.787 within the fist pose was
calculated, which is still acceptable.
After testing for acceptable ICC values, we used the
mean between the two raters for further statistical analysis.
Before starting the inferential statistics, we first checked
whether there are differences between the starting level of
all participants being in the different intervention groups
[VR-WB, VR-FA, VB, C] and whether there were statisti-
cal outliers by using Bland–Altman boxplots. The starting

13
532 Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540

Fig. 4  Examples of participants’

perspectives during the training
sessions. For better illustration,
the visualization of the own
body (FA the forearms and
WB the whole body) has been
removed in this graph. a The
different colored lines represent-
ing the lateral perspective (blue
line) and the frontal perspec-
tive (yellow line). b The fist
animation for better imagination
of the position of each finger. c
The lines on the ground indicat-
ing the width of the leg position
and the “roof” that should not
be touched during moving
forward. d The board on which
all movement’s instructions
were presented. The avatar is
the virtual trainer (color figure
online)

level is determined through the means of the scoring sys-
tem of the two raters. We used a one-way ANOVA for
independent samples by using all groups’ total points of
movement quality. The analyses resulted in no significant
differences between the groups after they had conducted
the pretest (p > 0.05). This was strengthened since the box-
plots within each group (and all participants together) did
not show any significant outliers.
Two main questions were considered during the data
analysis. The first one thematizes the comparison between
the groups in their improvements caused by the different
interventions. Therefore, we conducted a mixed ANOVA
with repeated measurements with the between-subject
factor group [VR-WB, VR-FA, VB, C] and the within-
subject factors time [pre-, post-, and retention test] and
the body regions [upper body, lower body, fist pose].
We also calculated with the total score (the sum of the
body regions) to get a better impression of performance
improvements. Since each body region includes a differ-
ent number of possible points because of the difference in
the maximum achievable score caused by the previously
explained weighting factors (upper body = 26 points, lower
body = 32 points, begin of the movement = 11 points, and
smooth transition = 10 points, fist movement = 17 points),
we used the percentages of the achieved points being able
to compare them and to make further statements on move-
ment acquisition’s quality. In total, a maximum score of
96 points could be reached by the participant. For the total
score, we conducted an additional two-way ANOVA with
the between-subject factor group [VR-WB, VR-FA, VB, C]
and the within-subject factor time [pre-, post-, and reten-
tion test]. To examine the body visualization, the groups
VR-WB and VR-FA were compared additionally, since the
less visualization in the VR-FA group could lead to a loss
in movement acquisition, especially for the lower body
part. If no sphericity was given, the Greenhouse–Geisser
correction was used for all calculations. In addition, we
conducted a multilevel linear regression with the points
(not using the percentage) as the dependent and group and
time as independent variables.
Other factors such as enjoyment during the training ses-
sions are considered to crystallize further advantages evoked
through the different intervention types. After each training
session, the participants had to state how much they felt
motivated (from 1 to 10, whereas 1 = does not apply at all
and 10 = fully applies). Therefore, multivariate ANOVAs
were conducted to reveal possible differences between the
groups [VR-WB, VR-FA, VB, C] and training sessions [T1,
T2, T3, T4].
4 Results
4.1 Comparison of the groups
First, we concentrated on the effectiveness of learning for
each group by observing the total score (sum of all body
regions). All groups that experienced an intervention
improved over the time from pre to post (see Fig. 1). The C
remained unchanged. There were no significant differences
between the post and retention for all groups (see Table 2).
After observing the total score, we were interested in
whether this occurred for all body regions since different
visualization types between the groups might harm the

13
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540 533

Table 2  The descriptive statistic of the groups

Group Body region Pre Post Retention
M + SD M + SD M + SD

Video-based (VB) Upper body % 39.75 ± 10.88 71.50 ± 8.45 73.55 ± 11.56
Points 10.34 ± 2.83 18.59 ± 2.20 19.12 ± 3.01
Lower body % 44.75 ± 14.60 67.58 ± 16.42 66.88 ± 13.64
Points 14.32 ± 4.67 21.63 ± 5.25 21.40 ± 4.36
Fist pose % 64.45 ± 12.59 75.45 ± 13.44 75.12 ± 10.97
Points 10.96 ± 2.14 12.83 ± 2.28 12.77 ± 1.86
Total % 44.05 ± 6.22 70.85 ± 7.29 70.85 ± 6.29
Points 42.29 ± 5.97 68.02 ± 7.00 68.02 ± 6.04
Whole-body visualization (VR-WB) Upper body % 37.68 ± 11.98 70.95 ± 11.76 66.55 ± 12.96
Points 9.80 ± 3.11 18.45 ± 3.01 17.03 ± 3.37
Lower body % 51.75 ± 9.39 72.28 ± 11.61 68.15 ± 9.66
Points 16.56 ± 3.00 23.13 ± 3.72 21.81 ± 3.01
Fist pose % 69.70 ± 17.63 72.45 ± 10.65 67.98 ± 11.72
Points 11.85 ± 3.00 12.32 ± 1.81 11.56 ± 1.99
Total % 48.83 ± 6.00 71.43 ± 6.46 68.20 ± 6.12
Points 46.88 ± 5.76 68.57 ± 6.20 65.47 ± 5.88
Forearms-visualization (VR-FA) Upper body % 45.30 ± 16.32 71.02 ± 12.95 70.25 ± 15.13
Points 11.78 ± 4.24 18.47 ± 3.37 18.27 ± 3.93
Lower body % 47.30 ± 13.47 68.86 ± 14.69 68.32 ± 19.77
Points 15.14 ± 4.31 22.04 ± 4.70 21.86 ± 5.43
Fist pose % 61.18 ± 18.29 64.36 ± 14.12 65.84 ± 16.97
Points 10.40 ± 3.11 10.94 ± 2.40 11.19 ± 2.88
Total % 45.93 ± 8.70 68.64 ± 7.44 68.36 ± 10.20
Points 44.09 ± 8.35 65.89 ± 7.14 65.63 ± 9.79
Control (C) Upper body % 38.52 ± 14.80 42.31 ± 11.85 41.14 ± 12.87
Points 10.02 ± 3.85 11.00 ± 3.08 10.70 ± 3.35
Lower body % 49.52 ± 9.28 47.57 ± 8.65 50.57 ± 10.18
Points 15.85 ± 2.97 15.22 ± 2.77 16.18 ± 3.26
Fist pose % 50.21 ± 12.43 55.29 ± 10.76 52.17 ± 15.42
Points 8.54 ± 2.11 9.40 ± 1.83 8.87 ± 2.62
Total % 44.38 ± 7.46 46.24 ± 6.56 46.10 ± 7.59
Points 42.60 ± 7.16 44.39 ± 6.30 44.26 ± 7.29
Factor Significance Post-hoc comparisons

Three-way ANOVA with repeated measure-

ments and calculated effect sizes
Within-subject effects
Time F (1.693, 133,758) = 148.09, p < 0.001, effect size: 0.86, large effect Pre versus Post (p < 0.05)
Pre vs. Retention (p < 0.05)
Body region F (2, 158) = 14.582, p < 0.001, effect size: 0.16, small effect Fist vs. Upper body (p < 0.05)
Fist vs. Lower body (p < 0.05)
Time*Body region F (4, 316) = 29.915, p < 0.001, effect size: 0.62, large effect –
Group*Time F (5.079, 133.758) = 13.707, p < 0.001, effect size: 0.36, moderate effect –
Group*Body region F (6, 158) = 2.065, p = 0.060, no effect –
Group*Time*body region F (4391.07, 24,994.89) = 4.626, p < 0.001, effect size: 0.15, small effect –
Between-subject effects
Group F (3, 79) = 33.971, p < 0.001, effect size: 0.68, large effect CG versus VB (p < 0.05)
CG versus VR-WB (p < 0.05)
CG versus VR-FA (p < 0.05)

The values represent the percentage of the completed performance for each body region within each group over the time. Effect sizes were calcu-
lated by using Cohen’s f (0.1–0.25 = small effect, 0.25 < 0.4 moderate effect, > 0.40 large effect)

13
534
Fig. 5  Overview of the learning process over the time (pre-, post-,
and retention test) for the video-based (VB), whole-body visualiza-
tion in VR (WB-VR), forearms visualization in VR (VR-FA) and
control group (C)
performance. Significant differences were found within the
main factors time, and body region (see Table 2). Perfor-
mance differences could be proven between the pre- and
post-test, as well as between pre- and retention test. The
same occurred for the body region since no improvement for
the fist pose could be observed for all groups compared to
the others. As shown in Fig. 5, the analysis of the between-
subject effects showed significant differences between the
groups accompanied by a large effect (see Table 2). After
excluding the C from the statistical analyses, the interaction
of the three factors (group, body region, time) was not sig-
nificant (F(6.864, 87.656) = 0.890, p = 0.525). Therefore, the
process of learning within all body regions (upper and lower
body, fist pose) over the time (pre-, post-, and retention) took
place equally for all intervention groups.
4.2 Improvement of the body regions over time
The controller in the VR-FA group had no impact on per-
formance level concerning the fist pose, nor did they limit
the lower body performance. This could also be observed
in Fig. 6, in which each group’s progress within each body
region is presented.
Multilevel linear regression was used to examine whether
the independent variables “group” and “time” were able to
statistically significant predict the dependent variable (cal-
culating with points instead of percentages). The R2 for the
overall model was 0.65 (adjusted R2 = 0.42), indicative for
a high goodness of fit, according to Cohen 1988. Group
and time statistically predict the participants’ level, F(2,
248) = 92.10, p < 0.001. The time is a significant predictor
for points. An increase over time is recognizable (β = 8.403;
t (248) = 10.63; p < 0.001). However, it must be considered
13
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540
that this increase cannot be seen between the post and reten-
tion (Fig. 7).
4.3 Enjoyment
We examined additionally the enjoyment during the training
phases. The univariate ANOVA revealed a significant inter-
action of the groups*training sessions (F(6, 177) = 2.742,
p = 0.14, η2 = 0.085). The least fun occurred in the VR-WB
group. Considering the main factor, the factor group revealed
a significant difference between the VR-WB and the VR-FA
(p < 0.05, Cohen's f: 0.44, strong effect). Generally, the train-
ing sessions showed no significant differences F(2,457,
177) = 0,430, p = 0.732, η2 = 0.07. For better illustration, the
enjoyment factor after the pretest, the subjective impression
of the difficulty of the movement to be learned, the preferred
perspective during the avatar’s movement observation, and
the enjoyment during the training are presented in Fig. 8.
5 Discussion
A trend of using VR as an additional learning tool has been
observed in the last years in many different fields, and the
application possibilities determined by the technical com-
ponents are increasing (Ahir et al. 2020). How and where to
use VR in sports is not fully transparent due to not matching
its effectiveness in the currently conducted research. But,
considering VR as a training tool that enables standalone
training at home when, for example, no training group exits
in the immediate vicinity, or for current reasons such as con-
tainments caused by pandemic, it is essential to examine
whether such learning is comparable to conventional training
methods such as video training or similar. It is essential to
investigate the learning process enabled by new technology
since possible negative outcomes could be evoked (Srini-
vasan et al. 2006). Therefore, the present study compared
learning methods of a movement that requires the coordina-
tion of the whole body. The sport-specific technique from
the karate kumite, the Soto Uke in Zenkutsu Dachi, is well
suited for this purpose since the upper and lower body have
to be coordinated.
In total, four groups were defined, two of them trained in
VR (VR-WB, VR-FA), one via video-based training (VB),
and one who experienced no training (C) to determine the
intervention as performance-limiting factor. The partici-
pants’ level was measured in the pre-, post-, and retention
test. Hereby, the participants had to observe three times the
movement from different perspectives shown on a monitor
without imitating simultaneously. After observation, they
were pleased to execute the shown movement as accurately
as possible. A rating system created with the cooperation
of experts was used to investigate the participants’ levels.
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540 535

Fig. 6  The differences from the percentage of performances from the following to the last testing time (pre-, post-, and retention test). The
dashed line indicates no learning effect; consequently, each positive value covers learning progress

13
536 Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540

Fig. 7  Distribution of the points (the total number) for the independ-
ent variables Group and Time and the reference line. Similar results
are observable regarding to the previous presented results. In (a), the
distribution of the points only differs between the training groups
(VB, VR-WB, VR-FA) and the group that had not trained (C). b The
improvement over the time indicated by the reference line (minimum
and maximum performance). The differences between the perfor-
mance quality consist only between the pre and the other time points
(post and retention)

Fig. 8  Plotted responses of the

participants for a the enjoyment
after the pretest to measure the
motivation before starting the
study (1 = does not apply at all,
10 = applies for me completely),
b the subjective estimated dif-
ficulty of the movement to be
learned (1 = very easy, 5 = very
difficult), c the perspectives
have been sufficient to learn
the movement (1 = does not
apply at all, 5 = applies for me
completely), d the enjoyment
after each training session (T)
to check the motivation of
the participants (1 = does not
apply at all, 10 = applies for me
completely). In (d), the control
group did not conduct training

It consisted of partial movements of the upper and lower
body, as well as the fist pose. As participants with no prior
knowledge of the technique or combat sports, in general,
were tested, emphasis was placed on the basic elements of
the movement. To ensure a reliable and objective scoring
system, the ICC between the two instructed raters was cal-
culated. Mainly, each group (except the C) passed through
the same developed intervention. This related to the proce-
dure of the study, for example, the split between the partial
movements, the repetitions of each movement, the perspec-
tives (except in VR where also a freely selectable was ena-
bled), the given feedback via written information, and the
possibility to observe their performance in a mirror. A few
restrictions occurred for the VR-FA group since no visual
feedback was given of all body parts. Besides, the fist pose
could not be imitated at the same level as the other groups
since the controller had to be held permanently in the hands
that harm the finger movements. In VB, no auditive feedback
for remaining the vertical height could be provided during
the first lesson in which the ZD (lower body movement)
was presented. The performance was compared separately
within the VR groups to investigate the influence of the dif-
ferent body visualization types on learning. To make further
statements whether a WB visualization is necessary to gain
each movement’s components, a closer look was obtained
on comparing between the VR-WB and VR-FA.
Generally, it has been crystallized that the VR interven-
tion can compete with the more used and established video
training since no significant differences were found between
the groups (VR-WB, VR-FA, VB). All groups improved

13
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540
significantly from pre- to the post-test, and the level of
improvement could keep up, indicated by no significant dif-
ference between the post- and retention tests. Positive trans-
fer of VR-adapted skills into real world could be found pre-
viously in football (Huang et al. 2015), rowing (Hoffmann
et al. 2014), table tennis (Liu et al. 2020) and further, but not
reported in combat sports (Petri et al. 2019c). Nevertheless,
we have to reject the first hypothesis, in which we assumed
higher learning for the VR training groups than the VB.
Being in an immersive virtual room while an avatar pre-
sents various movements seems to be an attractive learning
situation, especially when the perspective of observation
could be freely chosen to the individual needs. Different
perspectives could improve movement depending on the
point of observations, as previous studies have shown (Hül-
smann et al. 2019). It is assumable that gathering impres-
sions in a virtual scene is promising since other studies also
report higher vividness, interactivity, telepresence, and sat-
isfaction for media consumption in VR instead of perceiv-
ing on a 2-D screen (Kim and Ko 2019). Nevertheless, no
effect between the VR training groups and the VB could be
determined, which is not in line with other studies in which
VR training seems to be more effective than video train-
ing (Vignais et al. 2015). This may result from ensuring
comparability between the intervention since the learning
contents had to be kept the same within the different learn-
ing methods. A further possibility could be the unfamiliar
surroundings, which caused a higher cognitive load, leading
to higher distraction, and therefore, reducing the learning
outcome (Makransky et al. 2019). This suggests that simply
being in a three-dimensional virtual environment does not
necessarily support learning in a way that is not realizable
in video-based training. To use VR as a more efficient learn-
ing method, a higher range of possible advantages must be
integrated to maximize the learning progress. It is essential
to discuss these advantages and how they can be integrated
into the VR sessions, which was done previously (Checa
and Bustillo 2020).
Although the type of learning (split into partial move-
ments, number of repetitions, chosen perspectives, speed of
motion, etc.) remained the same over the different groups,
there were some added features within the VR interven-
tion. Besides, the participants got auditive feedback if they
exceeded the vertical line when they moved forward. The
auditive feedback can enhance interaction performance and
also compensate the missed haptic (Rausch et al. 2012).
Except for those, no differences between the interventions
existed. Thus, the range of advantages that VR can provide
was not fully integrated, explaining the same course of
improvement over time.
Since no significant differences between the VR train-
ing groups accompanied by different body visualization
types could be detected, the WB does not necessarily have
537
to be visualized in VR to achieve satisfactory performance,
which is in line with previous findings (Lugrin et al. 2018;
Pastel et al. 2020b). The VR-FA group could keep up with
the fist pose’s performance and revealed similar progress in
the lower body performance compared to VR-WB or VB,
although the participants of this group did not receive visual
feedback of the whole body during the intervention (expect
the forearms, see Fig. 3). This suggests that the controller’s
posture has no adverse effect on acquiring hand posture in
this context. The lack of lower limb visualization also did
not decrease the learning of the lower body movement. The
question is whether this also applies for a high-level train-
ing constructed for experts, in which details have been per-
fected, and more visual feedback is needed. Based on this
result, we can currently assume that WB is unnecessary,
especially when learning a new technique including basic
skills acquisition. In addition, the VR-FA reported a higher
enjoyment during the training sessions, and less effort had
to be made as only the calibration of the two controllers
took place. Considering the upper body movement improve-
ments, there is a learning restriction detectable elicited by
the controller. Although no significant differences appeared
between all intervention groups, VR-FA’s dispersion showed
no learning effect for some individuals. Other studies also
claimed the interaction and embodiment relating to the usage
of handheld controllers (Lougiakis et al. 2020). Especially
in positioning tasks in which interactions with other objects
have been tested, the controller seemed to be an adequate
method to complete tasks with high precision. The authors
also stated that visualizing the hand generated the strong-
est sense of ownership and was the preferred representation
chosen by the participants.
The construction of the training intervention has fol-
lowed some guidelines, which have been summarized and
further recommended (Fischer and Paul 2020). The authors
mainly described the optimal video training design, but the
same goals are transferable to VR training interventions.
Their expressed goals are to improve the understanding of
the interrelationships between the actions and functions of
sporting techniques through movement analyses concern-
ing kinematic factors (e.g., joint angles, trajectories, etc.)
(Fischer and Paul 2020). Also, the optimizing of athletic
training by becoming aware of discrepancies between the
actual execution of movement and its internal representation.
The generation of the target values was realized through the
virtual avatar or the athlete who was presented during the
video training. To strengthen the internal representation
of the optimal technique, the avatar/athlete demonstrated
each partial movement with less speed and key points of the
movements were frozen, so the participants had a higher
chance to compare their performance with the optimum. At
this point, it would be helpful to integrate external feed-
back from the trainer/avatar to provide the actual value of
13
538
participants’ movement, which just relied on their judgment.
Especially at the beginning of learning a new movement,
slowing down can bring an advantage; however, to com-
pensate for this, the movement’s presentation in real time is
indispensable (O and Hall 2009). Therefore, we decided to
slow down the movements’ speed at the beginning (avatar/
athletes’ movements and own execution) and increased it
each training session.
Often reported benefits of VR learning sessions are
higher motivation (reflected in presence feeling), interest,
and fun (Makransky et al. 2019; Parong and Mayer 2018).
High motivation could be observed over the training units
for all groups, but no difference between the VR groups and
the VB is detectable. The verbal feedback of the partici-
pants for the VR training scenarios was quite positive. They
reported having much fun, and it was perceived as an excit-
ing and thrilling experience. Sometimes, time was needed
to get used to the new surroundings, since only two percent
owned a VR device for private uses, 48.2% indicated pre-
experiences in participation of other VR studies.
6 Limitation
The current study hosts some missing points concerning
the usage of VR in a learning scenario. To maintain the
comparability, the interventions were similarly constructed
for each group to determine the impact of a high immersed
virtual environment on acquisition. For example, an inter-
active avatar that reacts to the participants individually was
not integrated. Furthermore, no feedback of the current state
during the intervention was given, and the participants could
only correct their movements by their sensation. Besides, it
should keep in mind that not all athletes prefer the visual
demonstration of a movement to acquire the basic elements.
Auditive feedback has been retained in general, and differ-
ent learning types should be considered. Although the par-
ticipants received an auditive signal when they exceeded a
certain height, it cannot be spoken of detailed auditory feed-
back like verbal instructions given by the avatar or realistic
sounds during its movement. This study does not answer
what kind of feedback is most effective to acquire motor
skills sufficiently. Its complexity is well discussed (Thurl-
ings et al. 2013), and further research, especially in VR due
to the favorable situation to enable any feedback, should be
followed.
7 Conclusion
We conclude that VR is a suitable tool to acquire sport-spe-
cific techniques, especially for beginners. We also detected
high interest and motivation to a not yet experienced training
13
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540
method. Since the content of the training intervention did not
significantly differ, the benefits in VR could not yet be fully
shown. That’s why the performance outcome was quite simi-
lar between the groups. Those benefits should be clarified in
future research to maximize the learning progress within VR
learning sessions. The outcome of the current study shows
that it is not more effective than just being in an immersive
virtual environment for learning a high-skilled movement.
For revealing all advantages, VR could elicit in the future,
more features have to be included, such as real-time feed-
back of the own performance, interaction with an avatar, or
other feedback sources such as auditive ones. Furthermore,
the results suggest that it is not necessary to visualize the
whole body. Single body limbs could be visualized via sim-
ple sensors without using elaborated technical components.
Of course, if possible, other tracking methods like the Vive
Tracker could be used to visualize the hands or feet, which
should be sufficient to enable feedback of one’s position in
the virtual scene and revealing additional feedback of body
limbs’ positions. Within the learning process, different
learning types should be considered in future research since
this study focused on the key elements’ visual perception.
Besides, the transfer effect was just measured in the
execution, not to a reaction of a real attack conducted by
an enemy. To prepare for the defense in the best possible
way, the training should have included attacks from the
virtual avatar, where haptic feedback could be provided by
using vibrotactile feedback of the controller to simulate hits.
Another exciting idea is to develop an autonomous learning
scenario in which the participants can decide, for example,
how often the demonstration of a single movement should
be repeated, the variability of speed, or frozen moments.
Acknowledgements The study was financed by the German Research
Foundation (DFG) under Grant WI 1456/22-1.
Funding Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt
DEAL.
Availability of data and material Yes.
Code availability Yes.
Declarations
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
Ethics approval The approval of the Ethics Committee of the Otto-von-
Guericke University at the Medical Faculty and University of Hospital
Magdeburg was obtained under the number 132/6.
Consent of participate Available.
Consent of publication All authors agreed for the publication process.
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri-
bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta-
tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long
as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source,
provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes
were made. The images or other third party material in this article are
included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated
otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in
the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will
need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a
copy of this licence, visit http://​creat​iveco​mmons.​org/​licen​ses/​by/4.​0/.
References
Ahir K, Govani K, Gajera R, Shah M (2020) Application on vir-
tual reality for enhanced education learning, military train-
ing and sports. Augment Hum Res. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s41133-​019-​0025-2
Burns A-M, Kulpa R, Durny A, Spanlang B, Slater M, Multon F (2011)
Using virtual humans and computer animations to learn complex
motor skills: a case study in karate. BIO Web Conf 1:12. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1051/​bioco​nf/​20110​100012
Checa D, Bustillo A (2020) Advantages and limits of virtual reality
in learning processes: Briviesca in the fifteenth century. Virtual
Real 24:151–161. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10055-​019-​00389-7
Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences,
2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove, London
Farley OR, Spencer K, Baudinet L (2020) Virtual reality in sports
coaching, skill acquisition and application to surfing: a review.
JHSE. https://​doi.​org/​10.​14198/​JHSE.​2020.​153.​06
Farrow D, Robertson S (2017) Development of a skill acquisition
periodisation framework for high-performance sport. Sports Med
47:1043–1054. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40279-​016-​0646-2
Faure C, Limballe A, Bideau B, Kulpa R (2020) Virtual reality to
assess and train team ball sports performance: a scoping review.
J Sports Sci 38:192–205. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 080/0​ 26404​ 14.2​ 019.​
16898​07
Fischer B, Paul A (2020) Lehren und Lernen mit und in digitalen
medien im sport, vol 18. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden,
Wiesbaden
Fox J, Arena D, Bailenson JN (2009) Virtual reality. J Media Psychol
21:95–113. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1027/​1864-​1105.​21.3.​95
Gray R (2017) Transfer of training from virtual to real baseball batting.
Front Psychol 8:2183. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fpsyg.​2017.​02183
Harris DJ, Buckingham G, Wilson MR, Vine SJ (2019) Virtually the
same? How impaired sensory information in virtual reality may
disrupt vision for action. Exp Brain Res 237:2761–2766. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00221-​019-​05642-8
Harris DJ, Buckingham G, Wilson MR, Brookes J, Mushtaq F, Mon-
Williams M, Vine SJ (2020) The effect of a virtual reality environ-
ment on gaze behaviour and motor skill learning. Psychol Sport
Exerc 50:101721. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​psych​sport.​2020.​
101721
Hoffmann CP, Filippeschi A, Ruffaldi E, Bardy BG (2014) Energy
management using virtual reality improves 2000-m rowing per-
formance. J Sports Sci 32:501–509. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 080/0​ 2640​
414.​2013.​835435
Huang Y, Churches L, Reilly B (2015) A case study on virtual reality
American football training. In: Proceedings of the 2015 virtual
reality international conference. ACM, New York, pp 1–5
Huang C, Zhang Y, Zhu C, Zhang C, Meng H (2019) Chinese sports
basketball teaching tactics training system combined with
539
multimedia interactive model and virtual reality technology.
Multimed Tools Appl. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/s​ 11042-0​ 19-7​ 298-9
Hülsmann F, Frank C, Senna I, Ernst MO, Schack T, Botsch M (2019)
Superimposed skilled performance in a virtual mirror improves
motor performance and cognitive representation of a full body
motor action. Front Robot AI. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​frobt.​2019.​
00043
Jackson T II (2021) Immersive virtual reality in sports. In: Tomei L,
Russell D (eds) Implementing augmented reality into immersive
virtual learning environments. IGI Global, Hershey, pp 135–150
Kallioniemi P, Mäkelä V, Saarinen S, Turunen M, Winter Y, Istudor
A (2017) User experience and immersion of interactive omnidi-
rectional videos in CAVE systems and head-mounted displays.
In: Bernhaupt R, Dalvi G, Joshi A, Balkrishan DK, O’Neill J,
Winckler M (eds) Human–computer interaction—INTERACT
2017. Springer, Cham, pp 299–318
Khan MS, Charissis V, Sakellariou S (2019) Exploring the develop-
ment requirements for virtual reality gait analysis. MTI 3:24.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​mti30​20024
Kim D, Ko YJ (2019) The impact of virtual reality (VR) technology on
sport spectators’ flow experience and satisfaction. Comput Hum
Behav 93:346–356. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​chb.​2018.​12.​040
Kim A, Kretch KS, Zhou Z, Finley JM (2018) The quality of visual
information about the lower extremities influences visuomotor
coordination during virtual obstacle negotiation. J Neurophysiol
120:839–847. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1152/​jn.​00931.​2017
Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intra-
class correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr
Med 15:155–163. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jcm.​2016.​02.​012
Lammfromm R, Gopher D (2011) Transfer of skill from a virtual
reality trainer to real juggling. BIO Web Conf 1:54. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1051/​bioco​nf/​20110​100054
Le Noury P, Buszard T, Reid M, Farrow D (2021) Examining the
representativeness of a virtual reality environment for simula-
tion of tennis performance. J Sports Sci 39:412–420. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1080/​02640​414.​2020.​18236​18
Liu H, Wang Z, Mousas C, Kao D (2020) Virtual reality racket
sports: virtual drills for exercise and training. In: 2020 IEEE
international symposium on mixed and augmented reality
(ISMAR). IEEE, pp 566–576
Lougiakis C, Katifori A, Roussou M, Ioannidis I-P (2020) Effects
of virtual hand representation on interaction and embodiment
in HMD-based virtual environments using controllers. In: 2020
IEEE conference on virtual reality and 3D user interfaces (VR).
IEEE, pp 510–518
Lugrin J-L, Ertl M, Krop P, Klupfel R, Stierstorfer S, Weisz B, Ruck
M, Schmitt J, Schmidt N, Latoschik ME (2018) Any “body”
there? Avatar visibility effects in a virtual reality game. In: 2018
IEEE conference on virtual reality and 3D user interfaces (VR).
IEEE, pp 17–24
Makransky G, Terkildsen TS, Mayer RE (2019) Adding immersive
virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence
but less learning. Learn Instr 60:225–236. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​learn​instr​uc.​2017.​12.​007
Michalski SC, Szpak A, Saredakis D, Ross TJ, Billinghurst M,
Loetscher T (2019) Getting your game on: using virtual reality
to improve real table tennis skills. PLoS ONE 14:e0222351.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1371/​journ​al.​pone.​02223​51
Mueller F, Stevens G, Thorogood A, O’Brien S, Wulf V (2007)
Sports over a distance. Pers Ubiquit Comput 11:633–645.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00779-​006-​0133-0
Neumann DL, Moffitt RL, Thomas PR, Loveday K, Watling DP,
Lombard CL, Antonova S, Tremeer MA (2018) A system-
atic review of the application of interactive virtual reality
to sport. Virtual Real 22:183–198. https://​d oi.​o rg/​1 0.​1 007/​
s10055-​017-​0320-5
13
540
Nor NN, Sunar MS, Kapi AY (2020) User experience of gamified vir-
tual reality (VR) in sport: a review. In: Santos H, Pereira GV,
Budde M, Lopes SF, Nikolic P (eds) Science and technologies for
smart cities, vol 323. Springer, Cham, pp 440–449
O J, Hall C (2009) A quantitative analysis of athletes’ voluntary use
of slow motion, real time, and fast motion images. J Appl Sport
Psychol 21:15–30. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​10413​20080​25418​92
Pan LA, Cheng XC, Du QL (2012) Study of table tennis training sys-
tem. AMR 472–475:3117–3120. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4028/​www.​
scien​tific.​net/​AMR.​472-​475.​3117
Park SH, Casamento-Moran A, Singer ML, Ernster AE, Yacoubi B,
Humbert IA, Christou EA (2018) Integration of visual feedback
and motor learning: corticospinal vs. corticobulbar pathway. Hum
Mov Sci 58:88–96. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​humov.​2018.​01.​002
Parong J, Mayer RE (2018) Learning science in immersive virtual real-
ity. J Educ Psychol 110:785–797. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​edu00​
00241
Pastel S, Chen C-H, Martin L, Naujoks M, Petri K, Witte K (2020a)
Comparison of gaze accuracy and precision in real-world
and virtual reality. Virtual Real. https:// ​ d oi. ​ o rg/ ​ 1 0. ​ 1 007/​
s10055-​020-​00449-3
Pastel S, Chen C-H, Petri K, Witte K (2020b) Effects of body visualiza-
tion on performance in head-mounted display virtual reality. PLoS
ONE 15:e0239226. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 371/j​ ourna​ l.p​ one.0​ 23922​ 6
Petri K, Bandow N, Masik S, Witte K (2019a) Improvement of early
recognition of attacks in karate kumite due to training in virtual
reality. Sportarea 4:294–308. https://​doi.​org/​10.​25299/​sport​area.​
2019.​vol4(2).​3370
Petri K, Masik S, Danneberg M, Emmermacher P, Witte K (2019b)
Possibilities to use a virtual opponent for enhancements of reac-
tions and perception of young karate athletes. Int J Comput Sci
Sport 18:20–33. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2478/​ijcss-​2019-​0011
Petri K, Emmermacher P, Danneberg M, Masik S, Eckardt F, Weichelt
S, Bandow N, Witte K (2019c) Training using virtual reality
improves response behavior in karate kumite. Sports Eng. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s12283-​019-​0299-0
Rhoads M, Da Matta GB, Pulos S (2014) A meta-analysis of visual
feedback for motor learning. Athl Insight 6:17–33
Sigrist R, Rauter G, Marchal-Crespo L, Riener R, Wolf P (2015) Sonifi-
cation and haptic feedback in addition to visual feedback enhances
complex motor task learning. Exp Brain Res 233:909–925. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00221-​014-​4167-7
Srinivasan M, Liederman E, Baluyot N, Jacoby R (2006) Saving time,
improving satisfaction: the impact of a digital radiology system
on physician workflow and system efficiency. J Healthc Inf Manag
20:123–131
13
Virtual Reality (2023) 27:523–540
Tauscher J-P, Schottky FW, Grogorick S, Bittner PM, Mustafa M, Mag-
nor M (2019) Immersive EEG: evaluating electroencephalography
in virtual reality. In: 2019 IEEE conference on virtual reality and
3D user interfaces (VR). IEEE, pp 1794–1800
Thurlings M, Vermeulen M, Bastiaens T, Stijnen S (2013) Understand-
ing feedback: a learning theory perspective. Educ Res Rev 9:1–15.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​edurev.​2012.​11.​004
Tirp J, Steingröver C, Wattie N (2015) Virtual realities as optimal
learning environments in sport—a transfer study of virtual and
real dart throwing. Psychol Test Assess Model 2015:57–69.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fpsyg.​2017.​02183
Unell A, Eisenstat ZM, Braun A, Gandhi A, Gilad-Gutnick S, Ben-
Ami S, Sinha P (2021) Influence of visual feedback persistence
on visuo-motor skill improvement. Sci Rep 11:17347. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1038/​s41598-​021-​96876-6
Vaziri S, Diedrichsen J, Shadmehr R (2006) Why does the brain pre-
dict sensory consequences of oculomotor commands? Optimal
integration of the predicted and the actual sensory feedback. J
Neurosci 26:4188–4197. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1523/​JNEUR​OSCI.​
4747-​05.​2006
Vignais N, Kulpa R, Brault S, Presse D, Bideau B (2015) Which tech-
nology to investigate visual perception in sport: video vs. virtual
reality. Hum Mov Sci 39:12–26. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​humov.​
2014.​10.​006
Wichmann W-D, Seer U (2005) Richtig karate, 3rd edn. BLV Sportp-
raxis Top, München
Wong JD, Kistemaker DA, Chin A, Gribble PL (2012) Can propriocep-
tive training improve motor learning? J Neurophysiol 108:3313–
3321. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1152/​jn.​00122.​2012
Wood G, Wright DJ, Harris D, Pal A, Franklin ZC, Vine SJ (2021)
Testing the construct validity of a soccer-specific virtual real-
ity simulator using novice, academy, and professional soc-
cer players. Virtual Real 25:43–51. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s10055-​020-​00441-x
Yu C-H, Wu C-C, Wang J-S, Chen H-Y, Lin Y-T (2020) Learning
tennis through video-based reflective learning by using motion-
tracking sensors. J Educ Technol Soc 23:64–77
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.