An analysis of motivation and situational interest in a location-based augmented reality application

pp.  198 - 220, download






Research has provided evidence that augmented reality (AR) can be an effective tool to improve teaching and learning across multiple domains. Research is limited, however, in several key areas related to AR. For instance, motivation and situational interest are critical to student learning outcomes. However, little is known about the relationship between the two constructs and AR, particularly for AR that leverages location-based triggers. This study addressed this need by analyzing data from participants who used an application that delivers location-based, instructional AR content about the tragic shootings that occurred on May 4th, 1970, at Kent State University. Data findings showed significant decreases in motivation, but significant growth in situational interest and content knowledge. Implications for development of future location-based AR applications are discussed. 


Keywords: location-based AR, history, situational interest, motivation, learning, teaching 





1. Krapp A.: Interest, motivation and learning: An educational-psychological perspective, European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, pp. 23–40. (1999).
2. Huang W., Huang W., Diefes-Dux H., Imbrie P. K.: A preliminary validation of Attention, Relevance, Confidence and Satisfaction model-based Instructional Material Motivational Survey in a computer-based tutorial setting, British Journal of Educational Technology, 37, pp. 243–259 (2006).
3. Ryan R. M., Deci E. L.: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, pp. 54–67 (2000)
4. Hidi S., Renninger K. A.: The four-phase model of interest development, Educational Psychologist, 41, pp. 111–127 (2006).
5. Renninger K.A., Hidi S.: Situational interest and achievement: Developmental issues raised by a case study, in The development of achievement motivation, pp. 173-195, Academic Press, (2002).
6. Katz I., Assor A., Kanat-Maymon Y., Bereby-Meyer Y.: Interest as a motivational resource: Feedback and gender matter, but interest makes the difference, Social Psychology of Education, 9, pp. 27-42 (2006).
7. Guthrie J. T., Wigfield A., Humenick N. M., Perencevich K. C., Taboada A., Barbosa P.: Influences of Stimulating Tasks on Reading Motivation and Comprehension, The Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), pp. 232–246 (2006).
8. Harp S. F., Mayer R. E.: The role of interest in learning from scientific text and illustrations: On the distinction between emotional interest and cognitive interest, Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, pp. 92–102 (1997).
9. Caudell T., Mizell D.: Augmented reality: An application of heads-up display technology to manual manufacturing processes, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 659-669, HICSS, (1992).
10. Treanor T.: AR is big - 5G will make it huge,
11. Rauschnabel P.A., Rossmann A., Dieck M.C.: An adoption framework for mobile augmented reality games: The case of Pokémon Go, Computers in Human Behavior, 76, pp. 276-286 (2017).
12. Juniper research: Virtual reality games revenues to reach $8.2 billion by 2023, 
13. Delaney M.: Survey: Education among top industries for AR/VR investments,
14. Solak E., Cakır R.: Investigating the role of augmented reality technology in the language classroom, Croatian Journal of Education, 18, pp. 1067–1085 (2016).
15. Sommerauer P., Müller, O.: Augmented reality in informal learning environments: A field experiment in a mathematics exhibition, Computers & Education, 79, pp. 59–68 (2014).
16. Gandolfi E., Ferdig R. E., Immel Z. Augmented Reality, in International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (Second Edition), pp. 1-13, Springer, (2018).
17. Di Serio Á., Ibáñez M. B., Kloos C. D.: Impact of an augmented reality system on students’ motivation for a visual art course, Computers & Education, 68, pp. 586–596 (2013).
18. Garzón J., Acevedo J.: Meta-analysis of the impact of augmented reality on students’ learning gains, Educational Research Review, 27, pp. 244–260 (2019).
19. Bacca J., Baldiris S., Fabregat R., Graf S.: Augmented reality trends in education: A systematic review of research and applications, Educational Technology & Society, 17, pp. 133–149 (2014).
20. Challenor J., Ma M.: A Review of Augmented Reality Applications for History Education and Heritage Visualization, Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 3(2), pp. 1-39 (2019).
21. Maslow A. H.: A theory of human motivation, Psychological Review, 50, pp. 370-396 (1943).
22. Ryan R. M., Deci E. L.: Self-Determination Theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being, American Psychologist, 55, pp. 68–78 (2000).
23. Olafsen A. H., Deci E. L., Halvari H.: Basic psychological needs and work motivation: A longitudinal test of directionality, Motivation and Emotion, 42, pp. 178–189 (2018).
24. Cerasoli C. P., Nicklin J. M., Ford M. T.: Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis, Psychological Bulletin,140, pp, 980-1008 (2014).
25. Adelman H. S., & Taylor L.: Enhancing motivation for overcoming learning and behavior problems, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, pp. 384–392. (1983).
26. Gottfried A. E.: Academic intrinsic motivation in elementary and junior high school students, Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, pp. 631–645 (1985).
27. Lepper M. R., Corpus J. H., Iyengar S. S.: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations in the classroom: Age differences and academic correlates, Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, pp. 184–196 (2005).
28. Keller J. M.: Development and use of the ARCS Model of Instructional Design, Journal of Instructional Development, 10, pp. 2–10 (1987).
29. Keller J. M.: Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn, Performance & Instruction, 26(8), pp. 1-7 (1987).
30. Keller J. M.: Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS Model approach; Springer, (2010).
31. Song S. H., Keller J. M.: Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction on the dynamic aspects of motivation, Educational Technology Research and Development, 49, pp. 5–22 (2001).
32. Hu A., Shewokis P. A., Ting K., Fung K.: Motivation in computer-assisted instruction, The Laryngoscope, 126, pp. S5–S13 (2016).
33. Choustoulakis E., Nikoloudakis E.: Applying ARCS model to assess the motivational characteristics of a web-based course in economic education in Greece,
34. Cook D. A., Beckman T. J., Thomas K. G., Thompson W. G.: Measuring motivational characteristics of courses: Applying Kellerʼs Instructional Materials Motivation Survey to a web-based course, Academic Medicine, 84, pp. 1505–1509 (2009).
35. Huang B., Hew K. F.: Measuring learners’ motivation level in massive open online courses, International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 6, pp. 759–764 (2016).
36. Loorbach N., Peters O., Karreman J., Steehouder M.: Validation of the Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (IMMS) in a self-directed instructional setting aimed at working with technology, British Journal of Educational Technology, 46, pp. 204–218 (2015).
37. Hinkin T. R.: A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires, Organizational Research Methods, 1, pp. 104—121 (1998).
38. Krapp A., Prenzel M.: Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings, International Journal of Science Education, 33, pp. 27–50 (2011).
39. Csikszentmihalyi M.: Flow: The psychology of optimal experience, Harper Perennial, (1990).
40. Csikszentmihalyi M.: Beyond boredom and anxiety, Jossey-Bass Publishers, (2000).
41. McDaniel M. A., Waddill P. J., Finstad K., Bourg T.: The effects of text-based interest on attention and recall, Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, pp. 492-502 (2000).
42. Wade S. E., Buxton W. M., Kelly M.: Using think‐alouds to examine reader‐text interest, Reading Research Quarterly, 34, pp. 194–216 (1999).
43. Hidi S.: A re-examination of the role of attention in learning from text, Educational Psychology Review, 7, pp. 323–350 (1995).
44. Ainley M. D., Hidi S., Berndorff D.: Interest, learning and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship, Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, pp. 1–17. (2002).
45. Renninger, K. A., & Wozniak R. H.: Effect of interest on attention shift, recognition, and recall in young children, Developmental Psychology, 21, pp. 624–632. (1985).
46. Alexander P. A., Kulikowich J., Schulze S. K.: The influence of topic knowledge, domain knowledge, and interest on the comprehension of scientific exposition, Learning and Individual Differences, 6, pp. 379–397 (1994).
47. Baldwin R. S., Peleg-Bruckner Z., McClintock A. H.: Effects of topic interest and prior knowledge on reading comprehension, Reading Research Quarterly, 20, pp. 497-504 (1985).
48. Renninger K. A., Ewen L., Lasher A. K.: Individual interest as context in expository text and mathematical word problems, Learning and Learning and Instruction, 12(4), pp. 467-491 (2002).
49. Mitchell M.: Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom, Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, pp. 424–436. (1993).
50. Linnenbrink-Garcia L., Durik A. M., Conley A. M., Barron K. E., Tauer J. M., Karabenick S. A., Harackiewicz,J. M.: Measuring situational interest in academic domains. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70, pp. 647-671 (2010).
51. Schiefele U.: Interest, learning and motivation, Educational Psychologist, 26, pp. 299-323 (1991).
52. Schiefele U.: The role of interest in motivation and learning, in Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement, pp. 163-194, Lawrence Erlbaum. (2001).
53. Krapp A.: An educational-psychological theory of interest and its relation to SDT, In The handbook of self-determination research, pp. 405-427, Rochester University Press, (2002).
54. Zhuravlov-Galchenko A: Six top tools to build augmented reality mobile apps,
55. van Arnhem J.P.: Mobile apps and gear for Libraries: Merge Cube’s handiness with holograms makes it a good place to start with augmented reality, The Charleston Advisor, 20(1), pp. 56–58 (2018).
56. Sahin N., Ozcan M. F.: Effects of augmented reality in teaching old Turkish language mementoes on student achievement and motivation. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10, pp. 198–213 (2019).
57. Sirakaya M., Cakmak E. K.: Effects of Augmented Reality on Student Achievement and Self-Efficacy in Vocational Education and Training, International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training, 5(1), pp. 1–18 (2018).
58. Chandrasekera T., Yoon S.-Y.: The effect of augmented and virtual reality interfaces in the creative design process, International Journal of Virtual and Augmented Reality, 2(1), pp, 1–13 (2018).
59. Chang Y., Liu J.: Applying an AR technique to enhance situated heritage learning in a ubiquitous learning environment, Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12, pp. 21–32 (2013).
60. Akçayir M., Akçayir G.: Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: A systematic review of the literature, Educational Research Review, 20, pp. 1–11 (2017).
61. Radu I.: Augmented reality in education: a meta-review and cross-media analysis. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 18, pp. 1533–1543 (2014).
62. Freitas R., Campos P. F.: SMART: A SysteM of augmented reality for teaching 2nd grade students, in People and computers XXII Culture, Creativity, Interaction (HCI) Conference, pp. 27-30, BCS HCI, (2008).
63. Dunleavy M., Dede C.: Augmented reality teaching and learning, in Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, pp. 735-770, New York, Springer, (2014).
64. Bénabou R., Tirole J.: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, The Review of Economic Studies, 70, pp. 489–520 (2003).
65. Simes R. J.: An improved Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance, Biometrika, 73(3), pp. 751-754 (1986).
66. Mayer R. E., Moren, R.: Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning, Educational Psychologist, 38, pp. 43–52 (2003).
67. Arifin Y., Sastria T. G., Barlian E.: User experience metric for augmented reality application: A review, Procedia Computer Science, 135, pp. 648–656 (2018).
68. Isleifsdotti J., Larusdottir M.: Measuring the user experience of a taskoriented software, In Proceedings of the international workshop on meaningful measures: valid useful user experience measurement, pp. 97-101, Irit, (2008).
69. Takahashi L., Nebe K.: Observed Differences Between Lab and Online Tests Using the AttrakDiff Semantic Differential Scale, Journal of Usability Studies, 14(2) (2019).
70. Albrecht U. V., Folta-Schoofs K., Behrends M., Von Jan U.: Effects of mobile augmented reality learning compared to textbook learning on medical students: randomized controlled pilot study, Journal of medical Internet research, 15(8), pp. e182 (2013).
71. Dhir A, Al-kahtani M.: A case study on user experience (UX) evaluation of mobile augmented reality prototypes, Journal of Universal Computer Science, 19, pp. 1175–1196 (2013).
72. Dünser A., Steinbügl K., Kaufmann H., Glück J.: Virtual and augmented reality as spatial ability training tools, in Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCHI New Zealand chapter's international conference on Computer-human interaction: design centered HCI, pp. 125-132, ACM, (2006).
73. Thornton T., Ernst J. V., Clark A. C.: Augmented reality as a visual and spatial learning tool in technology education, Technology and Engineering Teacher, 71(8), pp. 18-21, (2012).
74. Hassenzahl M.: Hedonic, emotional, and experiential perspectives on product quality, in Encyclopedia of human computer interaction, pp. 266-272, IGI Global, (2006).


back to Table of Contents