Utilizing virtual reality before, versus during, the COVID-19 pandemic

As the COVID-19 pandemic abruptly pushed interior design (ID) instruction online, instructors were challenged to adapt, and students adapted a new method of virtual reality (VR). The VR method before COVID-19 was a Homido V2 VR headset with iPhone viewing 360-degree panorama jpeg, and during COVID-19 a liquid crystal display (LCD) computer monitor viewing 360-degree panorama jpeg. The purpose of this study was, if a statistically significant difference (SSD) in spatial presence was found between the two types of VR, then an argument could be supported to evaluate spatial presence, before VR is implemented into ID curriculum. This study was at one Midwestern United States university with a sample (N = 52) of ID undergraduate students. The results revealed an SSD in the spatial presence in the aforementioned VR types. This SSD was found in two of the three dependent variables: Spatial Presence: Possible Action (SPPA; U = 772, p < 0.001), example survey question feeling you could jump into the action, and Spatial Presence: Self Location (SPSL; U = 789, p < 0.001), example feeling you are in the middle of the action. The third dependent variable, Spatial Situation Model (SSM; U = 1320, p = 0.834) did not reveal an SSD, example imagining the arrangement of the spaces. To support results, the Virtual Reality Spatial Presence Index (VRSPI) applied scored neutral (neither strong, nor weak) for spatial presence in both. This study filled research gaps on VR spatial presence measurement, with implications supporting a measurable advantage in ID students using VR headsets and ID curriculum developers evaluating VR before implementation.