Virtual Reality vs Traditional Videogames: Which is More Effective at Enhancing Adolescent Intentions and Attitudes Towards Sport?

Virtual Reality vs Traditional Videogames: Which is More Effective at Enhancing Adolescent Intentions and Attitudes Towards Sport? | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Virtual Reality vs Traditional Videogames: Which is More Effective at Enhancing Adolescent Intentions and Attitudes Towards Sport? Luke Wilkins, Adam D. Gorman, Samantha Merry, Minh Huynh, Aden Kittel This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7049862/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 07 Feb, 2026 Read the published version in Virtual Reality → Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Youth sport engagement brings substantial physical, mental, and social benefits, therefore establishing interventions which increase this are of profound importance. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of playing a virtual reality (VR) sports-game and a sports videogame on adolescents’ intentions and attitudes towards the respective sport of each game. Across three sport-specific designs (baseball, golf, tennis), 54 adolescents (aged 13–15) were randomly assigned to play a 20-minute VR sports-game, a traditional sports videogame, or a non-sport VR control game. Intentions and attitudes towards the sport depicted in each game were measured via questionnaires at baseline, post-test, and four-month retention. Linear mixed models revealed that intentions towards baseball and tennis were significantly improved after playing the VR game, with this effect maintained at retention for tennis. Intentions towards golf were significantly improved after playing the videogame but were not maintained at retention. Neither the VR nor videogame influenced adolescents’ attitudes towards the respective sports. We discuss how the sport-specific differences found suggest that the effectiveness of each digital intervention may depend on how well the sport’s features align with the strengths of the technology. Overall, despite limited effects on attitudes, the results underscore the pedagogical value of integrating VR and videogame interventions into physical education settings. Digital interventions Youth sport engagement Virtual reality sport Sports videogames Physical education Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 1. Introduction Participation in sport has a range of benefits for adolescents. For example, these benefits can be psychosocial, such as improved self-esteem, socialisation, and a reduced chance of depressive symptoms (Eime et al., 2013 ). Further, sport participation has been linked to improved academic performance (Owen et al., 2024 ) and improved self-concept (Donaldson et al., 2006). Despite these benefits to sport participation, there is a significant dropout rate of adolescents from organised sport activities (Eime et al., 2019 ). In particular, the early years of adolescence (e.g., ages 10–14) have been identified as a period where there is a significant amount of dropout (Vella et al., 2020 ), with common reasons including lower motivation and poor experiences in their sport (Back et al., 2022 ). Therefore, it remains a key issue to identify and assess novel ways to retain adolescents in sport and/or motivate them to (re)join organised sport. Motivation to participate in sports arises from a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic factors (Eime et al., 2024 ). Adolescents join organised sports due to the influence of parents (Light et al., 2013 ) and friends, and they also join for reasons related to socialisation and enjoyment (Visek et al., 2015 ). Factors that influence long-term participation and motivation include success in physical competencies (i.e., achieving fitness, team, or personal goals), social acceptance (i.e., club atmosphere, environment, and friends), and comfort (i.e., happiness) (Corr et al., 2019). Participation in sport may also result from earlier engagement in adjacent activities, such as watching televised matches, attending live events, or engaging via digital media platforms, which can inspire a child to have a more active involvement (Tian et al., 2023 ). To successfully engage in sports, adolescents need a supportive environment that prioritises fun and achievement, with parental influence and peer approval acting as significant motivators (Light et al., 2013 ). The Fun Integration Theory underscores the necessity of balancing enjoyment with competition, emphasising that for children and adolescents to sustain their participation in sports, their experiences must be enjoyable and fulfilling (Visek et al, 2015 ). Thus, understanding these evolving motivations is essential for fostering long-term engagement in sports among young people. There is a growing base of evidence to support the use of technology such as videogames to influence sport participation behaviours. For example, Adachi and Willoughby ( 2016 ) highlighted how playing sports videogames during older adolescence can predict future involvement in that sport later in life. This could be due to a greater level of interest from playing the game, but playing a videogame can also lead to familiarity of the player movements before actually playing the game (Ho et al., 2024 ). Further, this can result in greater self-esteem and confidence from playing the videogame that can transfer to the real-life sport (Adachi & Willoughby, 2016 ). Jenny et al. ( 2017 ) explored the impact of playing a cricket videogame over two weeks on the development of cricket knowledge and interest in playing and watching cricket, using a cohort of undergraduate students. In comparison to a non-videogame control group, the videogame group experienced improvements in game knowledge, plus a significantly stronger willingness to play cricket, with no differences for interest in watching cricket (Jenny et al., 2017 ). While videogames are beneficial for influencing sport participation behaviours, there may be other technologies with similar or greater benefits. With developing technology, more immersive technologies such as virtual reality (VR) are able to present immersive sport games, similar to videogames. VR refers to “the simulation of an interactive three-dimensional environment that users can be immersed into and that they can interact with” (Sagnier et al., 2020 , pp. 993), most often through the use of head-mounted displays. While VR is being increasingly used at the professional levels of sport (Dowsett et al., 2023 ; Wilkins, 2024 ) and has been found to be effective in developing skills essential for athletic performance (Le Noury et al, 2022 ; Kittel et al., 2024 ), it may also have benefit for participation reasons. The technology has become very popular within entertainment and gaming, and research has found that VR can provide participants with increased levels of enjoyment for an activity (Debska et al., 2019). A recent systematic review reported VR games can have positive benefits on physical, cognitive, and social health of older adults (Song et al., 2025 ). As highlighted previously, early teen years are a critical period for maintaining sport participation (Vella et al, 2020 ), and research has indicated a VR fitness game in physical education can lead to greater motivation levels to participate in physical activity (Hu, 2025 ). Similarly, Niu et al. ( 2025 ) evaluated a VR intervention in physical education, indicating VR can not only impact their enjoyment but can also lead to greater socialisation outcomes. The highly interactive nature of VR can also be beneficial for those with limited sport experience, where VR can lead to greater willingness to engage in sport compared to video-based advertisements (Zhu, 2025 ). Given the importance of enjoyment in determining one’s intention to participate in an activity (Oliveira-Brochado et al., 2017 ), it is possible that a sports-based VR intervention may increase the intention of individuals to participate in sport. Therefore, more research is required to understand the effects of VR on sport participation, particularly within this critical age period of adolescence. Aims and Hypotheses The present study aimed to examine the effectiveness of two digital-sport interventions – a 20-minute VR sports-game and a 20-minute traditional sports videogame – on adolescent intentions and attitudes towards the respective sport of each game. Both groups were also compared with a control intervention in which adolescents played a non-sports-game using VR. Additional items were included to gauge intentions and attitudes towards sport more generally to see if the potential impact of VR and videogames transfers beyond the game/sport in question, though no hypotheses were made in this regard given the minimal literature exploring indirect or transfer effects of VR/videogame playing. The following hypotheses were tested: Participants in the VR sports-game and traditional sports videogame groups will significantly increase (i.e., more positive) their intentions towards the sport represented in the games at both post-test and retention (four months), compared to baseline. No such increase will occur for the control groups. Participants in the VR sports-game and traditional sports videogame groups will significantly increase (i.e., more positive) their attitude towards the sport represented in the games at both post-test and retention, compared to baseline. No such increase will occur for the control groups. 2. Methodology Design Three separate, but identical experimental intervention designs were conducted. In each, a between-subjects approach was taken, with participants assigned to either a VR sports-game group (VR), traditional sports videogame group (videogame), or a control group who played a non-sports VR game (control). The difference between the three designs was in the choice of sports-game for the VR and videogame groups. The study comprised three phases, wherein the primary data was obtained. Specifically, participants’ intentions and attitudes towards sport were obtained approximately one month pre-intervention (baseline), immediately post-intervention (post-test), and approximately four months post-intervention (retention). The decision to have participants complete all three conditions was made based on practical/ethical considerations. That is, following discussions with the school, it was felt that the participants should have the opportunity to experience multiple VR modes and the videogame to avoid participants feeling disadvantaged compared to their peers. However, rather than adopt a within-subjects design which would have necessitated the use of just one sport, it was decided that three between-subjects designs would run concurrently, allowing for the experience (for participants) and examination (for the research) of multiple sports. Thus, in practice, each participant acted as a VR sports-game participant, a videogame participant, and a control participant, across the three separate designs (i.e., baseball, golf, tennis). Although participants engaged with all three game types across the three designs, the data were analysed using a between-subjects approach within each design, since each participant contributed only one data point to each context-specific analysis. Participants who played VR baseball always played the golf videogame; participants who played the VR golf always played the tennis videogame; and participants who played VR tennis always played the baseball videogame. Figure 1 depicts an example participant allocation and timeline for the intervention phase of the study. Participants Recruitment took place at a single metropolitan school in Victoria, Australia. Year 9 students were invited to participate via a verbal explanation of the study by a teacher, followed by the provision of an information sheet and parental/guardian consent form. This age group was chosen as it is the age at which sports participation in Australian adolescents has typically declined substantially, and therefore where an intervention encouraging sports involvement would be necessary (Kemp et al., 2020 ). Further criteria for involvement included that the individual was not currently participating regularly in two of baseball, golf, or tennis; that they were healthy and free from injury; and that they did not knowingly experience severe cyber-sickness or other related symptoms when playing VR or videogames. In total, 54 adolescents (34 females, 20 males) chose to participate in the study. The mean age of the sample was 14.43 years ( SD = 0.54, range = 13–15). Of the 54 participants, 45 reported that they had used a VR headset previously, though only 10 of these had played a sports-game in VR. Of these 10, seven reported that the sports-game played was related to either tennis, golf, or baseball and therefore in these instances it was ensured that the individual was allocated to a VR group for which they did not have previous VR experience in the sport. Ethical approval was obtained by the lead researcher’s institute (ID: HEC23333). Apparatus In design one, the sport chosen was baseball. Totally Baseball! was used as the VR game and MLB The Show 23 as the videogame. In design two, the sport chosen was golf. Golf + was used as the VR game and PGA Tour 2K23 as the videogame. In design three, the sport chosen was tennis. First Person Tenni s was used as the VR game and Tennis World Tour 2 as the videogame. In each design, Fruit Ninja 2 was used as the non-sports VR game for the control. The specific sports were chosen for three main reasons: 1) only a minority of Australian adolescents played them (6.0% for tennis and fewer than 1.4% for baseball and golf; AusSport, 2018 ); 2) they had established, commercially available VR and PlayStation 5 games based on them; and 3) the basic premise of the rules and gameplay was known and/or understandable to most adolescents. In general, the games were set to the easiest and simplest modes. Images of the gameplay for each condition have been included in the supplementary materials. The Meta Quest 2 was used for the VR and control conditions. This is a standalone VR device developed by Meta Platforms, Inc. that utilises a head mounted display and compatible ‘Touch’ controllers for navigation and interaction in the virtual environment. It provides users with an immersive experience without the need for external sensors or a tethered connection to a PC or gaming console. The headset features a high-resolution display with a pixel density of 1832 x 1920 per eye at 120Hz and an 89° field of view. The PlayStation 5 was used for the videogame condition. Developed by Sony Interactive Entertainment, it features an AMD Ryzen CPU with eight Zen 2 cores and a custom AMD Radeon RDNA 2 GPU, supporting ray tracing and resolutions up to 4K at 120Hz. The DualSense controller enhances gameplay with adaptive triggers and haptic feedback, providing tactile sensations that simulate in-game actions. Measures Three questionnaires were used throughout the study: a baseline questionnaire, the main questionnaire, and the gameplay questionnaire (all of which can be found in the supplementary materials). All questionnaires underwent three rounds of pilot testing, each with a different child aged between 12 and 14. This ensured that questions would be understandable to the target population, and that the overall length of the questionnaires were suitable. Of primary importance were the six measures of intentions and attitudes towards sport collected via the main questionnaire at the baseline, post-test, and retention phases. For each measure, participants were asked four questions, relating to each of baseball, golf, tennis, and ‘any sport’. The ‘any sport’ question was included as it is possible that playing a sports-game in VR may foster more positive intentions and attitudes towards sports in general. The measures, including example items, can be seen in Table 1 below. Ratings were made using a 10cm visual analogue scale (VAS) with the anchors of extremely unlikely/strongly disagree and extremely likely/strongly agree. VAS’ enable participants to make finer discriminations of their perceptions and are not limited by the discrete integer locations of Likert scales (Garcia-Perez & Alcala-Quintana, 2023 ). Table 1 Measures of Intentions and Attitudes Towards Sport Measure Example Item 1. Intention to participate in said sport If there was a golf club near you and money was not an issue, how likely would you be to participate in GOLF in the next 12 months? 2. Intention to attend said sport live If there were golf tournaments near you and money was not an issue, how likely would you be to attend a live GOLF tournament in the next 12 months? 3. Intention to watch said sport on television How likely are you to watch a GOLF tournament on television in the next 12 months? 4. Intention to follow events in said sport How likely are you to follow the events in GOLF in other ways (e.g., social media, internet, non-live TV, etc.) in the next 12 months? 5. Intention to play video/VR games in said sport How likely are you to play videogames or VR games about GOLF in the next 12 months? 6. Attitude towards the skills of said sport The skills and qualities needed to play GOLF are very high Notes. All items were repeated for baseball, tennis, and ‘any sport’. All intention items were constrained with the period of “in the next 12 months”. The Participate and Attend items included the text, “if there were [sport] near you and money was not an issue” to ensure that participants gave their ratings based on their attitude towards the sport, as opposed to any practical considerations. The baseline questionnaire was administered during the baseline phase and measured demographic information, sports and physical activity participation (via 15 questions taken from Siesmaa et al.’s, 2011 , measure of children’s self-report sport participation), and VR experience (via eight custom-made questions specific to the present study). The gameplay questionnaire was administered immediately after each condition during the intervention and measured perceptions of ease, physical effort, mental effort, complexity, and competence in the game, as well as desire to play the game again. These measures were included to assess participants' experiences and ensure they were comparable across the different game contexts. Specifically, it was hypothesised that these measures would not differ significantly between contexts, thus providing confidence that any observed differences in outcomes could be attributed to the sport and its modality (e.g., VR golf), rather than one’s individual experiences that may be unique to the chosen game. Non-significance in game perceptions is important given that considerable research has shown that one’s intention to participate in sport or physical activity is influenced by perceived effort (Chatzisarantis et al., 2007 ), competence (Lintunen et al., 1999 ), and enjoyment (Lewis et al., 2016 ). An identical VAS scale was used for this and can again be found in the supplementary materials. Procedure For the intervention, participants arrived at an empty classroom in groups of three. Participants spent 20 minutes playing in each of the three game conditions (VR sports-game, traditional sports videogame, and non-sports VR game). Each game had been setup by members of the research team such that the participant was able to engage in the main game playing aspect immediately, rather than having to navigate through to this stage themselves. For instance, in the VR golf game, the participants would begin on the first tee, ready to swing, rather than at the ‘start’ screen requiring them to select through a series of settings before they could commence playing. After each condition, participants completed the gameplay questionnaire described in the Measures subsection above. After the third and final condition, participants also completed the main questionnaire for a second (‘post-test’) time. The assignment of participants to each group was quasi-random based on their responses to the baseline questionnaire. That is, participants were excluded from being in the VR or videogame group of a particular sport if they reported: 1) that they had already played a VR game of that sport (occurring for seven participants); 2) that the sport was their favourite sport (one participant); 3) that they were currently participating in that sport recreationally or competitively more than once per month (seven participants); or 4) their average intention to engage with the sport at baseline was already very high (calculated at eight or more; six participants). Analyses Data were initially organised such that each questionnaire item was treated as a separate dependent measure, with scores recorded at each time point for all participants. This approach could have resulted in 24 dependent measures (five items assessing intention and one item assessing attitude applied to each of the four contexts: baseball, golf, tennis, and any sport). To simplify the analysis and ensure conceptual clarity, the internal consistency of the five intention items was assessed for each context to determine whether they measured the same underlying construct. Cronbach’s alpha values exceeded the threshold of 0.7 for all contexts (baseball = 0.867, golf = 0.723, tennis = 0.842, favourite sport = 0.791, any sport = 0.746), indicating that the intention items formed a reliable scale in each case. Consequently, a composite score for intention was calculated by averaging the scores of the five intention items within each context. As a result, the final analyses focused on two dependent measures: intention and attitude. All differences are reported in centimetres, corresponding to units on the 10cm VAS used to measure intention and attitude. Linear mixed models (LMMs) were conducted to examine the change over time as well as to compare groups. The LMMs included fixed effects of time (3 levels: baseline, post-test, and retention), group (VR, videogame, and control), and their interactions (time x group). A random intercept for subject was also fitted to each model. The mean difference for each of the outcomes (intention towards sport played in the VR/videogame condition; intention towards any sport) across the three designs were calculated and a 95% confidence interval was used to denote the imprecision of model parameter estimates. All analyses were conducted using the ‘ lme4’ package (Bates et al., 2015 ) within the R programming language (R Core Team, 2024 ). It is possible that potential effects found in the main analyses could simply be attributable to influential characteristics specific to the chosen game, such as how easy participants found it or how much effort was required to play the game. Thus, to evaluate whether the gameplaying experiences of participants were similar during each condition, one-way ANOVAs were conducted on the six items from the gameplay questionnaire (ease, physical effort, mental effort, complexity, competence, play again). Significant results were further analysed using Bonferroni post-hoc tests. These are termed the ‘Gameplay Checks’ below. 3. Results Gameplay Checks In design one (baseball), post-hoc tests following one-way ANOVAs revealed that participants in the control group perceived the game to be significantly easier than those in the videogame group ( F (2,53) = 7.19, p = .002, η² = .22; control M = 8.3, videogame M = 5.3). Similarly, the control group reported their game to be significantly less complicated than the videogame group ( F (2,53) = 3.88, p = .027, η² = .13; control M = 2.8, videogame M = 5.3). Perceptions from the VR group did not significantly differ from the videogame or control groups in any of the six gameplay checks. In design two (golf), post-hoc tests following one-way ANOVAs revealed no significant differences between any of the groups in any of the six gameplay checks. In design three (tennis), post-hoc tests following one-way ANOVAs revealed that participants in the videogame group perceived the game to require significantly less physical effort than those in the VR group or those in the control group ( F (2,53) = 8.88, p < .001, η² = .26; videogame M = 1.15, VR M = 3.98, control M = 3.91). Those in the videogame group also found their game to be more complicated than those in the control group ( F (2,52) = 3.25, p = .047, η² = .12; videogame M = 4.9, control M = 2.7). The videogame group also reported that they had less desire to play their game again compared to those in the control group ( F (2,53) = 3.85, p = .028, η² = .13; videogame M = 5.1, control M = 7.6). A table containing descriptive statistics for all gameplay measures in each design and for each group can be found in the Appendix. The gameplay checks show that the VR golf game, golf videogame, and VR Fruit Ninja were comparable in terms of their gameplay. The VR baseball and baseball videogame were also comparable, though the VR Fruit Ninja was reported to be easier and less complicated than the baseball videogame. The VR tennis game and tennis videogame were mostly comparable, though the videogame – unsurprisingly – was deemed to require less physical effort. The VR Fruit Ninja game also required less physical effort than the VR tennis game, whilst it was reported to be less complicated and elicited a greater desire to play again than the tennis videogame. Overall, these analyses suggest that for the baseball design, any significant effects found in the main LLM are likely due to the experience of playing the sport in question, rather than the gaming or technological aspects of the experience. Any significant effects for the golf and tennis designs should be considered within the context of the gameplay differences found here. Main Analyses The results of the LMMs for each design are presented in Table 1 . In these models, group x time interaction terms (e.g., ‘VR * Post’) represent the extent to which change in the outcome from baseline to a given time point (e.g., post-test) in the VR or videogame group differs from the change observed in the control group over the same time period. For instance, a significant positive VR * Post value would indicate that the VR group increased more (or decreased less) than the control group from baseline to post-test. Unless noted in the subsequent sections, effects were deemed inconclusive if confidence limits spanned meaningful regions in both positive and negative directions. Table 1 LMMs for Overall Intention across Each Design Design One: Baseball Design Two: Golf Design Three: Tennis Baseball Any Sport Golf Any Sport Tennis Any Sport Group 1 VR - Con -0.35 1.60* 1.10 -0.72 -2.50** -0.90 [-1.80, 1.10] [0.00, 3.20] [-0.05, 2.20] [-2.40, 0.94] [-4.20, -0.83] [-2.60, 0.81] Video - Con -0.43 0.72 2.10*** 0.90 -2.50** -1.60* [-2.00, 1.10] [-0.94, 2.40] [0.96, 3.30] [-0.81, 2.60] [-4.10, -0.88] [-3.20, 0.00] Video - VR -0.08 -0.90 1.00 1.60* 0.04 -0.72 [-1.70, 1.50] [-2.60, 0.81] [-0.07, 2.10] [0.00, 3.20] [-1.60, 1.70] [-2.40, 0.94] Time 2 Post - Base 1.00*** 0.33 0.94*** 0.33 0.94** 0.33 [0.60, 1.50] [-0.24, 0.90] [0.45, 1.40] [-0.24, 0.90] [0.32, 1.60] [-0.24, 0.90] Ret - Base 0.51* -0.05 0.35 -0.05 0.27 -0.05 [0.05, 0.98] [-0.65, 0.54] [-0.16, 0.87] [-0.65, 0.54] [-0.39, 0.93] [-0.65, 0.54] Ret - Post -0.52* -0.38 -0.59* -0.38 -0.68* -0.38 [-0.99, -0.06] [-0.98, 0.21] [-1.1, -0.07] [-0.98, 0.21] [-1.30, -0.01] [-0.98, 0.21] Group * Time VR * Post 1.30** -0.36 -0.09 0.18 1.30* 0.19 [0.45, 2.20] [-1.50, 0.76] [-1.10, 0.91] [-0.98, 1.30] [0.03, 2.70] [-1.00, 1.40] Video * Post 0.67 -0.18 1.10* -0.19 0.31 0.36 [-0.23, 1.60] [-1.30, 0.98] [0.12, 2.20] [-1.40, 1.00] [-0.94, 1.60] [-0.76, 1.50] VR * Ret 0.57 -0.96 0.39 -0.13 2.20** 1.10 [-0.38, 1.50] [-2.20, 0.26] [-0.62, 1.40] [-1.30, 1.00] [0.82, 3.60] [-0.17, 2.40] Video * Ret 0.21 0.13 -0.38 -1.10 0.87 0.96 [-0.71, 1.10] [-1.00, 1.30] [-1.50, 0.70] [-2.40, 0.17] [-0.48, 2.20] [-0.26, 2.20] Note. A positive estimate indicates that the first group listed had a higher mean than the second group; a negative estimate indicates the opposite. Design One: Baseball For this design, 18 participants formed the VR group, 16 the videogame group, and 20 the control group. Of primary interest, the group x time interaction revealed that the VR group showed a significantly greater increase in baseball intention from baseline to post-test than the control group, with a difference of 1.30 units. However, this effect was not maintained at retention, and no significant interaction effects were found for the videogame group at either time point. In terms of overall trends over time, baseball intention increased by 1.00 unit from baseline to post-test, and remained elevated at retention (+ 0.51 units from baseline), although there was a significant drop between post-test and retention (-0.52 units). In the group-level comparisons, a significant difference was found for intention towards any sport, with the VR group reporting scores 1.60 units higher than the control group. For attitude, there were no significant effects found at the group (baseball, any sport), time (baseline, post-test, retention), or group x time interaction level (all p > .05). A table containing these LMMs can be found in the Appendix. These results suggest that playing a VR baseball game has an immediate, positive impact on one’s intention to engage with baseball, but does not change their attitude towards the sport. The positive changes to intention were not retained four months later. Playing a baseball videogame has no effect. Design Two: Golf For this design, 20 participants formed the VR group, 18 the videogame group, and 16 the control group. Of primary interest, the group x time interaction revealed that the videogame group showed a significantly greater increase in golf intention from baseline to post-test than the control group, with a difference of 1.10 units. However, this effect was not maintained at retention, and no significant interaction effects were found for the VR group at either time point. In terms of overall trends over time, golf intention increased by 0.94 units from baseline to post-test, but significantly dropped between post-test and retention (-0.59 units). In the group level comparisons, significant differences were found for golf intention – with the videogame group reporting scores 2.10 units higher than the control group – and for intention towards any sport – with the videogame group reporting scores 1.60 units higher than the VR group. For attitude, there were no significant effects found at the group (golf, any sport), time (baseline, post-test, retention), or group x time interaction level (all p > .05). A table containing these LMMs can be found in the Appendix. These results suggest that playing a golf videogame game has an immediate, positive impact on one’s intention to engage with golf, but does not change their attitude towards the sport. The positive changes to intention were not retained four months later. Playing a VR golf has no effect. Design Three: Tennis For this design, 16 participants formed the VR group, 20 the videogame group, and 18 the control group. Of primary interest, the group x time interaction revealed that the VR group showed a significantly greater increase in tennis intention from baseline to post-test than the control group, with a difference of 1.30 units. Furthermore, this effect was maintained at retention (+ 2.20 units). No significant interaction effects were found for the videogame group at either time point. In terms of overall trends over time, tennis intention increased by 0.94 units from baseline to post-test, but significantly dropped between post-test and retention (-0.68 units). In the group-level comparisons, significant differences were found for three comparisons: the control group reported higher scores for tennis intention compared to the VR group (2.50 units) and the videogame group (2.50 units), whilst also reporting higher scores for intention towards any sport compared to the videogame group (1.60 units). For attitude, there were no significant effects found at the group (tennis, any sport), time (baseline, post-test, retention), or group x time interaction level (all p > .05). A table containing these LMMs can be found in the Appendix. These results suggest that playing a VR tennis game has an immediate and prolonged impact on one’s intention to engage with tennis, though it does not change their attitude towards the sport. Playing a tennis videogame has no effect. 4. Discussion The present study examined whether participation in a 20-minute VR sports-game and a 20-minute traditional sports videogame would influence adolescents’ intentions and attitudes towards that same sport (or sport more generally) in the real world. Three identical designs (each addressing a different sport – baseball, golf, and tennis) were employed, with a control group (non-sports VR game) used for comparison. Dependent variables were collected using questionnaires one-month prior (baseline), immediately after (post-test), and four months following the intervention (retention). Overall, the findings provide some support for hypothesis one. Playing VR baseball and VR tennis had a positive impact on intentions to engage with the respective sport, though only the tennis game maintained this impact four months later. Playing a VR golf game did not have an impact on intentions to engage with golf, though playing a golf videogame did; however, this impact was only immediate and not maintained long-term. No support was found for hypothesis two, with neither VR nor the videogames having an impact on attitude towards their respective sports at either post-test or retention. Overall, the results from the present study show that a brief (20-minute) exposure to a baseball or tennis VR game – but not videogame – can increase the intentions of adolescents to engage with the same real-world version of that sport. Interestingly, for golf, the reverse is true: it is the videogame, but not the VR game, which has the positive impact on adolescents’ intentions. These findings broadly support existing literature demonstrating positive associations between exposure to sports videogames and real-world sport interest (Adachi & Willoughby, 2016 ; Jenny et al., 2017 ) but extend prior research by illustrating that the immersive qualitative of VR may uniquely enhance intentions for dynamic sports like baseball and tennis. Despite the promising short-term results for VR and videogame interventions in baseball and tennis, their limited long-term effectiveness raises important considerations regarding intervention duration and reinforcement. One possible reason for the limited long-term effectiveness observed (except in tennis) could be the brief duration of exposure (only 20-minutes). Such short interventions might be insufficient to form stable, lasting intentions (Lamming et al., 2017 ). It is also possible that without reinforcement or follow-up sessions, the initial interest generated by novelty and immediate enjoyment diminishes over time. The lasting effect seen for tennis may be partially explained by external factors such as the increased exposure to tennis through the Australian Open occurring during the retention interval (all participants were residents of Victoria, Australia), which was not possible to control for given the logistical challenges of participant availability. This highlights the potential role that contextual reinforcement might play in sustaining long-term interest and warrants further systematic investigation. The observed differences across the three sports might indicate that the effectiveness of VR and videogames in enhancing intentions and attitudes depends on the characteristics of the sport itself. Sports involving direct interaction with an opponent or dynamic, high-impact gross motor skills (e.g., tennis and baseball) appear particularly suited to the immersive, embodied experiences of VR (Wilkins, 2024 ). Conversely, sports like golf, which rely on fine motor skills, accuracy, and are typically played individually in a slower-paced context, might benefit more from the strategy-focus and third-person perspective offered by traditional videogames. Future research should directly test these ideas by systematically comparing VR and videogame interventions across diverse sports with varying degrees of physical intensity, interactivity, and pacing. Whilst sport-specific suitability may explain the differing effectiveness of the VR and videogame interventions, the analyses of the gameplay checks indicate that inherent gameplay factors may have also played a contributing role. For golf, despite no significant differences emerging from gameplay perceptions between conditions, only the traditional videogame resulted in significant positive changes. Given golf’s low popularity and participation rates among Australian youth (AusSport, 2018 ), it seems unlikely that mere exposure to the sport through the videogame alone was responsible, otherwise similar positive effects would have also been observed in the VR condition. Instead, it may be that the third-person perspective of the videogame supports greater visual search strategies (Mann et al., 2009 ), which could have enhanced participants’ understanding of golf’s tactics, thereby increasing their interest compared to the first-person, immersive perspective of VR. Conversely, the baseball and tennis videogames were both perceived as being more complicated compared to their respective control conditions, and this increased complexity might partly explain the absence of significant positive effects for these videogames. Additionally, the tennis videogame was also associated with a decreased desire to play again, potentially reducing participants' motivation and limiting any positive impact on intentions. Importantly, the effectiveness observed for VR baseball and tennis interventions remains robust, as these gameplay issues pertained specifically to the videogame conditions. Collectively, these gameplay findings suggest that while sport-specific factors are critical, intervention effectiveness may also be sensitive to game complexity and the immediate enjoyment associated with each technology. Turning to the results for our second hypothesis – that for all three sports, neither VR nor videogames significantly changed the attitudes of participants – we consider two possible explanations. First is the fact that the questionnaire contained only one item to measure attitude, but there were five separate items for the measure of intentions. It is therefore possible that the measure used for attitude had less sensitivity in terms of its capability to identify significant differences between the groups (DeVellis, 2017 ; Diamantopoulos et al., 2012 ). Another explanation is that attitudes may be more resistant to change compared to intentions. Indeed, a meta-analysis that investigated behaviour change interventions revealed a higher weighted average effect size for intentions compared to attitudes, indicating that interventions attempting to change attitudes had less impact compared to those that attempted to change intentions (Steinmetz et al., 2016 ). This difference may occur because intentions often reflect immediate, context-dependent motivations that are sensitive to short-term experiences, such as the brief exposure to VR and videogames in the present study, whereas attitudes represent deeper, more enduring beliefs that likely require more sustained or repeated exposure to VR and videogame interventions to meaningfully shift (Albarracín & Shavitt, 2018 ). Participants’ intentions and attitudes to any sport were also obtained to see if any effects of the digital interventions would extend to sport more generally, rather than being limited solely to the specific sport simulated in the VR or videogame. The non-significant findings show that this does not occur. It seems that the benefits of sports VR and videogames in promoting engagement with real-world sport may be specific to the sport simulated in the VR game itself. This lack of generalisation to other sports may be due to the specificity of the knowledge that participants acquire during their gaming experience (Adachi & Willoughby, 2015 ; Kim & Jang, 2024 ). When that knowledge is linked to a specific sport from a VR or videogame, it appears unlikely that participation in that game will encourage real-world engagement with sports other than the one depicted in the game itself. This lack of transfer to broader sport engagement may not be surprising but is valuable in highlighting the sport-specific impact that digital games interventions may have. These findings have implications for how we conceptualise and promote engagement with sport. In this study, intentions were measured not only in terms of physical participation but also included adjacent behaviours such as watching televised events, engaging with related social media, and attending live matches. VR and videogame-based interventions may therefore support a wider spectrum of sport consumption, increasing general interest in the sporting domain. Importantly, this broader engagement has been associated with a higher likelihood of subsequent physical participation, particularly among youth (Tian et al., 2023 ), suggesting that digital interventions which initially foster non-participatory forms of interest may still contribute meaningfully to long-term behavioural outcomes and public health objectives. Building on this, the findings point to several valuable strategies for physical education pedagogy. VR and videogame-based experiences offer logistically feasible, cost-effective, and safe alternatives to traditional sport delivery, particularly for activities that are expensive, equipment-intensive, geographically restricted, or carry a higher risk of injury. For instance, adolescents living in rural or underserved areas might use VR to engage with water sports or snow-based sports for the first time, whilst activities such as golf or American football can be introduced without the usual financial or safety barriers. By facilitating exposure to a broader range of sports, these technologies can help educators increase inclusivity and diversify the types of experiences offered within school settings. In doing so, VR and videogames may serve as powerful tools for stimulating interest in sport and fostering long-term engagement, thereby supporting the well-established mental and physical health benefits associated with active lifestyles. The present study is not without its limitations. One notable methodological decision was not including a measure of actual behavioural engagement with the sports, which would provide a more definitive assessment of intervention effectiveness. Although this was justified given the practical constraints of measuring behaviour among adolescents (e.g., reliance on parental support), future studies might replicate this approach with adult participants to better isolate intervention effects from external factors. Another consideration is the brief duration of the intervention (20-minutes). Whilst this may reflect the reality of contemporary sport engagement strategies, where short attention spans amongst adolescents necessitate brief, high-impact interventions (Müller et al., 2021 ), our findings are consequently limited to the acute effects of a single, short-duration digital sport experience. Thus, it remains unknown whether prolonged or repeated interventions would produce different or more sustained effects on adolescent intentions and attitudes towards sport. 5. Conclusion The present study provides novel evidence that brief sport experiences delivered via VR and videogames may positively influence adolescent intentions towards specific sports, though these effects did not extend to adolescents’ attitudes or across sports more generally. The sport-specific differences found suggest that the effectiveness of each digital intervention may depend on how well the sport’s features align with the strengths of the technology. Future research should investigate this so that interventions can be optimally implemented by practitioners to promote sport involvement. Overall, despite limited effects on attitudes, the results underscore the pedagogical value of integrating VR and videogame interventions into physical education settings. Declarations Competing Interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication. Informed Consent and Ethical Approval Ethical approval was obtained from the lead researcher’s institute (ID: HEC23333). The experimental procedures and protocols were performed according to the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants provided written informed consent prior to the experiments. Author Note Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr Luke Wilkins, Sport, Performance and Nutrition (SPAN) Research Group, La Trobe University, La Trobe Sports Stadium, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia. Email: [email protected] . ORCID ID: 0000-0001-6735-1903 Author Contributions Luke Wilkins, Adam Gorman, and Aden Kittel contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection was performed by Luke Wilkins, Samantha Merry, and Aden Kittel. Data analyses were performed by Minh Huynh. All authors contributed to the writing of the first draft of the manuscript, as well as providing feedback and editing for subsequent versions. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgements The authors would like to express their gratitude to Brayden Stone and Helen D’Elia at Ivanhoe Grammar School for their invaluable support in organising the logistics of this study. We are also deeply thankful to all the students who participated in the study for their enthusiasm and cooperation. Finally, we extend our appreciation to Emily Awad, Daniel Topping, David Huynh, Miracle Dumayas, and Dr Todd Pickering for their assistance in running the data collection sessions, ensuring the study's smooth execution. Data availability statement The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Funding details No funds, grants, or other support was received. Compliance with Ethical Standards The study was approved by the lead author’s institution’s Human Research Ethics Committee (ID: HEC23333), and all participants provided informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. References Adachi PJ, Willoughby T (2015) From the couch to the sports field: The longitudinal associations between sports video game play, self-esteem, and involvement in sports. Psychol Popular Media Cult 4(4):329. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000042 Adachi PJ, Willoughby T (2016) Does playing sports video games predict increased involvement in real-life sports over several years among older adolescents and emerging adults? J Youth Adolesc 45:391–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0312-2 Albarracín D, Shavitt S (2018) Attitudes and attitude change. Ann Rev Psychol 69:299–327. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011911 AusSport (2018) Australian Government: Australian Sports Commission. AusPlay Focus: Children’s Participation in Organised Physical Activity Outside of School Hours. https://www.sportaus.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/675562/AusPlay_focus_Children_Participation_2.pdf Back J, Johnson U, Svedberg P, McCall A, Ivarsson A (2022) Drop-out from team sport among adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Psychol Sport Exerc 61:102205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102205 Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67(1). https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 Chatzisarantis NLD, Frederick C, Biddle SJH, Hagger MS, Smith B (2007) Influences of volitional and forced intentions on physical activity and effort within the theory of planned behaviour. J Sports Sci 25(6):699–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410600818523 Chung KS, Goebert C, Johnson JD (2025) Sport spectatorship in a virtual environment: how sensory experiences impact consumption intentions. Int J Sports Mark Spons 26(2):305–324. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-03-2023-0041 Corr M, McSharry J, Murtagh EM (2018) Adolescent girls’ perceptions of physical activity: A systematic review of qualitative studies. Am J Health Promotion 33(5):806–819. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117118818747 DeVellis RF (2017) Scale development: Theory and applications, 4th edn. Sage Publications, Inc. Dębska M, Polechoński J, Mynarski A, Polechoński P (2019) Enjoyment and intensity of physical activity in immersive virtual reality performed on innovative training devices in compliance with recommendations for health. Int J Environ Res Public Health 16(19):3673. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16193673 Diamantopoulos A, Sarstedt M, Fuchs C, Wilczynski P, Kaiser S (2012) Guidelines for choosing between multi-item and single-item scales for construct measurement: A predictive validity perspective. J Acad Mark Sci 40:434–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0300-3 Donaldson SJ, Ronan KR (2006) The effects of sports participation on young adolescents' emotional well-being. Adolescence 41(162):369–389 Dowsett R, Kinrade N, Whiteside D, Lawson D, Barnett C, Magistro D, Wilkins L (2023) Own goal or home run? Exploring the implementation of virtual reality training in football and baseball organisations. Sport Bus Management: Int J 13(6):665–684. https://doi.org/10.1108/SBM-09-2022-0083 Eime RM, Young JA, Harvey JT, Charity MJ, Payne WR (2013) A systematic review of the psychological and social benefits of participation in sport for children and adolescents: Informing development of a conceptual model of health through sport. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Activity 10:98. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-10-98 Eime RM, Harvey JT, Charity MJ (2019) Sport drop-out during adolescence: is it real, or an artefact of sampling behaviour? Int J Sport Policy Politics 11(4):715–726. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2019.1630468 Eime RM, Harvey J, Charity M, Pankowiak A, Westerbeek H, Mesagno C (2024) Leisure Studies , 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2024.2347282 Garcia-Perez MA, Alcala-Quintana R (2023) Accuracy and precision of responses to visual analog scales: Iner- and intra-individual variability. Behav Res Methods 55:4369–4381. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-02021-0 Ho WK, Sum KWR, Tang D (2024) A scoping review on physical literacy domains associated with participation in sports video games among youth and adolescence. Curr Psychol 43:22146–22157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05997-4 Hu Z (2025) Virtual reality-based cooperative learning in physical education: Ways to improve physical performance and motivation of students. Int J Human–Computer Interact 41(1):242–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2297331 Jakobsson BT (2014) What makes teenagers continue? A salutogenic approach to understanding youth participation in Swedish club sports. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy 19(3):239–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2012.754003 Jenny SE, Chung JJ, Rademaker SM, Schary DP (2017) Learning a sport through video gaming: A mixed-methods experimental study. Loading… J Can Game Stud Association 10(17):1–20 Jenny SE, Schary D (2014) Exploring the effectiveness of learning American football through playing the video game Madden NFL. Int J Technol Teach Learn 10(1):72–87 Kemp BJ, Parrish A, Batterham M, Cliff DP (2020) Participation in domains of physical activity among Australian youth during the transition from childhood to adolescence: A longitudinal study. J Phys Activity Health 17(3):278–286. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2018-0705 Kim J, Jang BG (2024) Perceived soccer literacy: A construct linking soccer video games play to soccer engagement. Sport Mark Q 33(1):66–80. https://doi.org/10.32731/SMQ.331.032024.05 Kittel A, Lindsay R, Le Noury P, Wilkins L (2024) The use of extended reality technologies in sport perceptual-cognitive skill research: A systematic scoping review. Sports Med – Open 10:128. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-024-00794-6 Lamming L, Pears S, Mason D, Morton K, Bijker M, Sutton S, Hardeman W (2017) What do we know about brief interventions for physical activity that could be delivered in primary care consultations? A systematic review of reviews. Prev Med 99:152–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.02.017 Le Noury P, Polman R, Maloney M, Gorman A (2022) A narrative review of the current state of extended reality technology and how it can be utilised in sport. Sports Med (Auckland N Z) 52(7):1473–1489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-022-01669-0 Lewis BA, Williams DM, Frayeh AL, Marcus BH (2016) Self-efficacy versus perceived enjoyment as predictors of physical activity behavior. Psychol Health 31(4):456–469. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2015.1111372 Light RL, Harvey S, Memmert D (2013) Why children join and stay in sports clubs: case studies in Australian, French and German swimming clubs. Sport Educ Soc 18(4):550–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2011.594431 Lintunen T, Valkonen A, Leskinen E, Biddle SJH (1999) Predicting physical activity intentions using a goal perspectives approach: a study of Finnish youth. Scand J Med Sci Sports 9(6):344–352. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0838.1999.tb00255.x Mann DL, Farrow D, Shuttleworth R, Hopwood M (2009) The influence of viewing perspective on decision-making and visual search behaviour in an invasive sport. Int J Sport Psycol 40(4):546–564 Müller C, Otto B, Sawitzki V, Kanagalingam P, Scherer JS, Lindberg S (2021) Short breaks at school: effects of a physical activity and a mindfulness intervention on children's attention, reading comprehension, and self-esteem. Trends Neurosci Educ 25:100160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2021.100160 Niu Y, Dong Y, Zhang J, Zhang S, Cao Y (2025) The value of athletics class with the use of virtual reality games for better communication and socialization of students. Educ Inform Technol 30:693–714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13206-9 Oliveira-Brochado A, Brito PQ, Oliveira-Brochado F (2017) Correlates of adults’ participation in sport and frequency of sport. Sci Sports 32(6):355–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2017.03.005 OpenAI (2025) ChatGPT (July 4 version) [Generative AI image output] . OpenAI. https://chat.openai.com/ Owen KB, Foley BC, Wilhite K, Booker B, Lonsdale C, Reece LJ (2024) Sport participation and academic performance in children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Activity 54(2):299–306. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000002786 R Core Team (2024) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/ Sagnier C, Loup-Escande E, Lourdeaux D, Thouvenin I, Valléry G (2020) User acceptance of virtual reality: An extended Technology Acceptance Model. Int J Human–Computer Interact 36(11):993–1007. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2019.1708612 Schlimm J, Mereu S, Breuer C (2024) Scoring big – how sports video game features drive virtual ownership, willingness to pay and soccer participation. Int J Sports Mark Spons. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-06-2024-0135 Siesmaa EJ, Blitvich JD, White PE, Finch CF (2011) Measuring children's self-reported sport participation, risk perception and injury history: Development and validation of a survey instrument. J Sci Med Sport 14(1):22–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2010.04.006 Song X, Ali NM, Salim M, M.H., Rezaldi MY (2025) A literature review of virtual reality exergames for older adults: Enhancing physical, cognitive, and social health. Appl Sci 15(1):351. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010351 Steinmetz H, Knappstein M, Ajzen I, Schmidt P, Kabst R (2016) How effective are behavior change interventions based on the theory of planned behavior? Z Psychol 224(3):216–233. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000255 Tian Y, Yang P, Zhang D (2023) The relationship between media use and sports participation behavior: A meta-analysis. Digit Health 9. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076231185476 Vella SA, Schweickle MJ, Sutcliffe JT (2020) Prevalence of drop-out from organised extracurricular sports and associations with body fat percentage during childhood and adolescence. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med 6:e000751. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2020-000751 Visek AJ, Achrati SM, Mannix HM, McDonnell K, Harris BS, DiPietro L (2015) The Fun Integration Theory: Toward sustaining children and adolescents sport participation. J Phys Activity Health 12(3):424–433. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2013-0180 Wilkins L (2024) A framework for using virtual reality to enhance psychological performance in baseball. J Sport Psychol Action 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/21520704.2024.2352864 Zhu DH (2025) Experiential virtual reality or informational video advertising? Assessing promotional effect on sport interest. Int J Sports Mark Spons 1464–6668. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-09-2024-0252 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files VRvsVideogameSupMaterials030725.docx VRvsVideogameAppendix030725.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 07 Feb, 2026 Read the published version in Virtual Reality → Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7049862","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":483027208,"identity":"6350e277-ae62-4d17-966e-9e1dd81f2ed9","order_by":0,"name":"Luke Wilkins","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"La Trobe University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Luke","middleName":"","lastName":"Wilkins","suffix":""},{"id":483027209,"identity":"727735a7-6c0e-41b8-86f9-d17bd49e6987","order_by":1,"name":"Adam D. Gorman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Queensland University of Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Adam","middleName":"D.","lastName":"Gorman","suffix":""},{"id":483027210,"identity":"bf672982-e496-4bfd-a0c8-e916cc5f26aa","order_by":2,"name":"Samantha Merry","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Deakin University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Samantha","middleName":"","lastName":"Merry","suffix":""},{"id":483027211,"identity":"488d1cac-8a4f-42fe-be96-9648fb8426d8","order_by":3,"name":"Minh Huynh","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"La Trobe University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Minh","middleName":"","lastName":"Huynh","suffix":""},{"id":483027212,"identity":"d42917fa-83b8-48fc-bf0b-3ebb158cef37","order_by":4,"name":"Aden Kittel","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Deakin University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Aden","middleName":"","lastName":"Kittel","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-05 01:08:06","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7049862/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7049862/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-026-01318-1","type":"published","date":"2026-02-07T15:57:17+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":86532228,"identity":"fa026f81-ec9a-4d6d-95d1-02b5fc94215b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-11 17:22:59","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":596487,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eTimeline (Intervention Phase Only) and Participant Allocation for the Three Experimental Designs\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNotes. \u003c/em\u003eStudents completed the intervention phase in groups of three. For instance, group One (Raewyn, Loraine, and Dotty) formed the VR group for design one, the videogame group for design two, and the control group for design three. Group Two (Rory, David, and Steve) formed the control group for design one, the VR group for design two, and the videogame group for design three. Group Three (Zoe, Max, and Fia) formed the videogame group for design one, the control group for design two, and the VR group for design three. All names are pseudonyms. Images were made using OpenAI (2025).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage145.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7049862/v1/e17cd256b9bfa7d4938b7bc6.png"},{"id":86532210,"identity":"14cda2b5-6a8a-416e-b563-dfe1473e87fd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-11 17:22:24","extension":"jpeg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":115021,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFigure 1. Group x Time Interaction for Baseball Intention\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7049862/v1/8bb81e116ff03a728e73f646.jpeg"},{"id":86532220,"identity":"52574570-70d8-4d53-a629-00dcf759a265","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-11 17:22:24","extension":"jpeg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":121956,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFigure 2. Group x Time Interaction for Golf Intention\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7049862/v1/46367bf3d5fe12e76f9ad598.jpeg"},{"id":86532227,"identity":"f24d7e76-c116-4c92-8e97-a30713dfac73","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-11 17:22:24","extension":"jpeg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":105451,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFigure 3. Group x Time Interaction for Tennis Intention\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7049862/v1/f74ce080a1c8b4c3dfe9a710.jpeg"},{"id":102233975,"identity":"d1ccc510-b4ff-49da-a8b0-a5b5bab83056","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-09 16:01:31","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1684938,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7049862/v1/1939e843-fb36-4440-a6fe-9e4cb7154079.pdf"},{"id":86532741,"identity":"98e88f36-f834-4b4c-9378-4cfcbea9d051","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-11 17:30:24","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":7039364,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"VRvsVideogameSupMaterials030725.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7049862/v1/c87bd39a34244fa63af7afba.docx"},{"id":86532737,"identity":"8d925bad-0b6a-4b24-aa81-81bcd9d692f9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-11 17:30:24","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":30259,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"VRvsVideogameAppendix030725.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7049862/v1/8ad99d5e410cf782a6cbf58b.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Virtual Reality vs Traditional Videogames: Which is More Effective at Enhancing Adolescent Intentions and Attitudes Towards Sport?","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eParticipation in sport has a range of benefits for adolescents. For example, these benefits can be psychosocial, such as improved self-esteem, socialisation, and a reduced chance of depressive symptoms (Eime et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Further, sport participation has been linked to improved academic performance (Owen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) and improved self-concept (Donaldson et al., 2006). Despite these benefits to sport participation, there is a significant dropout rate of adolescents from organised sport activities (Eime et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In particular, the early years of adolescence (e.g., ages 10\u0026ndash;14) have been identified as a period where there is a significant amount of dropout (Vella et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), with common reasons including lower motivation and poor experiences in their sport (Back et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, it remains a key issue to identify and assess novel ways to retain adolescents in sport and/or motivate them to (re)join organised sport.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMotivation to participate in sports arises from a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic factors (Eime et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Adolescents join organised sports due to the influence of parents (Light et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) and friends, and they also join for reasons related to socialisation and enjoyment (Visek et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Factors that influence long-term participation and motivation include success in physical competencies (i.e., achieving fitness, team, or personal goals), social acceptance (i.e., club atmosphere, environment, and friends), and comfort (i.e., happiness) (Corr et al., 2019). Participation in sport may also result from earlier engagement in adjacent activities, such as watching televised matches, attending live events, or engaging via digital media platforms, which can inspire a child to have a more active involvement (Tian et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). To successfully engage in sports, adolescents need a supportive environment that prioritises fun and achievement, with parental influence and peer approval acting as significant motivators (Light et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The Fun Integration Theory underscores the necessity of balancing enjoyment with competition, emphasising that for children and adolescents to sustain their participation in sports, their experiences must be enjoyable and fulfilling (Visek et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, understanding these evolving motivations is essential for fostering long-term engagement in sports among young people.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThere is a growing base of evidence to support the use of technology such as videogames to influence sport participation behaviours. For example, Adachi and Willoughby (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) highlighted how playing sports videogames during older adolescence can predict future involvement in that sport later in life. This could be due to a greater level of interest from playing the game, but playing a videogame can also lead to familiarity of the player movements before actually playing the game (Ho et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Further, this can result in greater self-esteem and confidence from playing the videogame that can transfer to the real-life sport (Adachi \u0026amp; Willoughby, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Jenny et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) explored the impact of playing a cricket videogame over two weeks on the development of cricket knowledge and interest in playing and watching cricket, using a cohort of undergraduate students. In comparison to a non-videogame control group, the videogame group experienced improvements in game knowledge, plus a significantly stronger willingness to play cricket, with no differences for interest in watching cricket (Jenny et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). While videogames are beneficial for influencing sport participation behaviours, there may be other technologies with similar or greater benefits.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWith developing technology, more immersive technologies such as virtual reality (VR) are able to present immersive sport games, similar to videogames. VR refers to \u0026ldquo;the simulation of an interactive three-dimensional environment that users can be immersed into and that they can interact with\u0026rdquo; (Sagnier et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e, pp. 993), most often through the use of head-mounted displays. While VR is being increasingly used at the professional levels of sport (Dowsett et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Wilkins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) and has been found to be effective in developing skills essential for athletic performance (Le Noury et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Kittel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), it may also have benefit for participation reasons. The technology has become very popular within entertainment and gaming, and research has found that VR can provide participants with increased levels of enjoyment for an activity (Debska et al., 2019). A recent systematic review reported VR games can have positive benefits on physical, cognitive, and social health of older adults (Song et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). As highlighted previously, early teen years are a critical period for maintaining sport participation (Vella et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), and research has indicated a VR fitness game in physical education can lead to greater motivation levels to participate in physical activity (Hu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, Niu et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) evaluated a VR intervention in physical education, indicating VR can not only impact their enjoyment but can also lead to greater socialisation outcomes. The highly interactive nature of VR can also be beneficial for those with limited sport experience, where VR can lead to greater willingness to engage in sport compared to video-based advertisements (Zhu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Given the importance of enjoyment in determining one\u0026rsquo;s intention to participate in an activity (Oliveira-Brochado et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), it is possible that a sports-based VR intervention may increase the intention of individuals to participate in sport. Therefore, more research is required to understand the effects of VR on sport participation, particularly within this critical age period of adolescence.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAims and Hypotheses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe present study aimed to examine the effectiveness of two digital-sport interventions \u0026ndash; a 20-minute VR sports-game and a 20-minute traditional sports videogame \u0026ndash; on adolescent intentions and attitudes towards the respective sport of each game. Both groups were also compared with a control intervention in which adolescents played a non-sports-game using VR. Additional items were included to gauge intentions and attitudes towards sport more generally to see if the potential impact of VR and videogames transfers beyond the game/sport in question, though no hypotheses were made in this regard given the minimal literature exploring indirect or transfer effects of VR/videogame playing.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe following hypotheses were tested:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants in the VR sports-game and traditional sports videogame groups will significantly increase (i.e., more positive) their \u003cem\u003eintentions\u003c/em\u003e towards the sport represented in the games at both post-test and retention (four months), compared to baseline. No such increase will occur for the control groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants in the VR sports-game and traditional sports videogame groups will significantly increase (i.e., more positive) their \u003cem\u003eattitude\u003c/em\u003e towards the sport represented in the games at both post-test and retention, compared to baseline. No such increase will occur for the control groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDesign\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThree separate, but identical experimental intervention designs were conducted. In each, a between-subjects approach was taken, with participants assigned to either a VR sports-game group (VR), traditional sports videogame group (videogame), or a control group who played a non-sports VR game (control). The difference between the three designs was in the choice of sports-game for the VR and videogame groups. The study comprised three phases, wherein the primary data was obtained. Specifically, participants\u0026rsquo; intentions and attitudes towards sport were obtained approximately one month pre-intervention (baseline), immediately post-intervention (post-test), and approximately four months post-intervention (retention).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe decision to have participants complete all three conditions was made based on practical/ethical considerations. That is, following discussions with the school, it was felt that the participants should have the opportunity to experience multiple VR modes and the videogame to avoid participants feeling disadvantaged compared to their peers. However, rather than adopt a within-subjects design which would have necessitated the use of just one sport, it was decided that three between-subjects designs would run concurrently, allowing for the experience (for participants) and examination (for the research) of multiple sports. Thus, in practice, each participant acted as a VR sports-game participant, a videogame participant, \u003cem\u003eand\u003c/em\u003e a control participant, across the three separate designs (i.e., baseball, golf, tennis). Although participants engaged with all three game types across the three designs, the data were analysed using a between-subjects approach within each design, since each participant contributed only one data point to each context-specific analysis. Participants who played VR baseball always played the golf videogame; participants who played the VR golf always played the tennis videogame; and participants who played VR tennis always played the baseball videogame. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e depicts an example participant allocation and timeline for the intervention phase of the study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eParticipants\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRecruitment took place at a single metropolitan school in Victoria, Australia. Year 9 students were invited to participate via a verbal explanation of the study by a teacher, followed by the provision of an information sheet and parental/guardian consent form. This age group was chosen as it is the age at which sports participation in Australian adolescents has typically declined substantially, and therefore where an intervention encouraging sports involvement would be necessary (Kemp et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Further criteria for involvement included that the individual was not currently participating regularly in two of baseball, golf, or tennis; that they were healthy and free from injury; and that they did not knowingly experience severe cyber-sickness or other related symptoms when playing VR or videogames.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn total, 54 adolescents (34 females, 20 males) chose to participate in the study. The mean age of the sample was 14.43 years (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.54, range\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;13\u0026ndash;15). Of the 54 participants, 45 reported that they had used a VR headset previously, though only 10 of these had played a sports-game in VR. Of these 10, seven reported that the sports-game played was related to either tennis, golf, or baseball and therefore in these instances it was ensured that the individual was allocated to a VR group for which they did not have previous VR experience in the sport. Ethical approval was obtained by the lead researcher\u0026rsquo;s institute (ID: HEC23333).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eApparatus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn design one, the sport chosen was baseball. \u003cem\u003eTotally Baseball!\u003c/em\u003e was used as the VR game and \u003cem\u003eMLB The Show 23\u003c/em\u003e as the videogame. In design two, the sport chosen was golf. \u003cem\u003eGolf\u0026thinsp;+\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;was used as the VR game and \u003cem\u003ePGA Tour 2K23\u003c/em\u003e as the videogame. In design three, the sport chosen was tennis. \u003cem\u003eFirst Person Tenni\u003c/em\u003es was used as the VR game and \u003cem\u003eTennis World Tour 2\u003c/em\u003e as the videogame. In each design, Fruit Ninja 2 was used as the non-sports VR game for the control. The specific sports were chosen for three main reasons: 1) only a minority of Australian adolescents played them (6.0% for tennis and fewer than 1.4% for baseball and golf; AusSport, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e); 2) they had established, commercially available VR and PlayStation 5 games based on them; and 3) the basic premise of the rules and gameplay was known and/or understandable to most adolescents. In general, the games were set to the easiest and simplest modes. Images of the gameplay for each condition have been included in the supplementary materials.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe Meta Quest 2 was used for the VR and control conditions. This is a standalone VR device developed by Meta Platforms, Inc. that utilises a head mounted display and compatible \u0026lsquo;Touch\u0026rsquo; controllers for navigation and interaction in the virtual environment. It provides users with an immersive experience without the need for external sensors or a tethered connection to a PC or gaming console. The headset features a high-resolution display with a pixel density of 1832 x 1920 per eye at 120Hz and an 89\u0026deg; field of view. The PlayStation 5 was used for the videogame condition. Developed by Sony Interactive Entertainment, it features an AMD Ryzen CPU with eight Zen 2 cores and a custom AMD Radeon RDNA 2 GPU, supporting ray tracing and resolutions up to 4K at 120Hz. The DualSense controller enhances gameplay with adaptive triggers and haptic feedback, providing tactile sensations that simulate in-game actions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMeasures\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThree questionnaires were used throughout the study: a baseline questionnaire, the main questionnaire, and the gameplay questionnaire (all of which can be found in the supplementary materials). All questionnaires underwent three rounds of pilot testing, each with a different child aged between 12 and 14. This ensured that questions would be understandable to the target population, and that the overall length of the questionnaires were suitable.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOf primary importance were the six measures of intentions and attitudes towards sport collected via the main questionnaire at the baseline, post-test, and retention phases. For each measure, participants were asked four questions, relating to each of baseball, golf, tennis, and \u0026lsquo;any sport\u0026rsquo;. The \u0026lsquo;any sport\u0026rsquo; question was included as it is possible that playing a sports-game in VR may foster more positive intentions and attitudes towards sports in general. The measures, including example items, can be seen in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e below. Ratings were made using a 10cm visual analogue scale (VAS) with the anchors of extremely unlikely/strongly disagree and extremely likely/strongly agree. VAS\u0026rsquo; enable participants to make finer discriminations of their perceptions and are not limited by the discrete integer locations of Likert scales (Garcia-Perez \u0026amp; Alcala-Quintana, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMeasures of Intentions and Attitudes Towards Sport\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMeasure\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eExample Item\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1. Intention to participate in said sport\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIf there was a golf club near you and money was not an issue, how likely would you be to participate in GOLF in the next 12 months?\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2. Intention to attend said sport live\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIf there were golf tournaments near you and money was not an issue, how likely would you be to attend a live GOLF tournament in the next 12 months?\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3. Intention to watch said sport on television\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHow likely are you to watch a GOLF tournament on television in the next 12 months?\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4. Intention to follow events in said sport\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHow likely are you to follow the events in GOLF in other ways (e.g., social media, internet, non-live TV, etc.) in the next 12 months?\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5. Intention to play video/VR games in said sport\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHow likely are you to play videogames or VR games about GOLF in the next 12 months?\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6. Attitude towards the skills of said sport\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eThe skills and qualities needed to play GOLF are very high\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNotes.\u003c/em\u003e All items were repeated for baseball, tennis, and \u0026lsquo;any sport\u0026rsquo;. All intention items were constrained with the period of \u0026ldquo;in the next 12 months\u0026rdquo;. The Participate and Attend items included the text, \u0026ldquo;if there were [sport] near you and money was not an issue\u0026rdquo; to ensure that participants gave their ratings based on their attitude towards the sport, as opposed to any practical considerations.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe baseline questionnaire was administered during the baseline phase and measured demographic information, sports and physical activity participation (via 15 questions taken from Siesmaa et al.\u0026rsquo;s, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e, measure of children\u0026rsquo;s self-report sport participation), and VR experience (via eight custom-made questions specific to the present study).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe gameplay questionnaire was administered immediately after each condition during the intervention and measured perceptions of ease, physical effort, mental effort, complexity, and competence in the game, as well as desire to play the game again. These measures were included to assess participants' experiences and ensure they were comparable across the different game contexts. Specifically, it was hypothesised that these measures would not differ significantly between contexts, thus providing confidence that any observed differences in outcomes could be attributed to the sport and its modality (e.g., VR golf), rather than one\u0026rsquo;s individual experiences that may be unique to the chosen game. Non-significance in game perceptions is important given that considerable research has shown that one\u0026rsquo;s intention to participate in sport or physical activity is influenced by perceived effort (Chatzisarantis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e), competence (Lintunen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e), and enjoyment (Lewis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). An identical VAS scale was used for this and can again be found in the supplementary materials.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eProcedure\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor the intervention, participants arrived at an empty classroom in groups of three. Participants spent 20 minutes playing in each of the three game conditions (VR sports-game, traditional sports videogame, and non-sports VR game). Each game had been setup by members of the research team such that the participant was able to engage in the main game playing aspect immediately, rather than having to navigate through to this stage themselves. For instance, in the VR golf game, the participants would begin on the first tee, ready to swing, rather than at the \u0026lsquo;start\u0026rsquo; screen requiring them to select through a series of settings before they could commence playing. After each condition, participants completed the gameplay questionnaire described in the Measures subsection above. After the third and final condition, participants also completed the main questionnaire for a second (\u0026lsquo;post-test\u0026rsquo;) time.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe assignment of participants to each group was quasi-random based on their responses to the baseline questionnaire. That is, participants were excluded from being in the VR or videogame group of a particular sport if they reported: 1) that they had already played a VR game of that sport (occurring for seven participants); 2) that the sport was their favourite sport (one participant); 3) that they were currently participating in that sport recreationally or competitively more than once per month (seven participants); or 4) their average intention to engage with the sport at baseline was already very high (calculated at eight or more; six participants).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnalyses\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eData were initially organised such that each questionnaire item was treated as a separate dependent measure, with scores recorded at each time point for all participants. This approach could have resulted in 24 dependent measures (five items assessing intention and one item assessing attitude applied to each of the four contexts: baseball, golf, tennis, and any sport). To simplify the analysis and ensure conceptual clarity, the internal consistency of the five intention items was assessed for each context to determine whether they measured the same underlying construct. Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha values exceeded the threshold of 0.7 for all contexts (baseball\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.867, golf\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.723, tennis\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.842, favourite sport\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.791, any sport\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.746), indicating that the intention items formed a reliable scale in each case. Consequently, a composite score for intention was calculated by averaging the scores of the five intention items within each context. As a result, the final analyses focused on two dependent measures: intention and attitude. All differences are reported in centimetres, corresponding to units on the 10cm VAS used to measure intention and attitude.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLinear mixed models (LMMs) were conducted to examine the change over time as well as to compare groups. The LMMs included fixed effects of time (3 levels: baseline, post-test, and retention), group (VR, videogame, and control), and their interactions (time x group). A random intercept for subject was also fitted to each model. The mean difference for each of the outcomes (intention towards sport played in the VR/videogame condition; intention towards any sport) across the three designs were calculated and a 95% confidence interval was used to denote the imprecision of model parameter estimates. All analyses were conducted using the \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003elme4\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e package (Bates et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) within the R programming language (R Core Team, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIt is possible that potential effects found in the main analyses could simply be attributable to influential characteristics specific to the chosen game, such as how easy participants found it or how much effort was required to play the game. Thus, to evaluate whether the gameplaying experiences of participants were similar during each condition, one-way ANOVAs were conducted on the six items from the gameplay questionnaire (ease, physical effort, mental effort, complexity, competence, play again). Significant results were further analysed using Bonferroni post-hoc tests. These are termed the \u0026lsquo;Gameplay Checks\u0026rsquo; below.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGameplay Checks\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn design one (baseball), post-hoc tests following one-way ANOVAs revealed that participants in the control group perceived the game to be significantly easier than those in the videogame group (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(2,53)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.19, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.002, \u003cem\u003eη\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = .22; control \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.3, videogame \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.3). Similarly, the control group reported their game to be significantly less complicated than the videogame group (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(2,53)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.88, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.027, \u003cem\u003eη\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = .13; control \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.8, videogame \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.3). Perceptions from the VR group did not significantly differ from the videogame or control groups in any of the six gameplay checks.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn design two (golf), post-hoc tests following one-way ANOVAs revealed no significant differences between any of the groups in any of the six gameplay checks.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn design three (tennis), post-hoc tests following one-way ANOVAs revealed that participants in the videogame group perceived the game to require significantly less physical effort than those in the VR group or those in the control group (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(2,53)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.88, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, \u003cem\u003eη\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = .26; videogame \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.15, VR \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.98, control \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.91). Those in the videogame group also found their game to be more complicated than those in the control group (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(2,52)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.25, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.047, \u003cem\u003eη\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = .12; videogame \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.9, control \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.7). The videogame group also reported that they had less desire to play their game again compared to those in the control group (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(2,53)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.85, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.028, \u003cem\u003eη\u0026sup2;\u003c/em\u003e = .13; videogame \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.1, control \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.6). A table containing descriptive statistics for all gameplay measures in each design and for each group can be found in the Appendix.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe gameplay checks show that the VR golf game, golf videogame, and VR Fruit Ninja were comparable in terms of their gameplay. The VR baseball and baseball videogame were also comparable, though the VR Fruit Ninja was reported to be easier and less complicated than the baseball videogame. The VR tennis game and tennis videogame were mostly comparable, though the videogame \u0026ndash; unsurprisingly \u0026ndash; was deemed to require less physical effort. The VR Fruit Ninja game also required less physical effort than the VR tennis game, whilst it was reported to be less complicated and elicited a greater desire to play again than the tennis videogame. Overall, these analyses suggest that for the baseball design, any significant effects found in the main LLM are likely due to the experience of playing the sport in question, rather than the gaming or technological aspects of the experience. Any significant effects for the golf and tennis designs should be considered within the context of the gameplay differences found here.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMain Analyses\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results of the LMMs for each design are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. In these models, group x time interaction terms (e.g., \u0026lsquo;VR * Post\u0026rsquo;) represent the extent to which change in the outcome from baseline to a given time point (e.g., post-test) in the VR or videogame group differs from the change observed in the control group over the same time period. For instance, a significant positive VR * Post value would indicate that the VR group increased more (or decreased less) than the control group from baseline to post-test. Unless noted in the subsequent sections, effects were deemed inconclusive if confidence limits spanned meaningful regions in both positive and negative directions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLMMs for Overall Intention across Each Design\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"9\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDesign One: Baseball\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDesign Two: Golf\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDesign Three: Tennis\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBaseball\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAny Sport\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGolf\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAny Sport\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTennis\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAny Sport\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eGroup\u003c/b\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cb\u003e1\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVR - Con\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.35\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.60*\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.72\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-2.50**\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.90\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.80, 1.10]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.00, 3.20]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.05, 2.20]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-2.40, 0.94]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[-4.20, -0.83]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-2.60, 0.81]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVideo - Con\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.43\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.72\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.10***\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.90\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-2.50**\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-1.60*\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-2.00, 1.10]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.94, 2.40]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.96, 3.30]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.81, 2.60]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[-4.10, -0.88]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[-3.20, 0.00]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVideo - VR\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.08\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.90\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.60*\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.04\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.72\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.70, 1.50]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-2.60, 0.81]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.07, 2.10]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.00, 3.20]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.60, 1.70]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-2.40, 0.94]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTime\u003c/b\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cb\u003e2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePost - Base\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.00***\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.33\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.94***\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.33\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.94**\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.33\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.60, 1.50]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.24, 0.90]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.45, 1.40]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.24, 0.90]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.32, 1.60]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.24, 0.90]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRet - Base\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.51*\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.05\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.35\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.05\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.27\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.05\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.05, 0.98]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.65, 0.54]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.16, 0.87]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.65, 0.54]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.39, 0.93]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.65, 0.54]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRet - Post\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-0.52*\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.38\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-0.59*\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.38\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e-0.68*\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.38\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[-0.99, -0.06]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.98, 0.21]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[-1.1, -0.07]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.98, 0.21]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[-1.30, -0.01]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.98, 0.21]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eGroup * Time\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVR * Post\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.30**\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.36\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.09\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.30*\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.19\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.45, 2.20]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.50, 0.76]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.10, 0.91]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.98, 1.30]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.03, 2.70]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.00, 1.40]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVideo * Post\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.67\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.18\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.10*\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.19\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.31\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.36\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.23, 1.60]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.30, 0.98]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.12, 2.20]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.40, 1.00]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.94, 1.60]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.76, 1.50]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVR * Ret\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.57\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.96\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.39\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.13\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.20**\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.38, 1.50]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-2.20, 0.26]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.62, 1.40]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.30, 1.00]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e[0.82, 3.60]\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.17, 2.40]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVideo * Ret\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.13\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-0.38\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-1.10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.87\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0.96\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.71, 1.10]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.00, 1.30]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-1.50, 0.70]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-2.40, 0.17]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.48, 2.20]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e[-0.26, 2.20]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"9\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e A positive estimate indicates that the first group listed had a higher mean than the second group; a negative estimate indicates the opposite.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDesign One: Baseball\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor this design, 18 participants formed the VR group, 16 the videogame group, and 20 the control group. Of primary interest, the group x time interaction revealed that the VR group showed a significantly greater increase in baseball intention from baseline to post-test than the control group, with a difference of 1.30 units. However, this effect was not maintained at retention, and no significant interaction effects were found for the videogame group at either time point. In terms of overall trends over time, baseball intention increased by 1.00 unit from baseline to post-test, and remained elevated at retention (+\u0026thinsp;0.51 units from baseline), although there was a significant drop between post-test and retention (-0.52 units). In the group-level comparisons, a significant difference was found for intention towards any sport, with the VR group reporting scores 1.60 units higher than the control group.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor attitude, there were no significant effects found at the group (baseball, any sport), time (baseline, post-test, retention), or group x time interaction level (all \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.05). A table containing these LMMs can be found in the Appendix.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese results suggest that playing a VR baseball game has an immediate, positive impact on one\u0026rsquo;s intention to engage with baseball, but does not change their attitude towards the sport. The positive changes to intention were not retained four months later. Playing a baseball videogame has no effect.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDesign Two: Golf\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor this design, 20 participants formed the VR group, 18 the videogame group, and 16 the control group. Of primary interest, the group x time interaction revealed that the videogame group showed a significantly greater increase in golf intention from baseline to post-test than the control group, with a difference of 1.10 units. However, this effect was not maintained at retention, and no significant interaction effects were found for the VR group at either time point. In terms of overall trends over time, golf intention increased by 0.94 units from baseline to post-test, but significantly dropped between post-test and retention (-0.59 units). In the group level comparisons, significant differences were found for golf intention \u0026ndash; with the videogame group reporting scores 2.10 units higher than the control group \u0026ndash; and for intention towards any sport \u0026ndash; with the videogame group reporting scores 1.60 units higher than the VR group.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor attitude, there were no significant effects found at the group (golf, any sport), time (baseline, post-test, retention), or group x time interaction level (all \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.05). A table containing these LMMs can be found in the Appendix.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese results suggest that playing a golf videogame game has an immediate, positive impact on one\u0026rsquo;s intention to engage with golf, but does not change their attitude towards the sport. The positive changes to intention were not retained four months later. Playing a VR golf has no effect.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDesign Three: Tennis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor this design, 16 participants formed the VR group, 20 the videogame group, and 18 the control group. Of primary interest, the group x time interaction revealed that the VR group showed a significantly greater increase in tennis intention from baseline to post-test than the control group, with a difference of 1.30 units. Furthermore, this effect was maintained at retention (+\u0026thinsp;2.20 units). No significant interaction effects were found for the videogame group at either time point. In terms of overall trends over time, tennis intention increased by 0.94 units from baseline to post-test, but significantly dropped between post-test and retention (-0.68 units). In the group-level comparisons, significant differences were found for three comparisons: the control group reported higher scores for tennis intention compared to the VR group (2.50 units) and the videogame group (2.50 units), whilst also reporting higher scores for intention towards any sport compared to the videogame group (1.60 units).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor attitude, there were no significant effects found at the group (tennis, any sport), time (baseline, post-test, retention), or group x time interaction level (all \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.05). A table containing these LMMs can be found in the Appendix.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese results suggest that playing a VR tennis game has an immediate \u003cem\u003eand\u003c/em\u003e prolonged impact on one\u0026rsquo;s intention to engage with tennis, though it does not change their attitude towards the sport. Playing a tennis videogame has no effect.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe present study examined whether participation in a 20-minute VR sports-game and a 20-minute traditional sports videogame would influence adolescents\u0026rsquo; intentions and attitudes towards that same sport (or sport more generally) in the real world. Three identical designs (each addressing a different sport \u0026ndash; baseball, golf, and tennis) were employed, with a control group (non-sports VR game) used for comparison. Dependent variables were collected using questionnaires one-month prior (baseline), immediately after (post-test), and four months following the intervention (retention). Overall, the findings provide some support for hypothesis one. Playing VR baseball and VR tennis had a positive impact on intentions to engage with the respective sport, though only the tennis game maintained this impact four months later. Playing a VR golf game did not have an impact on intentions to engage with golf, though playing a golf videogame did; however, this impact was only immediate and not maintained long-term. No support was found for hypothesis two, with neither VR nor the videogames having an impact on attitude towards their respective sports at either post-test or retention.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOverall, the results from the present study show that a brief (20-minute) exposure to a baseball or tennis VR game \u0026ndash; but not videogame \u0026ndash; can increase the intentions of adolescents to engage with the same real-world version of that sport. Interestingly, for golf, the reverse is true: it is the videogame, but not the VR game, which has the positive impact on adolescents\u0026rsquo; intentions. These findings broadly support existing literature demonstrating positive associations between exposure to sports videogames and real-world sport interest (Adachi \u0026amp; Willoughby, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Jenny et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) but extend prior research by illustrating that the immersive qualitative of VR may uniquely enhance intentions for dynamic sports like baseball and tennis.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite the promising short-term results for VR and videogame interventions in baseball and tennis, their limited long-term effectiveness raises important considerations regarding intervention duration and reinforcement. One possible reason for the limited long-term effectiveness observed (except in tennis) could be the brief duration of exposure (only 20-minutes). Such short interventions might be insufficient to form stable, lasting intentions (Lamming et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). It is also possible that without reinforcement or follow-up sessions, the initial interest generated by novelty and immediate enjoyment diminishes over time. The lasting effect seen for tennis may be partially explained by external factors such as the increased exposure to tennis through the Australian Open occurring during the retention interval (all participants were residents of Victoria, Australia), which was not possible to control for given the logistical challenges of participant availability. This highlights the potential role that contextual reinforcement might play in sustaining long-term interest and warrants further systematic investigation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe observed differences across the three sports might indicate that the effectiveness of VR and videogames in enhancing intentions and attitudes depends on the characteristics of the sport itself. Sports involving direct interaction with an opponent or dynamic, high-impact gross motor skills (e.g., tennis and baseball) appear particularly suited to the immersive, embodied experiences of VR (Wilkins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Conversely, sports like golf, which rely on fine motor skills, accuracy, and are typically played individually in a slower-paced context, might benefit more from the strategy-focus and third-person perspective offered by traditional videogames. Future research should directly test these ideas by systematically comparing VR and videogame interventions across diverse sports with varying degrees of physical intensity, interactivity, and pacing.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhilst sport-specific suitability may explain the differing effectiveness of the VR and videogame interventions, the analyses of the gameplay checks indicate that inherent gameplay factors may have also played a contributing role. For golf, despite no significant differences emerging from gameplay perceptions between conditions, only the traditional videogame resulted in significant positive changes. Given golf\u0026rsquo;s low popularity and participation rates among Australian youth (AusSport, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), it seems unlikely that mere exposure to the sport through the videogame alone was responsible, otherwise similar positive effects would have also been observed in the VR condition. Instead, it may be that the third-person perspective of the videogame supports greater visual search strategies (Mann et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e), which could have enhanced participants\u0026rsquo; understanding of golf\u0026rsquo;s tactics, thereby increasing their interest compared to the first-person, immersive perspective of VR. Conversely, the baseball and tennis videogames were both perceived as being more complicated compared to their respective control conditions, and this increased complexity might partly explain the absence of significant positive effects for these videogames. Additionally, the tennis videogame was also associated with a decreased desire to play again, potentially reducing participants' motivation and limiting any positive impact on intentions. Importantly, the effectiveness observed for VR baseball and tennis interventions remains robust, as these gameplay issues pertained specifically to the videogame conditions. Collectively, these gameplay findings suggest that while sport-specific factors are critical, intervention effectiveness may also be sensitive to game complexity and the immediate enjoyment associated with each technology.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTurning to the results for our second hypothesis \u0026ndash; that for all three sports, neither VR nor videogames significantly changed the attitudes of participants \u0026ndash; we consider two possible explanations. First is the fact that the questionnaire contained only one item to measure attitude, but there were five separate items for the measure of intentions. It is therefore possible that the measure used for attitude had less sensitivity in terms of its capability to identify significant differences between the groups (DeVellis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Diamantopoulos et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Another explanation is that attitudes may be more resistant to change compared to intentions. Indeed, a meta-analysis that investigated behaviour change interventions revealed a higher weighted average effect size for intentions compared to attitudes, indicating that interventions attempting to change attitudes had less impact compared to those that attempted to change intentions (Steinmetz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). This difference may occur because intentions often reflect immediate, context-dependent motivations that are sensitive to short-term experiences, such as the brief exposure to VR and videogames in the present study, whereas attitudes represent deeper, more enduring beliefs that likely require more sustained or repeated exposure to VR and videogame interventions to meaningfully shift (Albarrac\u0026iacute;n \u0026amp; Shavitt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants\u0026rsquo; intentions and attitudes to any sport were also obtained to see if any effects of the digital interventions would extend to sport more generally, rather than being limited solely to the specific sport simulated in the VR or videogame. The non-significant findings show that this does not occur. It seems that the benefits of sports VR and videogames in promoting engagement with real-world sport may be specific to the sport simulated in the VR game itself. This lack of generalisation to other sports may be due to the specificity of the knowledge that participants acquire during their gaming experience (Adachi \u0026amp; Willoughby, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Kim \u0026amp; Jang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). When that knowledge is linked to a specific sport from a VR or videogame, it appears unlikely that participation in that game will encourage real-world engagement with sports other than the one depicted in the game itself. This lack of transfer to broader sport engagement may not be surprising but is valuable in highlighting the sport-specific impact that digital games interventions may have.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese findings have implications for how we conceptualise and promote engagement with sport. In this study, intentions were measured not only in terms of physical participation but also included adjacent behaviours such as watching televised events, engaging with related social media, and attending live matches. VR and videogame-based interventions may therefore support a wider spectrum of sport consumption, increasing general interest in the sporting domain. Importantly, this broader engagement has been associated with a higher likelihood of subsequent physical participation, particularly among youth (Tian et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), suggesting that digital interventions which initially foster non-participatory forms of interest may still contribute meaningfully to long-term behavioural outcomes and public health objectives. Building on this, the findings point to several valuable strategies for physical education pedagogy. VR and videogame-based experiences offer logistically feasible, cost-effective, and safe alternatives to traditional sport delivery, particularly for activities that are expensive, equipment-intensive, geographically restricted, or carry a higher risk of injury. For instance, adolescents living in rural or underserved areas might use VR to engage with water sports or snow-based sports for the first time, whilst activities such as golf or American football can be introduced without the usual financial or safety barriers. By facilitating exposure to a broader range of sports, these technologies can help educators increase inclusivity and diversify the types of experiences offered within school settings. In doing so, VR and videogames may serve as powerful tools for stimulating interest in sport and fostering long-term engagement, thereby supporting the well-established mental and physical health benefits associated with active lifestyles.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe present study is not without its limitations. One notable methodological decision was not including a measure of actual behavioural engagement with the sports, which would provide a more definitive assessment of intervention effectiveness. Although this was justified given the practical constraints of measuring behaviour among adolescents (e.g., reliance on parental support), future studies might replicate this approach with adult participants to better isolate intervention effects from external factors. Another consideration is the brief duration of the intervention (20-minutes). Whilst this may reflect the reality of contemporary sport engagement strategies, where short attention spans amongst adolescents necessitate brief, high-impact interventions (M\u0026uuml;ller et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), our findings are consequently limited to the acute effects of a single, short-duration digital sport experience. Thus, it remains unknown whether prolonged or repeated interventions would produce different or more sustained effects on adolescent intentions and attitudes towards sport.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe present study provides novel evidence that brief sport experiences delivered via VR and videogames may positively influence adolescent intentions towards specific sports, though these effects did not extend to adolescents\u0026rsquo; attitudes or across sports more generally. The sport-specific differences found suggest that the effectiveness of each digital intervention may depend on how well the sport\u0026rsquo;s features align with the strengths of the technology. Future research should investigate this so that interventions can be optimally implemented by practitioners to promote sport involvement. Overall, despite limited effects on attitudes, the results underscore the pedagogical value of integrating VR and videogame interventions into physical education settings.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCompeting Interests\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eInformed Consent and Ethical Approval\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEthical approval was obtained from the lead researcher\u0026rsquo;s institute (ID: HEC23333). The experimental procedures and protocols were performed according to the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants provided written informed consent prior to the experiments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor Note\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCorrespondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr Luke Wilkins, Sport, Performance and Nutrition (SPAN) Research Group, La Trobe University, La Trobe Sports Stadium, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia. Email: [email protected]. ORCID ID: 0000-0001-6735-1903\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor Contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLuke Wilkins, Adam Gorman, and Aden Kittel contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection was performed by Luke Wilkins, Samantha Merry, and Aden Kittel. Data analyses were performed by Minh Huynh. All authors contributed to the writing of the first draft of the manuscript, as well as providing feedback and editing for subsequent versions. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors would like to express their gratitude to Brayden Stone and Helen D\u0026rsquo;Elia at Ivanhoe Grammar School for their invaluable support in organising the logistics of this study. We are also deeply thankful to all the students who participated in the study for their enthusiasm and cooperation. Finally, we extend our appreciation to Emily Awad, Daniel Topping, David Huynh, Miracle Dumayas, and Dr Todd Pickering for their assistance in running the data collection sessions, ensuring the study\u0026apos;s smooth execution.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability statement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding details\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo funds, grants, or other support was received.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompliance with Ethical Standards\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was approved by the lead author\u0026rsquo;s institution\u0026rsquo;s Human Research Ethics Committee (ID: HEC23333), and all participants provided informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdachi PJ, Willoughby T (2015) From the couch to the sports field: The longitudinal associations between sports video game play, self-esteem, and involvement in sports. Psychol Popular Media Cult 4(4):329. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000042\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1037/ppm0000042\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdachi PJ, Willoughby T (2016) Does playing sports video games predict increased involvement in real-life sports over several years among older adolescents and emerging adults? J Youth Adolesc 45:391\u0026ndash;401. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0312-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10964-015-0312-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlbarrac\u0026iacute;n D, Shavitt S (2018) Attitudes and attitude change. Ann Rev Psychol 69:299\u0026ndash;327. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011911\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011911\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAusSport (2018) Australian Government: Australian Sports Commission. AusPlay Focus: Children\u0026rsquo;s Participation in Organised Physical Activity Outside of School Hours. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.sportaus.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/675562/AusPlay_focus_Children_Participation_2.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.sportaus.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/675562/AusPlay_focus_Children_Participation_2.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBack J, Johnson U, Svedberg P, McCall A, Ivarsson A (2022) Drop-out from team sport among adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Psychol Sport Exerc 61:102205. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102205\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102205\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBates D, M\u0026auml;chler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.18637/jss.v067.i01\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChatzisarantis NLD, Frederick C, Biddle SJH, Hagger MS, Smith B (2007) Influences of volitional and forced intentions on physical activity and effort within the theory of planned behaviour. J Sports Sci 25(6):699\u0026ndash;709. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02640410600818523\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02640410600818523\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChung KS, Goebert C, Johnson JD (2025) Sport spectatorship in a virtual environment: how sensory experiences impact consumption intentions. Int J Sports Mark Spons 26(2):305\u0026ndash;324. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-03-2023-0041\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/IJSMS-03-2023-0041\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCorr M, McSharry J, Murtagh EM (2018) Adolescent girls\u0026rsquo; perceptions of physical activity: A systematic review of qualitative studies. Am J Health Promotion 33(5):806\u0026ndash;819. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0890117118818747\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0890117118818747\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeVellis RF (2017) Scale development: Theory and applications, 4th edn. Sage Publications, Inc.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDębska M, Polechoński J, Mynarski A, Polechoński P (2019) Enjoyment and intensity of physical activity in immersive virtual reality performed on innovative training devices in compliance with recommendations for health. Int J Environ Res Public Health 16(19):3673. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16193673\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/ijerph16193673\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDiamantopoulos A, Sarstedt M, Fuchs C, Wilczynski P, Kaiser S (2012) Guidelines for choosing between multi-item and single-item scales for construct measurement: A predictive validity perspective. J Acad Mark Sci 40:434\u0026ndash;449. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0300-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11747-011-0300-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDonaldson SJ, Ronan KR (2006) The effects of sports participation on young adolescents' emotional well-being. Adolescence 41(162):369\u0026ndash;389\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDowsett R, Kinrade N, Whiteside D, Lawson D, Barnett C, Magistro D, Wilkins L (2023) Own goal or home run? Exploring the implementation of virtual reality training in football and baseball organisations. Sport Bus Management: Int J 13(6):665\u0026ndash;684. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/SBM-09-2022-0083\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/SBM-09-2022-0083\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEime RM, Young JA, Harvey JT, Charity MJ, Payne WR (2013) A systematic review of the psychological and social benefits of participation in sport for children and adolescents: Informing development of a conceptual model of health through sport. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Activity 10:98. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-10-98\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/1479-5868-10-98\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEime RM, Harvey JT, Charity MJ (2019) Sport drop-out during adolescence: is it real, or an artefact of sampling behaviour? Int J Sport Policy Politics 11(4):715\u0026ndash;726. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2019.1630468\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/19406940.2019.1630468\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEime RM, Harvey J, Charity M, Pankowiak A, Westerbeek H, Mesagno C (2024) \u003cem\u003eLeisure Studies\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;16. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2024.2347282\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/02614367.2024.2347282\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGarcia-Perez MA, Alcala-Quintana R (2023) Accuracy and precision of responses to visual analog scales: Iner- and intra-individual variability. Behav Res Methods 55:4369\u0026ndash;4381. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-02021-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3758/s13428-022-02021-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHo WK, Sum KWR, Tang D (2024) A scoping review on physical literacy domains associated with participation in sports video games among youth and adolescence. Curr Psychol 43:22146\u0026ndash;22157. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05997-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s12144-024-05997-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHu Z (2025) Virtual reality-based cooperative learning in physical education: Ways to improve physical performance and motivation of students. Int J Human\u0026ndash;Computer Interact 41(1):242\u0026ndash;253. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2297331\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10447318.2023.2297331\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJakobsson BT (2014) What makes teenagers continue? A salutogenic approach to understanding youth participation in Swedish club sports. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy 19(3):239\u0026ndash;252. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2012.754003\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/17408989.2012.754003\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJenny SE, Chung JJ, Rademaker SM, Schary DP (2017) Learning a sport through video gaming: A mixed-methods experimental study. Loading\u0026hellip; J Can Game Stud Association 10(17):1\u0026ndash;20\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJenny SE, Schary D (2014) Exploring the effectiveness of learning American football through playing the video game Madden NFL. Int J Technol Teach Learn 10(1):72\u0026ndash;87\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKemp BJ, Parrish A, Batterham M, Cliff DP (2020) Participation in domains of physical activity among Australian youth during the transition from childhood to adolescence: A longitudinal study. J Phys Activity Health 17(3):278\u0026ndash;286. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2018-0705\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1123/jpah.2018-0705\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKim J, Jang BG (2024) Perceived soccer literacy: A construct linking soccer video games play to soccer engagement. Sport Mark Q 33(1):66\u0026ndash;80. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.32731/SMQ.331.032024.05\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.32731/SMQ.331.032024.05\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKittel A, Lindsay R, Le Noury P, Wilkins L (2024) The use of extended reality technologies in sport perceptual-cognitive skill research: A systematic scoping review. Sports Med \u0026ndash; Open 10:128. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-024-00794-6\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s40798-024-00794-6\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLamming L, Pears S, Mason D, Morton K, Bijker M, Sutton S, Hardeman W (2017) What do we know about brief interventions for physical activity that could be delivered in primary care consultations? A systematic review of reviews. Prev Med 99:152\u0026ndash;163. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.02.017\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.02.017\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLe Noury P, Polman R, Maloney M, Gorman A (2022) A narrative review of the current state of extended reality technology and how it can be utilised in sport. Sports Med (Auckland N Z) 52(7):1473\u0026ndash;1489. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-022-01669-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s40279-022-01669-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLewis BA, Williams DM, Frayeh AL, Marcus BH (2016) Self-efficacy versus perceived enjoyment as predictors of physical activity behavior. Psychol Health 31(4):456\u0026ndash;469. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2015.1111372\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/08870446.2015.1111372\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLight RL, Harvey S, Memmert D (2013) Why children join and stay in sports clubs: case studies in Australian, French and German swimming clubs. Sport Educ Soc 18(4):550\u0026ndash;566. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2011.594431\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13573322.2011.594431\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLintunen T, Valkonen A, Leskinen E, Biddle SJH (1999) Predicting physical activity intentions using a goal perspectives approach: a study of Finnish youth. Scand J Med Sci Sports 9(6):344\u0026ndash;352. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0838.1999.tb00255.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1600-0838.1999.tb00255.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMann DL, Farrow D, Shuttleworth R, Hopwood M (2009) The influence of viewing perspective on decision-making and visual search behaviour in an invasive sport. Int J Sport Psycol 40(4):546\u0026ndash;564\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM\u0026uuml;ller C, Otto B, Sawitzki V, Kanagalingam P, Scherer JS, Lindberg S (2021) Short breaks at school: effects of a physical activity and a mindfulness intervention on children's attention, reading comprehension, and self-esteem. Trends Neurosci Educ 25:100160. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2021.100160\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.tine.2021.100160\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNiu Y, Dong Y, Zhang J, Zhang S, Cao Y (2025) The value of athletics class with the use of virtual reality games for better communication and socialization of students. Educ Inform Technol 30:693\u0026ndash;714. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13206-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10639-024-13206-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOliveira-Brochado A, Brito PQ, Oliveira-Brochado F (2017) Correlates of adults\u0026rsquo; participation in sport and frequency of sport. Sci Sports 32(6):355\u0026ndash;363. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2017.03.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.scispo.2017.03.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOpenAI (2025) \u003cem\u003eChatGPT (July 4 version) [Generative AI image output]\u003c/em\u003e. OpenAI. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://chat.openai.com/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://chat.openai.com/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOwen KB, Foley BC, Wilhite K, Booker B, Lonsdale C, Reece LJ (2024) Sport participation and academic performance in children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Activity 54(2):299\u0026ndash;306. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000002786\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1249/MSS.0000000000002786\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eR Core Team (2024) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.R-project.org/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.R-project.org/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSagnier C, Loup-Escande E, Lourdeaux D, Thouvenin I, Vall\u0026eacute;ry G (2020) User acceptance of virtual reality: An extended Technology Acceptance Model. Int J Human\u0026ndash;Computer Interact 36(11):993\u0026ndash;1007. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2019.1708612\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10447318.2019.1708612\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchlimm J, Mereu S, Breuer C (2024) Scoring big \u0026ndash; how sports video game features drive virtual ownership, willingness to pay and soccer participation. Int J Sports Mark Spons. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-06-2024-0135\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/IJSMS-06-2024-0135\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSiesmaa EJ, Blitvich JD, White PE, Finch CF (2011) Measuring children's self-reported sport participation, risk perception and injury history: Development and validation of a survey instrument. J Sci Med Sport 14(1):22\u0026ndash;26. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2010.04.006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jsams.2010.04.006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSong X, Ali NM, Salim M, M.H., Rezaldi MY (2025) A literature review of virtual reality exergames for older adults: Enhancing physical, cognitive, and social health. Appl Sci 15(1):351. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/app15010351\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/app15010351\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSteinmetz H, Knappstein M, Ajzen I, Schmidt P, Kabst R (2016) How effective are behavior change interventions based on the theory of planned behavior? Z Psychol 224(3):216\u0026ndash;233. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000255\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1027/2151-2604/a000255\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTian Y, Yang P, Zhang D (2023) The relationship between media use and sports participation behavior: A meta-analysis. Digit Health 9. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/20552076231185476\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/20552076231185476\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVella SA, Schweickle MJ, Sutcliffe JT (2020) Prevalence of drop-out from organised extracurricular sports and associations with body fat percentage during childhood and adolescence. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med 6:e000751. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2020-000751\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1136/bmjsem-2020-000751\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVisek AJ, Achrati SM, Mannix HM, McDonnell K, Harris BS, DiPietro L (2015) The Fun Integration Theory: Toward sustaining children and adolescents sport participation. J Phys Activity Health 12(3):424\u0026ndash;433. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2013-0180\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1123/jpah.2013-0180\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilkins L (2024) A framework for using virtual reality to enhance psychological performance in baseball. J Sport Psychol Action 1\u0026ndash;16. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/21520704.2024.2352864\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/21520704.2024.2352864\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhu DH (2025) Experiential virtual reality or informational video advertising? Assessing promotional effect on sport interest. Int J Sports Mark Spons 1464\u0026ndash;6668. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-09-2024-0252\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/IJSMS-09-2024-0252\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Digital interventions, Youth sport engagement, Virtual reality sport, Sports videogames, Physical education","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7049862/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7049862/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eYouth sport engagement brings substantial physical, mental, and social benefits, therefore establishing interventions which increase this are of profound importance. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of playing a virtual reality (VR) sports-game and a sports videogame on adolescents\u0026rsquo; intentions and attitudes towards the respective sport of each game. Across three sport-specific designs (baseball, golf, tennis), 54 adolescents (aged 13\u0026ndash;15) were randomly assigned to play a 20-minute VR sports-game, a traditional sports videogame, or a non-sport VR control game. Intentions and attitudes towards the sport depicted in each game were measured via questionnaires at baseline, post-test, and four-month retention. Linear mixed models revealed that \u003cem\u003eintentions\u003c/em\u003e towards baseball and tennis were significantly improved after playing the VR game, with this effect maintained at retention for tennis. \u003cem\u003eIntentions\u003c/em\u003e towards golf were significantly improved after playing the videogame but were not maintained at retention. Neither the VR nor videogame influenced adolescents\u0026rsquo; \u003cem\u003eattitudes\u003c/em\u003e towards the respective sports. We discuss how the sport-specific differences found suggest that the effectiveness of each digital intervention may depend on how well the sport\u0026rsquo;s features align with the strengths of the technology. Overall, despite limited effects on attitudes, the results underscore the pedagogical value of integrating VR and videogame interventions into physical education settings.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Virtual Reality vs Traditional Videogames: Which is More Effective at Enhancing Adolescent Intentions and Attitudes Towards Sport?","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-07-11 17:21:57","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7049862/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"5e17c6ff-a6f5-4709-9750-a0dd98033238","owner":[],"postedDate":"July 11th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-02-09T16:00:26+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-7049862","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-026-01318-1","journal":{"identity":"virtual-reality","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Virtual Reality"},"publishedOn":"2026-02-07 15:57:17","publishedOnDateReadable":"February 7th, 2026"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-07-11 17:21:57","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s10055-026-01318-1","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-026-01318-1","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7049862","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7049862","identity":"rs-7049862","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}