本研究旨在探討創新人格特質和預防火災知識的涉入程度，對國小三年級學生持續使用虛擬實境遊戲式學習導入意願的影響。研究是使用實驗法配合問卷調查法，同時實際使用防火虛擬實境遊戲式教學，以及截取（Capture）自防火虛擬實境遊戲內容編撰成傳統 PPT 課堂混合式教學，並自編問卷，分別收集兩組學生的創新人格特質、預防火災知識涉入程度、對虛擬實境遊戲式學習的態度，以及持續學習意願等相關資料。
研究結果顯示，其中對於預防火知識的學習後涉入程度，對學生的持續學習意願具有顯著的正向影響，而創新人格特質的表現反而不顯著。此外，女學生對於悅趣化虛擬實境遊戲式學習的態度與持續學習意願呈現高正相關。本研究結果可提供教育相關機構在推廣虛擬實境遊戲式學習時的參考，例如傳統教學的方式會讓不想學的學生更加不想學、只要在學習上善用悅趣化教材輔助教學，即無需再擔心學科是否較為生硬艱澀，就可提高學生們、尤甚是國小學生的持續學習意願和學習效果。

This study aims to explore the impact of innovativeness personality trait and the degree of involvement in fire prevention knowledge on the willingness of third-grade elementary school students to continue using virtual reality game-based learning. The study used an experimental method combined with a questionnaire survey method, while actually using fire prevention virtual reality game-based teaching, and capturing
from the fire prevention virtual reality game content compiled into traditional PPT classroom blended teaching, and self-compiled questionnaires, respectively collecting two groups of students' innovativeness personality trait, the degree of involvement in fire prevention knowledge, attitudes towards virtual reality game-based learning, and willingness to continue learning and other related information.
The results showed that among them, the degree of involvement in learning about fire prevention knowledge after learning had a significant positive impact on students' willingness to continue learning, while the performance of innovativeness personality trait was not significant. In addition, female students' attitudes towards gamified virtual reality gamebased learning and their willingness to continue learning are highly positively correlated. The results of this study can provide a reference for
education-related institutions when promoting virtual reality game-based learning, such as traditional teaching methods will make students who do not want to learn even less willing to learn, as long as they use gamified teaching materials to assist teaching in learning, there is no need to worry about whether the subject is more rigid and difficult... In this way, it will improve the willingness and learning effect of students, especially elementary school students, to continue learning.

一、中文部分
1. 王俊傑（2020）。前測在不同研究設計中的效應探討。國立政治大學教育學系碩士論文。
2. 王曉玲（2017）。虛擬實境技術應用於高中教學之研究。國立臺北教育大學教育研究所碩士論文。
3. 吳珈瑤（2014）。寓教於樂–悅趣化數位學習。國立政治大學廣電所。
4. 林吟霞、王彥方（2009）。情境學習在課程與教學中的運用。北縣教育。第 69 期，頁 69-72。
5. 林宗彥、張永康（2017）。遊戲化學習對國小學童英語學習成效之研究。教育資料與研究，第 109 期，頁 91-116。
6. 林宗賢、郭冠廷、楊泓鑫（2021）。台灣大專院校火災教育之現況與建議。消防技術學刊，28（1），頁 31-42。
7. 林宛萱（2019）。虛擬實境在高中地理教學之應用研究。國立彰化師範大學地理學系碩士論文。
8. 林佳欣（2021）。中學生對虛擬實境火災教育遊戲的接受程度及使用意願之研究。國立彰化師範大學科技應用與人力資源發展學系碩士論文。
9. 林昱廷、林長信、施如齡、曾家俊（2017）。歷史文化學習之數位體感遊戲開發與成效評估。 數位學習科技期刊，9（4），109-131。
10. 林美惠（2020）。創新人格特質與大學生對虛擬實境遊戲教材的接受程度及使用意願之研究。國立台北教育大學教育科技學系碩士論文。
11. 周春美（2010）。技專校院商科教師教學實務之應用分析：認知學徒制的觀點。商管科技季刊。11（2），頁 303-313。
12. 高鈺涵（2008）。應用體感互動遊戲於自閉症兒童感覺統合訓練之研究。臺北科技大學創新設計研究所碩士論文。
13. 高憲宗（2018）。遊戲式學習對國中生科學學習成效之研究。教育研究集刊，第 64 期，頁 51-86。
14. 陳永佳（2018）。消費者行動支付使用意圖之研究-TAM 模型觀點。淡江大學國際行銷碩士在職專班。
15. 陳志洪（2020）。新興科技於高中職資訊科技教材發展與評估—悅趣化教學策略。國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育研究所。
16. 陳怡君、陳佩君、黃淑芬（2015）。遊戲化學習對學習成效與學習態度之影響：以英語為外語學習為例。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理學報，第 47 卷，第 1 期，頁 55-77。
17. 陳芳慈（2018）。大學生預防火災知識涉入程度對火災安全行為的影響。國立中興大學消防科學學系碩士論文。
18. 陳昱聖（2005）。互動玩具設計與開發-以體感互動裝置增進多元智能之玩具為例。元智大學資訊傳播學系碩士論文。
19. 陳思穎（2018）。前測對 EFL 閱讀學習成效之影響。國立台灣師範大學英語學系碩士論文。
20. 陳慧文（2018）. 國小教師預防火災知識、態度與實施情形之研究。檢自https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi/
21. 許惠萍、陳淑如（2018）。遊戲化學習與傳統教學法對國小學童數學學習成就之比較研究。教育資料與研究，第 112 期，頁 107-134。
22. 許慧華（2019）。遊戲化教學應用於預防災害教育之研究。國立彰化師範大學技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文。
23. 梁佳蓁（2015）。情境學習理論與幼兒教育課程的運用與實踐。臺灣教育評論月刊，4（7），136- 140。
24. 梁朝雲（2010）。實踐[育樂於教]理念的數位學習設計。T&D飛訊，第91期，頁1-19。
25. 梁維芬、陳聯瑛、黃玉瑄（2021）。遊戲化教學對國小五年級學生英語學習成效之影響。科學教育研究與發展期刊，第19卷，第2期，頁91-117。
26. 張美慧（2019）。創新人格特質對於大學生遊戲化學習的影響。國立成功大學資訊工程研究所碩士論文。
27. 張家豪（2019）。悅趣化數位遊戲教材對國小學生預防火災知識學習成效與學習動機之影響。國立中正大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
28. 張家興、林貴鴻、賴泰穎（2015）。火災教育融入國小科學課程之行動研究。科學教育學刊，23（2），123-145。
29. 張雅筑（2019）。國小學生對悅趣化預防火災數位遊戲教材之接受度及偏好研究。國立臺中教育大學幼兒教育學系碩士論文。
30. 張鈿富、林松柏、周文菁（2012）。臺灣高中學生學習投入影響因素之研究。教育資料集刊，第五十四輯。
31. 張嘉芬、張銘志、黃正祥（2019）。遊戲化學習對學生學習動機與數學學習成效之影響：以國小五年級為例。數位學習科技期刊，第13卷，第2期，頁65-84。
32. 張憲庭（2005）。〈少子化現象對學校經營管理之衝擊與因應之道〉《學校行政雙月刊》，36， 87-93 頁。
33. 黃淑慧（2019）。虛擬實境遊戲於國中地理教學之研究。國立臺中教育大學教育研究所碩士論文。
34. 黃靖淳（2008）。遊戲式學習教材案例分享。農業推廣充電站電子期刊。
35. 黃麗蓮（2018）。前測後測實驗法在數學學習中之應用。國立臺北教育大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
36. 葉彥麟（2006）。A 型人格特質理論之探討。國立彰化師範大學工業教育與技術研究所。
37. 彭康健（2015）。手作與數位之間。臺灣建築學會會刊雜誌，8-11。
38. 彭雲鳳（2018）。行動支付使用意圖因素之研究。國立東華大學國際企業學系。
39. 楊敏（2008）。遊戲化學習的設計與研究。教育研究，第 5 期，頁 20-27。
40. 劉家呈（2020）。探討體感互動遊戲對幼兒數學學習、動作技能及執行功能影響之研究。國立臺灣師範大學。
41. 劉家萱（2021）。國小學生對悅趣化預防火災數位遊戲教材之意願研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系碩士論文。
42. 劉嫚妮（2008）。應用體感互動遊戲於自閉症兒童認知學習之研究。臺北科技大學創新設計研究所碩士論文。
43. 鄭欣怡、林欣穎、鄭景維（2019）。台灣地區國小學童火災知識、風險認知與自我效能之研究。消防學報，29（2），1-16。
44. 賴明洲、陳炳宏、林信輝（2017）。國民中學生火災逃生知識、技能、態度及其相關因素之研究。綜合教育學刊，5（2），67-82。
45. 賴建丞（2005）。應用電腦視覺技術於互動體感遊戲之設計與探討。元智大學資訊傳播學系碩士論文。
46. 賴俊雄（2019）。以遊戲式學習探討國中生數學學習成效之研究。教育科學研究期刊，第64卷，第1期，頁1-31。
47. 盧姝如16、劉英傑、莊英君、彭正平（2012）。體感互動遊戲應用於國小閩南語鄉土語言課程教學之研究。課程與教學季刊，15（2），169-192。
48. 盧瑞山、林儀、莊玉屏（2021）。以悅趣化數位學習架構研究提升自主閱讀成效。德明財經科技大學資訊管理系。
49. 蕭敏瑛（2019）。國小防火教育教師專業成長議題探究。教育研究資訊網。
檢自 https://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/
50. 蘇冠琳（2009）。來源國形象認知對消費者價格敏感度之影響-以消費者創新採用特質為干擾變數。中國文化大學國際貿易學系。
二、英文部分
1. Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, R. B., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does play
make for better learning? A systematic review. PloS one, 6 (10), e27757.
2. Allport, Gordon W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. Holt, Reinhart &
Winston.
3. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. Springer.
4. Annetta, L., Minogue, J., Holmes, S., & Cheng, M. T. (2009). Investigating the
impact of video games on high school students' engagement and learning about
genetics. Computers & Education, 53 (1), 74-85.
5. Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher
education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25 (4), 297-308.
6. Bagon, S., & Vodopivec, J. L. (2016). Motivation for using ICT and pupils with
learning difficulties. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning,
11 (10), 70-75.
7. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptions of perceptual symbols. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 22 (4), 637-660.
8. Besar, P. H. S. N. B. P. H. (2018). Situated Learning Theory: The Key to Effective
Classroom Teaching. International Journal for Educational, Social, Political &
Cultural Studies, 1 (1), 49-60.
9. Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: An
expectation-confirmation model. MIS quarterly, 25 (3), 351-370.
10. Boocock, S. S., & Schild, E. O. (Eds.). (1968) Simulation games in learning. Sage.
11. Brown, A., & Miller, T. (2021). The impact of pretesting on student learning.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(2), 325-335.
12. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture
of Learning. Educational Researcher, 1 (1), 32-42.
13. Bruce Fuller, Edward Bein, Margaret Bridges, Yoonjeon Kim, Sophia RabeHesketh (2017). Do academic preschools yield stronger benefits? Cognitive
emphasis, dosage, and early learning. Volume 52, 1-11.
14. Carvalho, M., Gomes, A., & Carvalho, C. (2017). Using virtual reality to train
evacuation behaviours: A systematic review of the literature. Safety Science, 93,
185-197.
15. Chang, M., De Angelis, M., Gaeta, A., Orciuoli, F., & Parente, M. (2020).
Designing situated learning experiences for smart cities: the Inf@nziaDigiTales3.6
experience. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-18.
16. Chen, K., Wang, Y., & Li, L. (2019). Investigating the effects of gamified learning
on preschool children’s achievement motivation and learning effectiveness.
Computers & Education, 132, 64-76.
17. Chen, X., Li, X., Wang, R., Hu, M., & Huang, X. (2019). Virtual reality in fire
safety education: Effects of fire drill experience and fire safety knowledge on
evacuation behavior. Applied Sciences, 9(9), 1884.
18. Chen, X., & Liu, J. (2017). A study of the relationship between students' learning
motivation and learning effect under the traditional teaching mode. International
Education Studies, 10(7), 9-14.
19. Chen, Y.-C. (2019). Effect of mobile augmented reality on learning performance,
motivation, and math anxiety in a math course. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 57(7), 1695-1722.
20. Clarke, R. (2012). Developing a fire safety education programme for primary
school children: a case study of two schools in the UK. Fire Safety Journal, 51,
57-65.
21. Clawson, J. G. (2010). The effectiveness of fire safety education and home fire
safety visits: a systematic review. Annual Review of Nursing Research, 28 (1),
235-266.
22. Cox, D. (2019). Digital fire safety education: bridging the digital divide. Fire
Safety Journal, 105, 1-6.
23. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience.
Harper & Row.
24. Danial Hooshyar, Margus Pedaste (2019). Gaming to Computational Thinking:
An Adaptive Educational Computer Game-Based Learning Approach. 59 (3).
25. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user
acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13 (3).319-340.
26. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of
computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management
Science, 35(8). 982-1003.
27. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Handbook of self-determination research.
University Rochester Press.
28. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R. and Nacke, L. (2011). ‘From game design
elements to gamefulness: Defining gamification’, In Proceedings of the 15th
international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media
environments, 9-15.
29. Dianne Cyr, Milena Head, Alex Ivanov. (2006). Design aesthetics leading to mloyalty in mobile commerce. 43, (8), 950-963.
30. Dicheva, D., Dichev, C., Agre, G., & Angelova, G. (2015). Gamification in
education: A systematic mapping study. Journal of Educational Technology &
Society, 18 (3), 75-88.
31. Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2005). The systematic design of instruction
(6th ed.). Pearson.
32. Dyer, J. H., & H. Singh, (1998). The Relational View：Cooperative and sources
of interorganizational competitive advantage,23, 660-679.
33. Eisenhart, M. L., & Shih, J. C. (2020). Designing assessments for deeper learning
in game-based and virtual reality environments. Educational Technology Research
and Development, 68(2), 685-709.
34. Ellen A. Skinner, Thomas A. Kindermann, & Carrie J. Furrer. (2008). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: conceptualization and
assessment of Children's behavioral and emotional participation in academic
activities in the classroom. 69, (3).
35. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement:
Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research,
74(1), 59-109.
36. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy,
ACM Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), 1-4.
37. Gee, J. P. (2007). Good video games and good learning. Phi Kappa Phi Forum, 87
(2), 33-37.
38. Gentile, D. A., Gentile, J. R., & Anderson, C. A. (2018). Violent video games as
exemplary teachers: A conceptual analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
47(2), 257-266.
39. Georgiou, Y., & Ioannou, A. (2021). Developing, enacting and evaluating a
learning experience design for technology-enhanced embodied learning in math
classrooms. TechTrends, 65, 38-50.
40. Graham, C. R., & Scarborough, H. S. (2007). Enhancing teaching and learning
through educational data mining and learning analytics: An issue brief. US
Department of Education.
41. Guo, Y. R., & Goh, D.-H.-L. (2016). Evaluation of affective embodied agents in
an information literacy game. Computers & Education, 103, 59-75.
42. Hall, J. R. (2015). Impact of fire safety education on smoke alarm usage and
maintenance. Journal of Burn Care & Research, 36 (2), 408-412.
43. Hansen, W. B., Graham, J. W., Wolkenstein, B. H., Rohrbach, L. A., & Hallfors,
D. B. (2011). Program integrity as a moderator of prevention program
effectiveness: Results from the all stars cluster randomized trial. Prevention
science, 12(3), 210-221.
44. Harackiewicz, J. M., Canning, E. A., Tibbetts, Y., Giffen, C. J., Blair, S. S., Rouse,
D. I., & Hyde, J. S. (2016). Closing achievement gaps with a utility-value
intervention: Disentangling race and social class. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 111(5), 745-765.
45. Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2014). Use of Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and
higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational Research
Review, 9, 47-64.
46. H. Jenkins, K. Squire, & P. Tan. (2003). You can't bring that game to school:
Designing games to teach. Computers in Entertainment(CIE).
47. Hoysniemi, J., Hamalainen, P., Turkki, L. & Rouvi, T. (2005). Children's intuitive
gestures in vision-based action games. Communications of the ACM, 48(1), 44-
50.
48. Hsiu-Sen Chiang. (2013). Continuous usage of social networking sites: The effect
of innovation and gratification attributes.
49. Hsu, P. C., Lin, Y. L., & Liang, C. W. (2012). A study on fire safety education for university students. Procedia Engineering, 42, 1285-1291.
50. Hsu, S.H., Wen, M.H. and Wu, M.C. (2009), ‘Exploring user preferences as
predictors of MMORPG addiction’, Computers and Education, Vol. 53, No. 3, pp.
990-999.
51. Huang, C. Y., Yang, S. C., & Cheng, Y. M. (2017). A study of university students’
e-learning continuance intention: Perspectives from a hybrid TAM and IS success
model. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(8), 996-1011.
52. Hung, H. T., Hwang, G. J., & Huang, I. (2012). A project-based digital storytelling
approach to improving students' learning motivation, problem-solving
competence and learning achievement. Journal of Educational Technology &
Society, 15(4), 368-379.
53. Hwang, G. J., & Wu, P. H. (2012). Advancements and trends in digital game-based
learning research: a review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), E6-E10.
54. Hwang, G.J., Wu, P.H. and Chen, C.C. (2012). An online game approach for
improving students' learning performance in web-based problem-solving activities.
Computers & Education, 59(4), 1246-1256.
55. Ibánez, G., de Jesús Luis, J., & Wang, A. I. (2015). Learning recycling from
playing a Kinect game. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 5(3), 25-
44.
56. James C. Kaufman., & Ronald A. Beghetto (2009). Beyond big and little: The four
C model of creativity. 13 (1), 133–169.
57. James J. Appleton, Sandra L. Christenson, Dongjin Kim, Amy L. Reschly. (2006).
Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student
Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology. 44, (5), 427-445.
58. J. B. Biggs. (1985). The role of metalearning in study processes.
Volume55, Issue3. 185-212.
59. Jennifer A. Fredricks, Phyllis C. Blumenfeld, Alison H. Paris. (2004). School
engagement: Potential of the concept. Review of Educational Research. 74, (1),
59–109.
60. Jin Ho Kim, Hak Yang Kim, Na Young Kim, Sang Woo Kim, Jae Gyu Kim, Jae
Jun Kim, Im Hwan Roe, Jeong Kee Seo, Jae Geon Sim, Hyoengsik Ahn, Byung
Chul Yoon, Sang Woo Lee, Yong Chan Lee, In Sik Chung, Hwoon Yong Jung,
Weon Seon Hong, Kyoo Wan Choi. (2001). Seroepidemiological study of
Helicobacter pylori infection in asymptomatic people in South Korea. Journal of
Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 16, 969–975.
61. Jisun Jung & Cecilia Ka Yuk Chan (2017). Academics’ Perception on Research
Versus Teaching and Their Recognition. The Changing Academic Profession in
Hong Kong. 45–160.
62. Johanna Höysniemi, Perttu Hämäläinen, Laura Turkki, Teppo Rouvi (2005).
Children's intuitive gestures in vision-based action games. Communications of the
ACM, Volume 48(1), 44–50.
63. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2014). Cooperative learning: History, theory,
and research. Teachers College Press.
64. Johnson, A., Miller, T., & Smith, G. (2018). The effectiveness of fire prevention
programs: A systematic review. Fire Safety Journal, 102, 45-52.
65. Johnson-Glenberg, M. C. (2018). Immersive VR and education: Embodied design
principles that include gesture and hand controls. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5,
81.
66. Jones, M. (2018). Public fire safety education programs: a systematic review. Fire
Technology, 54 (3), 937-965.
67. Jong, M., Shang, J., Lee, F., & Lee, J. (2006). A new vision for empowering
learning and teaching with IT: The VISOLE approach. Proceedings of the Hong
Kong International IT in Education Conference 2006: Capacity building for
learning through IT, (pp. 18-25). Hong Kong, China.
68. Kao, G., et al. (2018). Effects of Gamification-Based Teaching on Students’
Motivation and Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Educational
Computing Research, 56 (7), 973–997.
69. Karlsson, B. (2016). Fire safety engineering in the 21st century: achievements and
challenges. Fire Technology, 52 (3), 679-708.
70. Kebritchi, M., Hirumi, A. & Bai, H. (2010). The effects of modern mathematics
computer games on mathematics achievement and class motivation. Computers &
Education, 55 (2), 427-443.
71. Koszalka, T. A., & Ntloedibe-Kuswani, G. S. (2010). Literature Review: The Use
of Electronic Resources for Teaching and Learning. Journal of Educational
Technology Development and Exchange, 3 (1), 1-16.
72. Kuligowski, E. D., Peacock, R. D., & Hoskins, B. L. (2014). Effectiveness of fire
drills and emergency evacuation training for children in K-12 schools. Fire
Technology, 50 (5), 1165-1190.
73. Leander, K. M., & Hollett, T. (2017). The embodied rhythms of learning: From
learning across settings to learners crossing settings. International Journal of
Educational Research, 84, 100-110.
74. Lee, J., & Hammer, J. (2011). Gamification in education: What, how, why bother?
Academic Exchange Quarterly, 15 (2), 1-5.
75. Liang, Y., Huang, J., & Wei, Q. (2020). Research on the Application of Innovative
Teaching Materials in Primary School Science Teaching. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1537 (1), 012041.
76. Lin, C., & Chang, Y. (2017). Pretesting as a tool for differentiated instruction.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 282-291.
77. Lin, H., & Li, L. (2021). Research on the Design and Application of Innovative
Teaching Materials Based on Information Technology. International Journal of
Emerging Technologies in Learning, 16 (2), 122-130.
78. Lisa Boonk, Hieronymus J.M. Gijselaers, Henk Ritzen, Saskia Brand-Gruwel,
(2018). A review of the relationship between parental involvement indicators and
academic achievement. Educational Research Review. 24, 10-30.
79. Liu, E. Z. F., & Lin, C. H. (2009). Developing evaluative indicators for educational
computer games. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 174-178.
80. Liu, J., Zhao, X., & Wu, L. (2019). Research on the Development and Application
of Innovative Teaching Materials in Higher Education. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1234(1), 012033.
81. Loring, R. (1998). Situatedlearning: understanding contextual learning. Retrieved
from http://ics.soe.umich.edu/
82. Luo, T., Liao, C., & Chen, C. (2019). The effects of educational gamification on
student learning outcomes: A systematic review of empirical research. Journal of
Educational Technology & Society, 22(2), 1-16.
83. Mahboubeh Shirzad, Elham Shakibazadeh, Abbas Rahimi Foroushani,
Mehrandokht Abedini, Hamid Poursharifi & Sohrab Babaei (2020). Effect of
“motivational interviewing” and “information, motivation, and behavioral skills”
counseling interventions on choosing the mode of delivery in pregnant women: a
study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
84. Malone, T. & Lepper, M. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic
motivations of learning. In R. E. Snow& M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning, and
instruction, 3. 223-253.
85. Malone, T. W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction.
Cognitive science, 4(4), 333-369.
86. Mark R. Lepper. (2009). Motivational Considerations in the Study of
Instruction.289-309.
87. Marshall, A. (2020). Evaluating the use of virtual reality as a fire safety training
tool. Fire Technology, 56 (1), 303-325.
88. McFarlane, A. Sparrowhawk, A. & Heald, Y. (2002). Report on the educational
use of games: A Cambridge.
89. McLellan, H. (1994). Situated learning: Continuing the conversation. Educational
Technology, 34(10), 7-8.
90. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of
Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of
Online Learning Studies. US Department of Education.
91. Mengjiao Li, Jie Chen, Naishi Li & Xinying Li. (2014). A Twin Study of
Problematic Internet Use: Its Heritability and Genetic Association With Effortful
Control.
92. Michael, D., & Chen, S. L. (2006). Serious Games: Games That Educate, Train,
and Inform. Muska & Lipman/Premier-Trade.
93. Miller, L.M., et al. (2011). Learning and motivational impacts of a multimedia
science game. Computers & Education, 57 (1), 1425-1433.
94. Moore, J. L., Lin X., Schwartz, D. T., Campbell, O., Hmelo, C., & Cognitive and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1994). The relationship between situated
cognition and anchored instruction: a response to tripp, 34(10), 28-32.
95. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kalman, H. K., & Kemp, J. E. (2019). Designing
effective instruction (8th ed. ). Wiley.
96. Mowen, J.C. & Minor MS. (2001). Consumer behavior: a framework. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
97. Nonaka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation,
Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37
98. Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of
satisfaction decisions. Journal of marketing research, 17 (4), 460-469.
99. Pao-Nan Chou, Chi-Cheng Chang, Ching-Hsin Lin, (2017). BYOD or not: A
comparison of two assessment strategies for student learning. 74, 63-71.
100. Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital Game-Based Learning in high school Computer
Science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation.
Computers & Education, 52(1), 1-12.
101. Papastergiou, M. (2009). Exploring the potential of computer and video games for
health and physical education: A literature review. Computer & Education. 53, 3,
603-622.
102. Pavic, Sandra. (2020). Analysis in how user experience influences consumer
attitude towards VR as a communication medium. IIESpace.
103. Pierfy, D. A. (1977). Comparative Simulation Game Research: Stumbling Blocks
and Stepping stones. Simulation and Games, 8 (2), 255-268.
104. Pilgrim, M. E., Bledsoe, C., & Reily, R. C. (2017). Implementing blended learning:
Policy, administration, and pedagogy. Springer.
105. Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Hayward, E. O. (2009). Design factors for
educationally effective animations and simulations. Journal of Computing in
Higher Education, 21(1), 31-61.
106. Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based
learning. Educational Psychologist, 50 (4), 258-283.
107. Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither Market nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of
Organization,12, 295-336.
108. Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital game-based learning. McGraw-Hill.
109. Proulx, G., & Rafter, T. A. (2018). The impact of smoke alarms on home fire
deaths. Journal of Fire Sciences, 36 (6), 523-536.
110. Ren, W., Li, W., & Li, Y. (2019). A review of recent research on the effects of
gamification in physical education. Education Sciences, 9 (2), 88.
111. Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S., & Krapp, A. (2012). The role of interest in learning and
development. Psychology Press.
112. Rieber, L. P. (1996). Seriously considering play: Designing interactive learning
environments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games.
Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(2), 43–58.
113. Rita Walczuch, Jos Lemmink, Sandra Streukens. (2007). The effect of service employees’ technology readiness on technology acceptance. 44(2), 206-215.
114. Ritu Agarwal, Jayesh Prasad. (1998). A Conceptual and Operational Definition of
Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology.
115. Ritu Agarwal, Elena Karahanna. (2000). Time Flies When You're Having Fun:
Cognitive Absorption and Beliefs about Information Technology Usage. 24,
(4),665-694.
116. Rosas, R., et al. (2003). Beyond Nintendo: Design and assessment of educational
video games for first and second grade students. Computers & Education, 40(1),
71-94.
117. Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues
as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1-42.
118. Schultze, U., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2010).Virtual Worlds: A Performative
Perspective on Globally Distributed, Immersive Work,Information Systems
Research, 21(4), 810-821.
119. Shen, H., Huang, R., & Luo, Q. (2021). Research on the Design of Innovative
Teaching Materials Based on Multimedia Technology. Educational Technology &
Society, 24 (1), 201-210.
120. Sindermann, C., Golde, S., Kuhn, P. H., & Weichert, F. (2020). Can virtual reality
increase students' motivation and learning performance in the domain of fire
protection? An experimental study comparing VR and PowerPoint. Computers &
Education, 154, 103925.
121. Slater, M., Usoh, M., & Steed, A. (2006). Depth of presence in virtual
environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7(6), 610-617.
122. Smith, J. (2009). The effectiveness of fire drills and the use of simulation in the
promotion of fire safety amongst school children. Fire Safety Journal, 44 (6), 891-
898.
123. Smith, J., & Johnson, A. (2018). Fire Safety Education: Best Practices and
Recommendations. Journal of Fire Protection Studies, 45 (2), 112-128.
124. Smith, J., Jones, M., & Brown, T. (2016). The importance of pre-testing for the
control group design in social psychology: Evidence from healthcare. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 67-73.
125. Smith, R., & Brown, E. (2019). Evaluating the impact of fire safety education in
schools: A longitudinal study. Journal of Fire Prevention Education, 21 (3), 112-
125.
126. Smith, R., Howe, J., & Higgins, S. (2013). The impact of immersive simulations
on young people's safety awareness and knowledge of road accidents. Learning,
Media and Technology, 38(2), 210-225.
127. Stuart J. Barnes, & Martin Böhringer, (2010). Modeling Use Continuance
Behavior in Microblogging Services: The Case of Twitter. 1-10.
128. Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and Situated Action: The Problem of Human
machine Communication. Cambridge University Press.
129. Sun, Y., Liu, L., Peng, X., Dong, Y., & Barnes, S. J. (2014). Understanding Chinese users' continuance intention toward online social networks : An integrative
theoretical model. Electronic Markets,24(1),57-66.
130. Susan M. Land, Michael J. Hannafin, Kevin Oliver (2012). Student-Centered
Learning Environments, Foundations, Assumptions and Design.
131. Thompson, R., Davis, S., Young, M., & Bridge, H. (2020). Virtual reality in fire
safety education: Impact on student motivation and learning outcomes. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 58(1), 123-143.
132. Tyre, M. J. and E. von Hippel. (1997). The Situated Nature of Adaptive Learning
in Organizations, OrganizationScience, 8 (1), 71-83.
133. Vaquero, L. M., López-Menéndez, A., & Cabrera, L. (2020). Blended learning: An
exploration of its applicability in higher education. International Journal of
Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17 (1), 1-18.
134. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance
of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27 (3), 425-478.
135. Wang, W., Ngai, E. W. T., Wei, H. (2012). Explaining instant messaging
continuance intention : the role of personality. Journal of Human-Computer
Interaction, 28, 500-510.
136. Weinhold, T. (2015). The effectiveness of fire safety education programs: a
systematic review. Fire Technology, 51 (4), 949-979.
137. West, M. A., & Farr, J. L. (1990). Innovation at work. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr
(Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational
strategies,3–13.
138. Wolfberg, P.J. (1999). Play and Imagination in Children with Autism, Teachers
College Press.
139. Wu, C. C., Huang, Y., Hsu, C. L. (2014). Benevolence trust : A key determinant of
user continuance use of online social networks. Information Systems and eBusiness Management,12(2), 189-211.
140. Wu, C. H., Chen, Y. C., Cheng, Y. B., & Yang, Y. T. C. (2012). The effects of
mobile natural-science learning based on the 5E learning cycle: A case study.
Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 237–247.
141. Xie, H., Wei, X., & Wu, J. (2019). Research on the Application of Innovative
Teaching Materials in College English Teaching. Journal of Physics: Conference
Series, 1326(1), 012015.
142. Xiao, X., Ding, Y., & Chen, Y. (2019). Design and Application of Innovative
Teaching Materials Based on Personalized Learning. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1234(1), 012034.
143. Yannier, N., Koedinger, K. R., & Hudson, S. E. (2015). Learning from mixedreality games: Is shaking a tablet as effective as physical observation? In B. Begole,
J. Kim, & K. Inkpen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on
human factors in computing systems, 1045-1054.
144. Yingying Xie, Congcong Yuan, Mengru Sun, Jie Sun, Ningnannan Zhang, Wen
Qin, Feng Liu, Hui Xue, Hao Ding, Sijia Wang, Jinyan He, Lizhi Hu, Xiaoxia Li,Chunshui Yu. (2022). Personality and brain contribute to academic achievements
of medical students. Volume 16,
145. Zepke, N., & Leach, L. (2010). Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for
action. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11 (3), 167-177.
146. Zhang, M., Li, Y., & Liang, H. (2021). Design and Development of Innovative
Teaching Materials Based on Personalized Learning. Journal of Educational
Technology Development and Exchange, 14 (1), 75-81.