Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial

Dominguez Jacques; Dominguez Benoît; Adrien Parietti; Arthur Alain; Virgile Thiriot; Daniela Popescu; Denis Brouillet

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial

Dominguez Jacques, Dominguez Benoît, Adrien Parietti, Arthur Alain, Virgile Thiriot, Daniela Popescu, Denis Brouillet^*

Published in International Journal of Education, Culture and Society (Volume 10, Issue 6)

Received: 25 October 2025 Accepted: 17 November 2025 Published: 9 December 2025

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

In the field of education and training, the use of new information and communication technologies (ICTs), particularly educational technologies (EdTech), has increased significantly in recent years. Among these, the adoption of Virtual Reality (VR) is expanding rapidly. While recent studies emphasize the importance of considering individual differences in executive functions (EFs)-a set of cognitive processes involved in planning and regulating thoughts and actions-the aim of our study was to examine the impact of various digital media (digital tablets, VR with joystick, VR with hand-tracking, and conventional support) on EFs using the Tower of London task implemented on both tablet and VR platforms. A total of 48 participants (32 women and 16 men) completed the Tower of London test in all four conditions. Most participants were apprentices in the fields of sales and hairdressing, with no prior exposure to instruction using tablet-based or VR-based tools. Statistical analyses (t-test and Bayes repeated measurement) were conducted on several indicators, including the number of movements, problem-solving time, and the time-to-movement ratio. Among these, the latter emerged as the most informative, as it normalizes performance across the four experimental conditions. Data analysis revealed that performance with VR supports (both joystick -20.21- and hand-tracking -21.75) was lower compared to tablet use (13.33), Cohen’s d = 1.613 and 2.01. This difference may be explained by participants’ lack of familiarity with VR, which imposes greater cognitive demands (cognitive load) than the more conventional tablet interface. These findings suggest that, before integrating VR into educational settings, it is essential to ensure that students are sufficiently familiar with and comfortable using this technology. In other words, while VR represents a promising opportunity to enhance training, its implementation must carefully consider the limitations associated with learners’ executive functions.

Published in	International Journal of Education, Culture and Society (Volume 10, Issue 6)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14
Page(s)	347-357
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Executive Functions, Tower of London, Tablet, VR Joystick, VR Hand-tracking

References

[1]	Alvarez, J. A., & Emory, E. (2006). Executive function and the frontal lobes: a meta-analytic review. Neuropsychology review, 16, 17-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-006-9002-x
[2]	Anderson, V., Anderson, P. J., Northam, E., Jacobs, R., & Catroppa, C. (2001). Development of executive functions through late childhood and adolescence in an Australian sample. Developmental Neuropsychology, 20(1), 385–406. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326942DN2001_5
[3]	Baggetta, P., & Alexander, P. A. (2016). Conceptualization and operationalization of executive function. Mind, Brain, and Education, 10(1), 10–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12100
[4]	Bailenson, J. N. (2018). Experience on demand: What virtual reality is, how it works, and what it can do. W. W. Norton & Company.
[5]	Best, J. R., Miller, P. H., & Naglieri, J. A. (2011). Relationships between executive function and academic achievement from 5 to 17 years old in a large and representative national sample. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(4), 327–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.01.007
[6]	Biswas, N., Mukherjee, A., & Bhattacharya, S. (2024). “Are you feeling sick?” A systematic literature review of cybersickness in virtual reality. ACM Computing Surveys, 56(11), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3670008
[7]	Bonnin-Arias, C., Sanchez, V. B., Alonso, X. R., Jorrin, S. G., & Ramos, C. S. (2023). Effects of LED light screens on school children’s eyes. Clinical Research, 4(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1234/clinres.2023.040401
[8]	Catania, V., Rundo, F., Panerai, S., & Ferri, R. (2023). Virtual reality for the rehabilitation of acquired cognitive disorders: A narrative review. Bioengineering, 11(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11010035
[9]	Cheng, K. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2019). A case study of immersive virtual field trips in an elementary classroom: Students’ learning experience and teacher-student interaction behaviors. Computers & Education, 140, 103600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103600
[10]	Chen, J., Fu, Z., Liu, H., & Wang, J. (2024). Effectiveness of virtual reality on learning engagement: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), 19(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJWLTT.20240101
[11]	Conway, A. R. A., Cowan, N., & Bunting, M. F. (2003). The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: The importance of working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8(2), 331–335. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196528
[12]	Coyette, F., Van der Linden, M. & Dapsens, N. (1982). Adaptation Shallice T. Specific Impairments of Planning, pp. 199-209. In, Broadbent, D. E., & Weiskrantz, L. (Eds.). (1982). The neuropsychology of cognitive function. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. The Royal Society.
[13]	Dede, C. (2012). Customization in immersive learning environments. In D. Ifenthaler, D. Eseryel, & X. Ge (Eds.), Digital teaching platforms: Customizing classroom learning for each student (pp. 282–297). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3546-4_17
[14]	Doebel, S. (2020). Rethinking executive function and its development. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(4), 942–956. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620904775
[15]	Duruaku, F., Sims, V., & Jentsch, F. G. (2025). Individual differences influencing procedural learning outcomes in virtual reality: A case study on an exterior preflight inspection. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 6, 1601562. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2025.1601562
[16]	Fernandez, M. A., Rebon-Ortiz, F., Saura-Carrasco, M., Climent, G., & Diaz-Orueta, U. (2023). ICE CREAM: New virtual reality tool for the assessment of executive functions in children and adolescents: A normative study. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1196964. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1196964
[17]	Fisk, J. E., & Sharp, C. A. (2003). The role of the executive system in visuo-spatial memory functioning. Brain and Cognition, 52(3), 364–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2626(03)00104-2
[18]	Follmer, D. J. (2018). Executive function and reading comprehension: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 53(1), 42–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1389063
[19]	Freina, L., & Ott, M. (2015). A literature review on immersive virtual reality in education: State of the art and perspectives. The International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education, 1(133), 10–100. https://doi.org/10.12753/2066-026X-15-133
[20]	Garon, N., Bryson, S. E., & Smith, I. M. (2008). Executive function in preschoolers: A review using an integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 31–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.31
[21]	González, F. M., Saux, G., & Burin, D. (2019). The decorative images’ seductive effect in e-learning depends on attentional inhibition. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3984
[22]	Gropen, J., Clark‐Chiarelli, N., Hoisington, C., & Ehrlich, S. B. (2011). The importance of executive function in early science education. Child Development Perspectives, 5(4), 298–304. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00183.x
[23]	Herodotou, C. (2018). Young children and tablets: A systematic review of effects on learning and development. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12213
[24]	Hindman, S., King, R., & Pereira, A. (2024). Virtual reality–based executive function training in schools: The experience of primary school–aged children, teachers, and teaching assistants. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 16, 100500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2023.100500
[25]	Ingram, N. B. (2020). The use of E-books, computers, and tablets to enhance reading skills (Doctoral dissertation). Kennesaw State University. https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/teachleaddoc_etd/41
[26]	Jiang, H., Mizobuchi, S., & Chignell, M. (2023). Lower executive function ability may lead to higher perceived mental workload in driving scenarios. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 17(3), 246–261. https://doi.org/10.1177/15553434231192859
[27]	Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
[28]	Karsenti, T, Lourdes-Gozales, M.L. (2016). Using Tablets in the ESL Classroom to Engage Learners in Reading Books. Formation et profession, 24(3), 94-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.18162/fp.2016.a107
[29]	Kavanagh, S., Luxton-Reilly, A., Wuensche, B., & Plimmer, B. (2017). A systematic review of virtual reality in education. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 10(2), 85–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.05.001
[30]	Kirkham, R., Nguyen, A., Stewart, C., Niman, A., & Parsons, T. D. (2024). Immersive virtual reality–based methods for assessing executive functioning: Systematic review. JMIR Serious Games, 12, e53088. https://doi.org/10.2196/53088
[31]	Kolev, M., Trenchev, I., Traykov, M., Mavreski, R., & Ivanov, I. (2023, June). The impact of virtual and augmented reality on the development of motor skills and coordination in children with special educational needs. In International Conference on Computer Science and Education in Computer Science (pp. 171–181). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33573-2_15
[32]	Lara-Alvarez, C. A., Parra-González, E. F., Ortiz-Esparza, M. A., & Cardona-Reyes, H. (2023). Effectiveness of virtual reality in elementary school: A meta-analysis of controlled studies. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), ep 459. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13855
[33]	Lawson, A. P., & Mayer, R. E. (2024). Individual differences in executive function affect learning with immersive virtual reality. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(3), 1068–1082. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12812
[34]	Luo, H., Li, G., Feng, Q., Yang, Y., & Zuo, M. (2021). Virtual reality in K‐12 and higher education: A systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2019. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(3), 887–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12525
[35]	Lin, X. P., Li, B. B., Yao, Z. N., Yang, Z., & Zhang, M. (2024). The impact of virtual reality on student engagement in the classroom–a critical review of the literature. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1360574. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1360574
[36]	Luria, A. R. (1966). Human brain and psychological processes. New-York, Harper & Row.
[37]	Makransky, G., & Lilleholt, L. (2018). A structural equation modeling investigation of the emotional value of immersive virtual reality in education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(5), 1141–1164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9581-2
[38]	Marougkas, A., Troussas, C., Krouska, A., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2023). Virtual reality in education: A review of learning theories, approaches and methodologies for the last decade. Electronics, 12(13), 2832. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12132832
[39]	Marougkas, A., Troussas, C., Krouska, A., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2024). How personalized and effective is immersive virtual reality in education? A systematic literature review for the last decade. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 83(6), 18185–18233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-024-23412-5
[40]	Meltzer, L. (Ed.). (2018). Executive function in education: From theory to practice. Guilford Publications, New-York – London.
[41]	Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on K-12 and higher education student learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 70, 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033
[42]	Mikropoulos, T. A., & Natsis, A. (2011). Virtual educational environments: A ten-year review of empirical research (1999–2009). Computers & Education, 56(3), 769–780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.020
[43]	Mitra, S. (2005). Self-organising systems for mass computer literacy: Findings from the ‘hole in the wall’ experiments. International Journal of Development Issues, 4(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1108/14468950580000887
[44]	Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
[45]	Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 7(1), 44–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90004-2
[46]	Paas, F., & Ayres, P. (2014). Cognitive load theory: A broader view on the role of memory in learning and education. Educational Psychology Review, 26(2), 191–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9263-5
[47]	Parong, J., & Mayer, R. E. (2021). Cognitive and affective processes for learning science in immersive virtual reality. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(1), 226–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12570
[48]	Poupard, M., Larrue, F., Sauzéon, H., & Tricot, A. (2024). A systematic review of immersive technologies for education: Learning performance, cognitive load and intrinsic motivation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 56(1), 5–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13321
[49]	Pottle, J. (2019). Virtual reality and the transformation of medical education. Future Healthcare Journal, 6(3), 181–185. https://doi.org/10.7861/fhj.2019-0027
[50]	Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T. A., Fromm, J., & Wohlgenannt, I. (2020). A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education, 147, 103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778
[51]	Reddy, P., Sharma, B., & Chaudhary, K. (2020). Digital literacy: A review of literature. International Journal of Technoethics (IJT), 11(2), 65–94. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJT.2020040104
[52]	Reddy, P., Chaudhary, K., & Hussein, S. (2023). A digital literacy model to narrow the digital literacy skills gap. Heliyon, 9(4), e14628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14628
[53]	Reddy, P., Chaudhary, K., Sharma, B., & Chand, R. (2021). The two perfect scorers for technology acceptance. Education and Information Technologies, 26(2), 1505-1526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10320-2
[54]	Rmus, M., McDougle, S. D., & Collins, A. G. (2021). The role of executive function in reinforcement learning training. Current Opinion in Behavioral Science, 38, 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.005
[55]	Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
[56]	Sari, R. C., Pranesti, A., Solikhatun, I., Nurbaiti, N., & Yuniarti, N. (2023). Cognitive overload in immersive virtual reality in education: More presence but less learnt? Education and Information Technologies, 29, 12887–12909. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-11412-5
[57]	Schönbrodt, F. D., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2018). Bayes factor design analysis: Planning for compelling evidence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(1), 128–142. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1230-8
[58]	Shallice, T. (1982). Specific impairments of planning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 298, 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1982.0082
[59]	Shallice, T., & Burgess, P. (1991). Higher-order cognitive impairments and frontal lobe lesions in man. In H. S. Levin, H. M. Eisenberg, & A. L. Benton (Eds.), Frontal lobe function and dysfunction (pp. 125–138). New York: Oxford University Press.
[60]	Souchet, A. D., Lourdeaux, D., Pagani, A., & Rebenitsch, L. (2023). A narrative review of immersive virtual reality’s ergonomics and risks at the workplace: Cybersickness, visual fatigue, muscular fatigue, acute stress, and mental overload. Virtual Reality, 27(1), 19–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-022-00742-1
[61]	Spiegel, J. A., Goodrich, J. M., Morris, B. M., Osborne, C. M., & Lonigan, C. J. (2021). Relations between executive functions and academic outcomes in elementary school children: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 147(4), 329–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000316
[62]	Straker, L. M., Coleman, J., Skoss, R., Maslen, B. A., Burgess-Limerick, R., & Pollock, C. M. (2008). A comparison of posture and muscle activity during tablet computer, desktop computer and paper use by young children. Ergonomics, 51(4), 540–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130701737254
[63]	Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
[64]	Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205
[65]	Tortora, C., Di Crosta, A., La Malva, P., Prete, G., Ceccato, I., Mammarella, N., … & Palumbo, R. (2024). Virtual reality and cognitive rehabilitation for older adults with mild cognitive impairment: A systematic review. Ageing Research Reviews, 93, 102146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2024.102146
[66]	Velchik, A. (2020). Digital tablets in the classroom: A perspective. Journal of Education and Practice, 11(15), 45–52.
[67]	Wagenmakers, E. J., Love, J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J., … & Morey, R. D. (2018b). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: Example applications with JASP. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25, 58–76. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1323-7
[68]	Wagenmakers, E. J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J., Love, J., … & Morey, R. D. (2018a). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25, 35–57. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1343-3
[69]	Willcutt, E. G., Doyle, A. E., Nigg, J. T., Faraone, S. V., & Pennington, B. F. (2005). Validity of the executive function theory of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analytic review. Biological Psychiatry, 57(11), 1336–1346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.01.044

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Jacques, D., Benoît, D., Parietti, A., Alain, A., Thiriot, V., et al. (2025). Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial. International Journal of Education, Culture and Society, 10(6), 347-357. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Jacques, D.; Benoît, D.; Parietti, A.; Alain, A.; Thiriot, V., et al. Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial. Int. J. Educ. Cult. Soc. 2025, 10(6), 347-357. doi: 10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Jacques D, Benoît D, Parietti A, Alain A, Thiriot V, et al. Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial. Int J Educ Cult Soc. 2025;10(6):347-357. doi: 10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14,
  author = {Dominguez Jacques and Dominguez Benoît and Adrien Parietti and Arthur Alain and Virgile Thiriot and Daniela Popescu and Denis Brouillet},
  title = {Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial},
  journal = {International Journal of Education, Culture and Society},
  volume = {10},
  number = {6},
  pages = {347-357},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijecs.20251006.14},
  abstract = {In the field of education and training, the use of new information and communication technologies (ICTs), particularly educational technologies (EdTech), has increased significantly in recent years. Among these, the adoption of Virtual Reality (VR) is expanding rapidly. While recent studies emphasize the importance of considering individual differences in executive functions (EFs)-a set of cognitive processes involved in planning and regulating thoughts and actions-the aim of our study was to examine the impact of various digital media (digital tablets, VR with joystick, VR with hand-tracking, and conventional support) on EFs using the Tower of London task implemented on both tablet and VR platforms. A total of 48 participants (32 women and 16 men) completed the Tower of London test in all four conditions. Most participants were apprentices in the fields of sales and hairdressing, with no prior exposure to instruction using tablet-based or VR-based tools. Statistical analyses (t-test and Bayes repeated measurement) were conducted on several indicators, including the number of movements, problem-solving time, and the time-to-movement ratio. Among these, the latter emerged as the most informative, as it normalizes performance across the four experimental conditions. Data analysis revealed that performance with VR supports (both joystick -20.21- and hand-tracking -21.75) was lower compared to tablet use (13.33), Cohen’s d = 1.613 and 2.01. This difference may be explained by participants’ lack of familiarity with VR, which imposes greater cognitive demands (cognitive load) than the more conventional tablet interface. These findings suggest that, before integrating VR into educational settings, it is essential to ensure that students are sufficiently familiar with and comfortable using this technology. In other words, while VR represents a promising opportunity to enhance training, its implementation must carefully consider the limitations associated with learners’ executive functions.},
 year = {2025}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial
AU  - Dominguez Jacques
AU  - Dominguez Benoît
AU  - Adrien Parietti
AU  - Arthur Alain
AU  - Virgile Thiriot
AU  - Daniela Popescu
AU  - Denis Brouillet
Y1  - 2025/12/09
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14
T2  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
JF  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
JO  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
SP  - 347
EP  - 357
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-3363
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14
AB  - In the field of education and training, the use of new information and communication technologies (ICTs), particularly educational technologies (EdTech), has increased significantly in recent years. Among these, the adoption of Virtual Reality (VR) is expanding rapidly. While recent studies emphasize the importance of considering individual differences in executive functions (EFs)-a set of cognitive processes involved in planning and regulating thoughts and actions-the aim of our study was to examine the impact of various digital media (digital tablets, VR with joystick, VR with hand-tracking, and conventional support) on EFs using the Tower of London task implemented on both tablet and VR platforms. A total of 48 participants (32 women and 16 men) completed the Tower of London test in all four conditions. Most participants were apprentices in the fields of sales and hairdressing, with no prior exposure to instruction using tablet-based or VR-based tools. Statistical analyses (t-test and Bayes repeated measurement) were conducted on several indicators, including the number of movements, problem-solving time, and the time-to-movement ratio. Among these, the latter emerged as the most informative, as it normalizes performance across the four experimental conditions. Data analysis revealed that performance with VR supports (both joystick -20.21- and hand-tracking -21.75) was lower compared to tablet use (13.33), Cohen’s d = 1.613 and 2.01. This difference may be explained by participants’ lack of familiarity with VR, which imposes greater cognitive demands (cognitive load) than the more conventional tablet interface. These findings suggest that, before integrating VR into educational settings, it is essential to ensure that students are sufficiently familiar with and comfortable using this technology. In other words, while VR represents a promising opportunity to enhance training, its implementation must carefully consider the limitations associated with learners’ executive functions.
VL  - 10
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Dominguez Jacques

Society of Epistemes, Bages, France
Dominguez Benoît

Society of Epistemes, Bages, France
Adrien Parietti

Society of Epistemes, Bages, France
Arthur Alain

Society of Epistemes, Bages, France
Virgile Thiriot

Society of Epistemes, Bages, France
Daniela Popescu

Society of Epistemes, Bages, France
Denis Brouillet

Society of Epistemes, Bages, France;Epsylon Laboratory, University of Montpellier Paul Valéry, Montpellier, France;LICAE Laboratory, University of Nanterre, Nanterre, France

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0643-7345

Download PDF

Submit an Article

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Jacques, D., Benoît, D., Parietti, A., Alain, A., Thiriot, V., et al. (2025). Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial. International Journal of Education, Culture and Society, 10(6), 347-357. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Jacques, D.; Benoît, D.; Parietti, A.; Alain, A.; Thiriot, V., et al. Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial. Int. J. Educ. Cult. Soc. 2025, 10(6), 347-357. doi: 10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Jacques D, Benoît D, Parietti A, Alain A, Thiriot V, et al. Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial. Int J Educ Cult Soc. 2025;10(6):347-357. doi: 10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14,
  author = {Dominguez Jacques and Dominguez Benoît and Adrien Parietti and Arthur Alain and Virgile Thiriot and Daniela Popescu and Denis Brouillet},
  title = {Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial},
  journal = {International Journal of Education, Culture and Society},
  volume = {10},
  number = {6},
  pages = {347-357},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijecs.20251006.14},
  abstract = {In the field of education and training, the use of new information and communication technologies (ICTs), particularly educational technologies (EdTech), has increased significantly in recent years. Among these, the adoption of Virtual Reality (VR) is expanding rapidly. While recent studies emphasize the importance of considering individual differences in executive functions (EFs)-a set of cognitive processes involved in planning and regulating thoughts and actions-the aim of our study was to examine the impact of various digital media (digital tablets, VR with joystick, VR with hand-tracking, and conventional support) on EFs using the Tower of London task implemented on both tablet and VR platforms. A total of 48 participants (32 women and 16 men) completed the Tower of London test in all four conditions. Most participants were apprentices in the fields of sales and hairdressing, with no prior exposure to instruction using tablet-based or VR-based tools. Statistical analyses (t-test and Bayes repeated measurement) were conducted on several indicators, including the number of movements, problem-solving time, and the time-to-movement ratio. Among these, the latter emerged as the most informative, as it normalizes performance across the four experimental conditions. Data analysis revealed that performance with VR supports (both joystick -20.21- and hand-tracking -21.75) was lower compared to tablet use (13.33), Cohen’s d = 1.613 and 2.01. This difference may be explained by participants’ lack of familiarity with VR, which imposes greater cognitive demands (cognitive load) than the more conventional tablet interface. These findings suggest that, before integrating VR into educational settings, it is essential to ensure that students are sufficiently familiar with and comfortable using this technology. In other words, while VR represents a promising opportunity to enhance training, its implementation must carefully consider the limitations associated with learners’ executive functions.},
 year = {2025}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Effects of the Use of Different Digital Media on the Assessment of Executive Functions Using the Tower of London, a Randomized Cross-over Trial
AU  - Dominguez Jacques
AU  - Dominguez Benoît
AU  - Adrien Parietti
AU  - Arthur Alain
AU  - Virgile Thiriot
AU  - Daniela Popescu
AU  - Denis Brouillet
Y1  - 2025/12/09
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14
T2  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
JF  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
JO  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
SP  - 347
EP  - 357
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-3363
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20251006.14
AB  - In the field of education and training, the use of new information and communication technologies (ICTs), particularly educational technologies (EdTech), has increased significantly in recent years. Among these, the adoption of Virtual Reality (VR) is expanding rapidly. While recent studies emphasize the importance of considering individual differences in executive functions (EFs)-a set of cognitive processes involved in planning and regulating thoughts and actions-the aim of our study was to examine the impact of various digital media (digital tablets, VR with joystick, VR with hand-tracking, and conventional support) on EFs using the Tower of London task implemented on both tablet and VR platforms. A total of 48 participants (32 women and 16 men) completed the Tower of London test in all four conditions. Most participants were apprentices in the fields of sales and hairdressing, with no prior exposure to instruction using tablet-based or VR-based tools. Statistical analyses (t-test and Bayes repeated measurement) were conducted on several indicators, including the number of movements, problem-solving time, and the time-to-movement ratio. Among these, the latter emerged as the most informative, as it normalizes performance across the four experimental conditions. Data analysis revealed that performance with VR supports (both joystick -20.21- and hand-tracking -21.75) was lower compared to tablet use (13.33), Cohen’s d = 1.613 and 2.01. This difference may be explained by participants’ lack of familiarity with VR, which imposes greater cognitive demands (cognitive load) than the more conventional tablet interface. These findings suggest that, before integrating VR into educational settings, it is essential to ensure that students are sufficiently familiar with and comfortable using this technology. In other words, while VR represents a promising opportunity to enhance training, its implementation must carefully consider the limitations associated with learners’ executive functions.
VL  - 10
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download