Skip to content

How Cultural Background Affects Cognitive and Motor Learning Using Virtual Reality

Cultural Intelligence and Learning in Virtual Reality: How Cultural Background Shapes Cognitive and Motor Adaptation

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07242937
Enrollment
43
Registered
2025-11-21
Start date
2024-10-14
Completion date
2025-02-17
Last updated
2025-11-21

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Cognitive Function, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Motor Skills, Neuroplasticity, Virtual Reality

Brief summary

This observational study examined how long-term cultural background is associated with differences in cognitive and motor learning within a virtual reality environment. Forty-three healthy university students participated in four days of standardized assessment procedures involving cognitive testing, fine-motor evaluation, and performance on a virtual reality (VR) task. Participants were classified into two pre-existing groups based on long-term cultural exposure: a Home group (lived mainly in their native country) and an Abroad group (lived abroad for at least ten years). All participants completed the same assessment procedures. The study observed natural variations in cognitive performance, motor coordination, and VR learning progression across sessions.

Detailed description

This observational study examined how long-term cultural background is associated with differences in cognitive and motor learning within a virtual reality (VR) environment. The study used a case-control design based on naturally existing groups. Participants were not assigned to conditions. Instead, they were classified into two groups according to their long-term cultural exposure: a Home group (lived primarily in their native country for at least ten years) and an Abroad group (lived abroad for at least ten years). All participants followed the exact same schedule and attended the study sessions on four fixed days: Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and the following Monday. This controlled scheduling ensured that all participants experienced the same time intervals between sessions, eliminating variability due to inconsistent spacing. During Day 1, participants completed baseline assessments, including: CogniFit cognitive battery, evaluating attention, memory, processing speed, and executive functions Purdue Pegboard Test, assessing fine-motor coordination IFIS scale (Index of Fit Self-Perception) to assess physical fitness Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) to measure cultural intelligence After completing the baseline assessments on Day 1, participants performed the standardized VR learning task (Beat Saber). On Days 2 and 3 (Wednesday and Friday), participants completed only the VR Beat Saber task. These sessions were used to measure progression of visuomotor learning, accuracy, speed, and performance over time. On Day 4 (the following Monday), participants again completed: CogniFit cognitive battery Purdue Pegboard Test The VR Beat Saber task Repeating these tests on Day 4 allowed the study to evaluate changes in cognitive performance and motor coordination across the study period, as well as overall VR learning progression. All procedures and assessments were identical for both groups. The study did not manipulate behavior or deliver interventions; instead, it observed naturally occurring differences in learning and performance across participants with different long-term cultural backgrounds. This design allowed the analysis of how cultural exposure may relate to cognitive adaptation, motor learning, and VR-based task progression. No biospecimens were collected.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALVirtual reality beat saber training and cognitive and motor assessment

All participants completed the same four-day assessment procedure consisting of cognitive evaluation (Cognitive Assessment Battery-Professional \[CAB PRO\]), fine-motor coordination testing (Purdue Pegboard Test), and performance on a virtual reality (VR) Beat Saber task using the Meta Quest 2 headset. These procedures were administered equally to all participants. No interventions were assigned; the study observed natural performance differences between pre-existing cultural groups.

Sponsors

CogniFit Limited
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Bahçeşehir University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
CASE_CONTROL
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
17 Years to 35 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Healthy university students aged 17-35 * Lived at least ten years in either their home country (Home group) or abroad (Abroad group) * Fluent in English * Normal or corrected-to-normal vision * Able to use virtual reality headset and controllers * Provided informed consent

Exclusion criteria

* History of neurological or psychiatric disorders * Severe visual or motor impairment * Use of medications affecting cognition * Any condition preventing safe participation in VR tasks

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Cognitive Performance Score (CogniFit CAB PRO)Day 1 and Day 4Computerized cognitive assessment measuring attention, memory, reasoning, and executive functions. Composite cognitive score is calculated using the Cognitive Assessment Battery-Professional \[CAB PRO\]) battery.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Motor Dexterity (Purdue Pegboard Test)Day 1 and Day 4Fine-motor coordination assessed using the Purdue Pegboard Test, including dominant hand, non-dominant hand, both hands, and assembly scores.
VR Gameplay Accuracy (Beat Saber Cut Accuracy)Day 1 to Day 4Percentage of targets cut correctly during Beat Saber gameplay, reflecting visuomotor precision and learning progression.
VR Gameplay Performance (Beat Saber Combo Length)Day 1 to Day 4Maximum consecutive successfully hit targets (combo streak) recorded during each virtual reality session to evaluate learning and consistency.

Countries

Turkey (Türkiye)

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026