A substantial amount of media comparison research has been conducted in the last decade to investigate whether students learn Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) content better in immersive virtual reality (IVR) or more traditional learning environments. However, a thorough review of the design and implementation of conventional and IVR conditions in media comparison studies has not been conducted to examine the extent to which specific affordances of IVR can be pinpointed as the causal factor in enhancing learning. The present review filled this gap in the literature by examining the degree to which conventional and IVR conditions have been controlled on instructional methods and content within the K-12 and higher education STEM literature base. Thirty-eight published journal articles, conference proceedings, and dissertations related to IVR comparison studies in STEM education between the years 2013 and 2022 were coded according to 15 categories. These categories allowed for the extraction of information on the instructional methods and content characteristics of the conventional and IVR conditions to determine the degree of control within each experimental comparison. Results indicated only 26% of all comparisons examined between an IVR and conventional condition were fully controlled on five key control criteria. Moreover, 40% of the comparisons had at least one confound related to instructional method and content. When looking at the outcomes of the studies, it was difficult to gather a clear picture of the benefits or pitfalls of IVR when much of the literature was confounded and/or lacked sufficient information to determine if the conditions were controlled on key variables. Implications and recommendations for future IVR comparison research are discussed.

过去十年进行了大量的媒体比较研究，以调查学生是否在沉浸式虚拟现实 (IVR) 或更传统的学习环境中更好地学习科学、技术、工程和数学 (STEM) 内容。然而，尚未对媒体比较研究中传统条件和 IVR 条件的设计和实施进行彻底审查，以检验 IVR 的特定可供性在多大程度上可以被确定为增强学习的因果因素。本综述通过研究 K-12 和高等教育 STEM 文献库中传统和 IVR 条件对教学方法和内容的控制程度，填补了文献中的这一空白。 2013 年至 2022 年期间发表的 38 篇与 STEM 教育 IVR 比较研究相关的期刊文章、会议记录和论文根据 15 个类别进行编码。这些类别允许提取有关传统和 IVR 条件的教学方法和内容特征的信息，以确定每个实验比较中的控制程度。结果表明，在 IVR 和传统条件之间进行的所有比较中，只有 26% 在五个关键控制标准上得到完全控制。此外，40% 的比较至少存在一项与教学方法和内容相关的混杂因素。在查看研究结果时，由于许多文献混乱和/或缺乏足够的信息来确定关键变量的条件是否受到控制，因此很难清楚地了解 IVR 的优点或缺点。 讨论了对未来 IVR 比较研究的影响和建议。