## 5 Results
### Analysis of the Questionnaires  
For examining the results in the questionnaires (RQ2a-d), four repeated measures Analysis of Variance (rANOVA) tests were conducted (equal to the number of factors), using gender as a between-subjects factor. There were no issues regarding the assumptions for conducting these tests, though there were two exceptions in which the sphericity assumption was violated. In these cases, the results of the Greenhouse-Geisser tests are reported. Regarding enjoyment/positive feelings, the influence of gender on the averaged enjoyment/positive feelings scores was found to be insignificant, indicating that gender did not account for a significant proportion of the variance in enjoyment/positive feelings across all tools (Table 4). There were substantial differences in enjoyment/positive feelings between the three types of media, with a large effect size observed. Furthermore, there was no interaction effect between gender and enjoyment/positive feelings, suggesting that gender did not differentially impact enjoyment/positive feelings across the various media formats (printed materials, conventional videos, and 360\({}^{\circ}\) videos). The pairwise comparisons revealed a statistically significant difference in enjoyment/positive feelings between printed materials and 360\({}^{\circ}\) videos, favoring the latter (Table 5). Consequently, in addressing RQ2a, it is clear that students derived significantly greater enjoyment/positive feelings from the 360\({}^{\circ}\) videos compared to the printed materials. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Source** & \(\SS\) & \(\df\) & \(\MS\) & \(\F\) & \(\p\) & \(\eta_{p}\)\({}^{2}\) \\ \hline Between-Subjects & & & & & & \\ Pre-test & 0.202 & 1 & 0.202 & 5.41 & 0.025 & 0.117 \\ Gender & 0.026 & 1 & 0.026 & 0.70 & 0.409 & 0.017 \\ Residuals & 1.534 & 41 & 0.037 & & & \\ \hline Within-Subjects & & & & & & \\ Evaluation tests & 0.004 & 2 & 0.002 & 0.40 & 0.671 & 0.010 \\ Pre-test \(\times\) Evaluation tests & 0.011 & 2 & 0.006 & 0.99 & 0.376 & 0.024 \\ Gender \(\times\) Evaluation tests & 0.009 & 2 & 0.004 & 0.80 & 0.452 & 0.019 \\ Residuals & 0.458 & 82 & 0.006 & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} _Notes._\(\SS\) = sum of squares, \(\MS\) = mean square, \(\eta_{p}\)\({}^{2}\) = partial eta squared effect size. For the interpretation of the effect sizes, the following cutoff values apply: 0.010—small effect size; 0.059—medium effect size; and 0.138 or higher—large effect size [54].  
\end{table} 
Table 2: The rANCOVA results for the evaluation tests. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Factor** & **Factor** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} _Mean_ \\ _Difference_ \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} _Std._ \\ _Error_ \\ \end{tabular} & \(\p\) \\ \hline
1 & 2 & \(-0.903\) & \(1.595\) & \(0.999\) \\
1 & 3 & \(-4.173\) & \(1.396\) & \(0.014\) \\
2 & 3 & \(-3.270\) & \(1.784\) & \(0.222\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} _Notes._ Factor 1 = evaluation tests printed materials, Factor 2 = evaluation tests conventional videos, and Factor 3 = evaluation tests 360\({}^{\circ}\) videos.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Pairwise comparisons for the evaluation tests. Gender did not have a significant effect on the averaged scores of immersion; thus, gender did not account for a significant proportion of the variance in immersion across all tools (Table 6). There were significant differences between the three media regarding immersion and the effect size was large. There was no interaction effect between gender and immersion, suggesting that gender did not have a differential effect on immersion across the various media formats. The pairwise comparisons revealed that, in all cases, there was a statistically significant difference in immersion in favor of 360\({}^{\circ}\) videos (Table 7). Consequently, in addressing RQ2b, it is evident that 360\({}^{\circ}\) videos offered a more immersive experience compared to both the other media.