## 4 Evaluation Study
### Qualitative Findings  
We identified four main themes through the qualitative analysis of interviews. The first three describe the specific aspects of participants' experiences with the VR game and reveal the possible influencing factors, such as technical affordances and individual attributes. The themed findings provide data triangulation and an explanation of the quantitative results, and they are detailed in this section. The fourth theme identifies several issues regarding the current game design and technologies, which improved our understanding of participants' collaboration experiences in VR and provides a basis for future VR game refinement. Table 4 lists the themes, categories, and nodes. 5.1. Themed Finding 1: Spatial Presence and Natural Feedback Afford a Sense of Immersion in the IVR Collaboration Space  
Although the students admitted that they had limited past VR experience, their unease and self-doubt rapidly disappeared after entering the virtual world, and they engaged with the created virtual environment immediately. A possible explanation is that the virtual world was highly authentic, with the same spatial and temporal rules as the physical world, thus greatly reducing the time needed for adaptation and adjustment. As one student explained, \"As the artillery fire flew toward me, I felt the danger and needed something to block\". Additionally, the fluency and details of the virtual scenarios enhanced the immersion level of students. Especially when seeing smoke appearing after the explosion of artillery or the enemy fall, they found it extremely \"playful\", \"exciting\", and even \"intimidating\". The immersion was further enhanced when various learner actions were triggered in the virtual space, with effects similar to those in the real world; for example, the speed of running in reality matched the speed of moving in the virtual space. Additionally, the gesture interaction was an important factor in enhancing immersion; as explained by a \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **EP** & **RD** & **CC** & **SpaP** & **SocP** & **CE** & **SE** \\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{Extroverted personality (EP)} & 1 & & & & & & \\ VR readiness (RD) & 0.476 ** & 1 & & & & & \\ Collaboration competence (CC) & 0.612 ** & 0.373 ** & 1 & & & & \\ Spatial presence (SpaP) & 0.226 * & 0.153 & 0.375 ** & 1 & & & \\ Social presence (SocP) & 0.277 ** & 0.154 & 0.302 ** & 0.706 ** & 1 & & \\ Collective efficacy (CE) & 0.303 ** & 0.174 & 0.297 ** & 0.459 ** & 0.521 ** & 1 & \\ Social experience (SE) & 0.275 ** & 0.119 & 0.365 ** & 0.577 ** & 0.679 ** & 0.627 ** & 1 \\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{Note: ** \(p\) < 0.01 and * \(p\) < 0.05.} & & & & & \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Correlation analysis between predictors ([PERSON]’s correlation coefficient). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Dependent Variable**} & **Predictors** & **B** & **SE** & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\beta\)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Collinearity**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Adjusted R\({}^{2}\)**} \\ \cline{4-4} \cline{6-7}  & Extraversion & 0.197 & 0.104 & 0.172 & 0.923 & 1.083 & 0.283 \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{Social presence} & 0.529 & 0.102 & 0.473 *** & 0.923 & 1.083 & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Social experience} & Collaboration competence & 0.214 & 0.095 & 0.176 * & 0.909 & 1.100 & 0.479 \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{Social presence} & 0.642 & 0.080 & 0.626 *** & 0.909 & 1.100 & \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{Note: SE is an abbreviation of Standard Error; VIF is an abbreviation of variance inflation factor; *** \(p\) < 0.001 and * \(p\) < 0.05.} & & & \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Key statistics of the backward-elimination multiple linear regression analysis (N = 95). student playing the role of the attacker, \"I can press the button on the handle to shoot arrows to attack the enemy, which is the same as pulling the trigger to actually shoot an arrow\".