## 4 Results  
### Mean and Standard Deviation for Each Scale  
In this experiment, the usability, emotional responses (emotional valence and arousal), flow experience, technology acceptance, activity performance, preference, and satisfaction were compared between participants engaged in freeform creativity and goal-directed training VR activities. Following the completion of both VR tasks, the participants used the SAM scale to rate their emotional valence and arousal levels. Emotional valence referred to the positive or negative feelings of pleasure, which were rated on a nine-point scale, where higher scores (closer to 9) indicated more pleasure and lower scores (closer to 1) indicated less pleasure. Emotional arousal referred to the intensity of emotion aroused in the participants, with higher scores (closer to 9) indicating more intense emotions and lower scores (closer to 1) indicating calmer emotions. The remaining scales were evaluated on a five-point scale, with higher scores (closer to 5) indicating better performance and lower scores (closer to 1) indicating poorer performance.  
Finally, the study compiled data from the 33 participants and conducted statistical analyses. Figure 6 presents a line graph depicting the mean scores for each scale across the two VR types and Table 3 presents the mean values and standard deviations (SD). Since emotional valence and emotional arousal were originally measured on a nine-point Likert scale, while the other scales were measured on a five-point scale, we converted  
Figure 5: Example of a Google online questionnaire (Question 1-1 presented as an example).  
the nine-point scales for emotional valence and emotional arousal to five-point scales to facilitate accurate comparisons and avoid misleading interpretations. A preliminary analysis of the descriptive statistics revealed that freeform creativity performed better on most indicators, including emotional valence (4.31, SD = 0.92) and emotional arousal (4.14, SD = 0.86). Regarding flow experience, technology acceptance, preference, and satisfaction, the mean values were 3.98 (SD = 0.55), 4.21 (SD = 0.66), 4.36 (SD = 0.74), and 4.24 (SD = 0.75), respectively. Notably, both VR types achieved a satisfactory mean score of 3.61 or higher on the five-point Likert scale in terms of flow experience, technology acceptance, preference, and satisfaction.  
Interestingly, freeform creativity exhibited superior performance in activity effectiveness (mean = 3.18, SD = 1.29) compared with goal-directed training (mean = 2.76, SD = 1.37) on the self-assessed activity effectiveness scale. Although superior performance was observed for other indicators, the scores for usability for both VR types were closer to the  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Item**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Goal-Directed Training**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Freeform Creativity**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** \\ \hline Emotional valence & 3.92 & 0.96 & 4.31 & 0.92 \\ \hline Emotional arousal & 3.18 & 1.25 & 4.14 & 0.86 \\ \hline QUIS & 4.21 & 0.48 & 3.87 & 0.69 \\ \hline Flow experience & 3.68 & 0.68 & 3.98 & 0.55 \\ \hline Technology acceptance & 3.92 & 0.76 & 4.21 & 0.66 \\ \hline Self-assessed activity effectiveness & 2.76 & 1.37 & 3.18 & 1.29 \\ \hline Preference & 3.61 & 1.06 & 4.36 & 0.74 \\ \hline Overall satisfaction & 3.73 & 0.91 & 4.24 & 0.75 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Mean values and SDs for each scale across two VR types: freeform creativity and goal-directed training (Unit: five-point Likert scale).  
Figure 6: Line graph of mean scores for each scale across two VR types: freeform creativity and goal-directed training (Unit: five-point Likert scale).  
median value, with goal-directed training (mean = 4.21, SD = 0.48) outperforming freeform creativity (mean = 3.87, SD = 0.69). Further detailed analysis entailed paired sample \(t\)-tests to investigate significant differences between indicators.