KMAN Publication Inc. International Journal of Sport Studies for Health 2588-5782 In Press 2026 08 21 Effects of a Hybrid Immersive Virtual Reality and Conventional Football Training Program on Passing Performance, Decision-Making, and Game Performance in Undergraduate Physical Education Students Effects of a Hybrid Immersive Virtual Reality and Conventional Football Training Program on Passing Performance, Decision-Making, and Game Performance in Undergraduate Physical Education Students EN Journal Article Background: Immersive virtual reality may provide representative and controllable opportunities for football decision practice, but its contribution cannot be inferred when it replaces rather than supplements conventional field training. This trial compared a hybrid immersive-VR and conventional football program with a time-matched conventional program in undergraduate physical education students. Materials and Methods: Seventy-two undergraduate students were randomized to either a hybrid training group (n = 36), which completed 30 minutes of conventional football practice followed by 30 minutes of immersive VR-based perception–action training per session, or a control group (n = 36), which completed 60 minutes of conventional football practice. Both groups trained three times weekly for eight weeks (24 scheduled sessions). Outcomes were assessed at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at a four-week follow-up using Loughborough Soccer Passing Test (LSPT) completion time, decision-making accuracy and reaction time, and the Game Performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI). Intrinsic motivation was assessed only after the intervention using the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI). Results: Significant Group × Time interactions were observed for LSPT completion time (F = 438.08, p < .001, ηp² = .862), decision-making accuracy (F = 715.31, p < .001, ηp² = .911), decision-making reaction time (F = 845.37, p < .001, ηp² = .924), and GPAI scores (F = 441.55, p < .001, ηp² = .863). These interactions indicate that outcome trajectories differed between the hybrid and conventional training packages; they do not isolate a VR-specific effect. Mean performance values in the hybrid group remained close to post-intervention levels at the four-week follow-up; Bonferroni-adjusted post-intervention versus follow-up contrasts indicated small changes across the four-week follow-up, with 95% confidence intervals reported in Table 8. The hybrid group also reported higher post-intervention IMI scores than the control group (p < .001, Cohen’s d = 3.08); because IMI was not assessed at baseline, this finding represents a post-intervention group difference rather than a demonstrated improvement in motivation. Conclusions: A time-matched hybrid curriculum was associated with different trajectories in the reported performance outcomes compared with conventional practice alone. The trial evaluates the complete hybrid package and does not establish an independent VR effect. The four-week observations suggest short-term persistence, although unmeasured football and physical activity during the follow-up interval limit interpretation as definitive motor-learning retention.