Manipulating subjective realism and its impact on presence: Preliminary results on feasibility and neuroanatomical correlates
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The feeling of presence has been shown to be an important concept in several clinical applications of virtual reality. Among the factors influencing presence, realism factors have been examined extensively from the angle of objective realism. Objective realism has been manipulated by altering numerous technological characteristics such as pictorial quality, texture and shading, or by adding more sensory information (i.e., smell, touch). Much less studied is the subjective (or perceived) realism, the focus of the two pilot studies reported in this article. In Study 1, subjective realism was manipulated in order to assess the impact on the feeling of presence. Method: Presence was measured in 31 adults after two immersions in virtual reality. Participants were immersed in a neutral/irrelevant virtual environment and subsequently subjected to the experimental manipulation. Participants in the experimental condition were falsely led to believe that they were immersed live in real time in a “real” room with a “real” mouse in a cage. In the control condition, participants believed they were immersed in a replica of the nearby room. All participants were actually immersed in the exact same virtual environment. Results: A manipulation check revealed that 80% of the participants believed in the deception. A 2 Times by 2 Conditions repeated measure ANOVA revealed that leading people to believe they were seeing a real environment digitized live in virtual reality increased their feeling of presence compared to the control condition. In Study 2, the same experimental design was used but with simultaneous functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in order to assess brain areas potentially related to the feeling of presence. fMRI data from five participants were subjected to a within subject fixed effect analysis to verify differences between the experimental immersion (higher presence) and the control immersion (lower presence). Results revealed a statistically significant difference in left and right parahippocampus areas. Conclusion: Results are discussed according to layers of presence and consciousness and the meaning given to experiences occurring in virtual reality. Some suggestions are formulated to target core presence and extended presence.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle