Virtual Reality Gamification of Visual Search, Response Inhibition, and Visual Short-Term Memory Tasks for Cognitive Assessment: Experimental Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Cognitive tasks are foundational tools in psychology and neuroscience for studying attention, perception, and memory. However, they typically employ simple or artificial stimuli and require numerous repetitive trials, which can adversely affect participant engagement and ecological validity. Objective: This study investigated whether gamified versions of 3 established cognitive tasks, namely, the Visual Search task (attention), the Whack-the-Mole task (response inhibition), and the Corsi block-tapping test (visual short-term memory), replicate the typical patterns of results reported for their traditional counterparts. It also examined whether the method of administration-in immersive virtual reality (VR) versus desktop computer, and in the laboratory versus at home-influences performance. Methods: Seventy-five participants (male=24, female=51; age range 18-35 years; mean 23.15, SD 4.38 years) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 administration conditions (n=25 each). In the VR-Lab condition, participants completed the tasks in immersive VR within the laboratory; in the Desktop-Lab condition, they completed the tasks on a 2D desktop screen in the laboratory; and in the Desktop-Remote condition, participants completed the tasks on their personal computers at home. All participants completed the same gamified tasks while seated, entering responses with either a mouse or a VR controller, depending on the condition. Results: The results obtained from these gamified tasks across all 3 administration conditions replicated the typical performance patterns observed with their traditional counterparts, despite using more ecologically valid stimuli and fewer trials. However, administration modality did influence certain performance measures, particularly reaction times (RTs) and task efficiency. Specifically, in the Visual Search task, RTs were significantly faster in the VR-Lab condition (mean 1.24 seconds) than in the Desktop-Lab (mean 1.49 seconds; P<.001) and Desktop-Remote (mean 1.44 seconds; P=.008) conditions. In the Whack-the-Mole task, no significant group differences emerged in d' scores (VR-Lab: mean 3.79, Desktop-Remote: mean 3.75, Desktop-Lab: mean 3.62; P=.49), but RTs were slower in the Desktop-Remote condition (mean 0.64 seconds) than in the VR-Lab (mean 0.41 seconds; P<.001) and Desktop-Lab (mean 0.48 seconds; P<.001) conditions. For the Corsi block-tapping test, no significant group differences in span scores were found (VR-Lab: mean 5.48, Desktop-Lab: mean 5.68, and Desktop-Remote: mean 5.24; P=.24). Finally, a significant positive correlation was observed between RTs for Hits in the Whack-the-Mole task and feature search trials in the Visual Search task (r=0.24; P=.04). Conclusions: Gamified cognitive tasks administered in VR replicated established behavioral patterns observed with their traditional versions while improving ecological validity and reducing task duration. Administration modality had limited effects on overall outcomes, although RTs were slower in remote settings. These findings support the feasibility of using gamified VR tasks for scalable and ecologically valid cognitive assessment. Overall, the study underscores the potential of VR to increase participant engagement and enrich cognitive research through more immersive and motivating testing environments.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
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 | 0,006 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».