Utilizing Virtual Reality to Improve the Ecological Validity of Clinical Neuropsychology: An fMRI Case Study Elucidating the Neural Basis of Planning by Comparing the Tower of London with a Three-Dimensional Navigation Task
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Virtual reality (VR) was used to create an ecologically valid spatial-navigation task in hand with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to articulate the neural basis of planning behavior. A virtual version of a traditional planning measure, the Tower of London, was also developed to ascertain convergent and divergent validity in terms of planning behavior and functional neuroanatomy. This VR-fMRI case study experiment was performed at 3.0 Tesla on a young healthy male subject. The obtained image data suggest both convergent and divergent specificity between the two conditions in terms of location and overall intensity of activation. Overall, the present case study provides supportive evidence that the activity of various brain regions associated with planning tasks is largely modulated by the ecological validity of the measure being used. This finding may extend to all domains of inquiry in neuropsychological research and assessment when deductive conclusions are formulated on the results of neuropsychological test measures that could be considered contrived in nature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it