Examining Changes to Center of Pressure During the First Trials of Wii Gameplay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Use of the Nintendo Wii™ as a balance assessment and rehabilitation tool continues to grow. One advantage of the Wii is that games can serve as a virtual reality training tool; however, a disadvantage of the Wii is the human-machine interface and the learning effect over multiple trials. The purpose of this study was to assess changes in postural control during Wii gameplay over a series of trials in novice players. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one university athletes (aged 18-25 years) completed four trials of the Nintendo Wii Fit™ soccer heading (SH) balance game. Center of pressure (COP) was calculated in the anterior-posterior (AP) and medial-lateral (ML) directions for each 70-second time trial at 1000 Hz. COP was assessed using six linear and two nonlinear measures. Repeated measures analysis of variances compared COP measures over the four trials. RESULTS: Significant differences in COP magnitude and velocity were found between trials 1 and 2 in the ML direction. No significant effects of trial were found in the AP direction. In contrast, a measure of the overall area of COP using an ellipse method revealed a significant reduction to COP area between trials 3 and 4. No significant differences between trials were observed in nonlinear measures. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate how magnitude and velocity measures of COP control stabilize after the first trial of Wii SH game play in novice young adults. As Wii rehabilitation focuses on individuals with balance difficulties, an important consideration when using the game as an assessment tool is that more than four trials may be required to capture learning in these populations. In addition, contrasting results from ellipse measurement methods point to the use of multiple measures for robust description of COP behavior. This work provides understanding of normative postural control responses with further research in clinical populations needed.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".