Virtual Reality as a Portable Alternative to Chromotherapy Rooms for Stress Relief: A Preliminary Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chromotherapy rooms are comfortable spaces, used in places like special needs schools, where stimuli are carefully selected to cope with stress. However, these rooms are expensive and require a space that cannot be reutilized. In this article, we propose the use of virtual reality (VR) as an inexpensive and portable alternative to chromotherapy rooms for stress relief. We recreated a chromotherapy room stress relief program using a commercial head mounted display (HD). We assessed the stress level of two groups (test and control) through an EEG biomarker, the relative gamma, while they experienced a relaxation session. First, participants were stressed using the Montreal imaging stress task (MIST). Then, for relaxing, the control group utilized a chromotherapy room while the test group used virtual reality. We performed a hypothesis test to compare the self- perceived stress level at different stages of the experiment and it yielded no significant differences in reducing stress for both groups, during relaxing (p-value: 0.8379, α = 0.05) or any other block. Furthermore, according to participant surveys, the use of virtual reality was deemed immersive, comfortable and pleasant (3.9 out of 5). Our preliminary results validate our approach as an inexpensive and portable alternative to chromotherapy rooms for stress relief.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".