The effect of virtual reality environments on auditory memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auditory recall is stronger in the environment in which a memory was originally encoded, an effect of context-dependent memory (CM) [Godden and Baddeley, Brit. J. Psychol.66(3), 325–331 (1975)]. Innovations in virtual reality (VR) have resulted in the adoption of VR as a communication platform in professional, medical, and educational contexts. The present study reports an experiment testing how CM impacts auditory memory across differing VR environments. An experiment will be described in which participants in one of two distinct virtual environments (e.g., beach and forest) within the VR-communication platform AltSpace hear three iterations of a pre-recorded list of 16 words controlled for frequency and syllable count. Participants are tested for recall of the word-list in either the same or the differing virtual environment. Improved accuracy when tested in the same environment would suggest that CM can be observed for auditory memory between virtual environments. Preliminary results indicate a potential context-dependent effect between virtual environments. Results will be discussed, with implications for professional, medical, and pedagogical applications in virtual settings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.024 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".