MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388140722 · doi:10.1163/22134808-bja10112

Beyond the Eye: Multisensory Contributions to the Sensation of Illusory Self-Motion (Vection)

2023· review· en· W4388140722 on OpenAlexaff
Bernhard E. Riecke, Brandy Murovec, Jennifer L. Campos, Behrang Keshavarz

Bibliographic record

VenueMultisensory Research · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Rehabilitation InstituteToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity Health NetworkSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyEmbodied cognitionIllusionMultisensory integrationSensationCognitive psychologySensory cueCrossmodalSensory systemAffect (linguistics)Optical illusionEye movementCommunicationPerceptionVisual perceptionComputer scienceNeuroscienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vection is typically defined as the embodied illusion of self-motion in the absence of real physical movement through space. Vection can occur in real-life situations (e.g., 'train illusion') and in virtual environments and simulators. The vast majority of vection research focuses on vection caused by visual stimulation. Even though visually induced vection is arguably the most compelling type of vection, the role of nonvisual sensory inputs, such as auditory, biomechanical, tactile, and vestibular cues, have recently gained more attention. Non-visual cues can play an important role in inducing vection in two ways. First, nonvisual cues can affect the occurrence and strength of vection when added to corresponding visual information. Second, nonvisual cues can also elicit vection in the absence of visual information, for instance when observers are blindfolded or tested in darkness. The present paper provides a narrative review of the literature on multimodal contributions to vection. We will discuss both the theoretical and applied relevance of multisensory processing as related to the experience of vection and provide design considerations on how to enhance vection in various contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.292
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultisensory ResearchSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207