MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396609534 · doi:10.1162/pres_a_00424

Contribution of Virtual Reality to the Reproduction of Social Interaction Characteristics in Neuropsychology: A Systematic Review of the Literature

2024· review· en· W4396609534 on OpenAlexaff
Maxime Jollivet, Jérémy Besnard, Frédéric Banville, Philippe Allain

Bibliographic record

VenuePRESENCE Virtual and Augmented Reality · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperationalizationNeuropsychologyObjectificationInteractionismPsychologyVariety (cybernetics)Systematic reviewPerspective (graphical)Ecological validityEpistemologyCognitive psychologySociologyCognitionComputer scienceSocial scienceMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sociocognitive difficulties are observed in many pathologies associated with brain lesions or atypical brain functioning. The development of virtual reality offers an opportunity to assess this dimension from an interactionist perspective and to increase the ecological validity of the material used. However, this approach can be operationalized and conceptualized in a variety of ways. To understand these aspects, we conducted a systematic review of articles found in the PubMed, PubMed Central, and ScienceDirect databases, following PRISMA-P guidelines. A corpus of 48 articles was identified and analyzed in terms of the experimental devices used, to gauge the extent to which they reproduced the characteristics of real-world social interactions, as well as the associated conceptions. Results suggested that interactionist research lies on a continuum between ecological validity (studies exploring interactions via general functions) and a high level of experimental control (exploration of interactions with respect to specific processes). They are discussed in terms of the operationalization and objectification of interactionism.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0150.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRESENCE Virtual and Augmented RealitySame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207