MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399899700 · doi:10.1007/s10055-024-01024-w

Perspective matters: a systematic review of immersive virtual reality to reduce racial prejudice

2024· review· en· W4399899700 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVirtual Reality · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersErnest Oppenheimer Memorial TrustNational Research FoundationCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Computer scienceVirtual realityPrejudice (legal term)Human–computer interactionComputer graphicsComputer graphics (images)Artificial intelligencePsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the rise of social justice movements, increased attention has been directed to levels of intergroup tension worldwide. Racial prejudice is one such tension that permeates societies and creates distinct inequalities at all levels of our social ecosystem. Whether these prejudices are present explicitly (directly or consciously) or implicitly (unconsciously or automatically), manipulating body ownership by embodying an avatar of another race using immersive virtual reality (IVR) presents a promising approach to reducing racial bias. Nevertheless, research findings are contradictory, which is possibly attributed to variances in methodological factors across studies. This systematic review, therefore, aimed to identify variables and methodological variations that may underlie the observed discrepancies in study outcomes. Adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this systematic review encompassed 12 studies that employed IVR and embodiment techniques to investigate racial attitudes. Subsequently, two mini meta-analyses were performed on four and five of these studies, respectively — both of which utilised the Implicit Association Test (IAT) as a metric to gauge these biases. This review demonstrated that IVR allows not only the manipulation of a sense of body ownership but also the investigation of wider social identities. Despite the novelty of IVR as a tool to help understand and possibly reduce racial bias, our review has identified key limitations in the existing literature. Specifically, we found inconsistencies in the measures and IVR equipment and software employed, as well as diversity limitations in demographic characteristics within both the sampled population and the embodiment of avatars. Future studies are needed to address these critical shortcomings. Specific recommendations are suggested, these include: (1) enhancing participant diversity in terms of the sample representation and by integrating ethnically diverse avatars; (2) employing multi-modal methods in assessing embodiment; (3) increasing consistency in the use and administration of implicit and explicit measures of racial prejudice; and (4) implementing consistent approaches in using IVR hardware and software to enhance the realism of the IVR experience.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.328 · 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