Individual factors and vection in younger and older adults: How sex, field dependence, personality, and visual attention do (or do not) affect illusory self-motion
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An important aspect to an immersive experience in Virtual Reality is vection, defined as the illusion of self-motion. Much of the literature to date has explored strategies to maximize vection through manipulations of the visual stimulus (e.g., increasing speed) or the experimental context (e.g., framing of the study instructions). However, the role of individual differences (e.g., age, biological sex) in vection susceptibility has received little attention. The objective of the current study was to investigate the influence of individual-difference factors on vection perception in younger and older adults. Forty-six younger adults ( M age = 25.1) and 39 older adults ( M age = 72.4) completed assessments of personality traits, field dependence, and visual attention prior to observing a moving visual stimulus aimed at inducing circular vection. Vection was measured using self-reports of onset latency, duration, and intensity. Results indicated that, in both age groups, females experienced longer-lasting vection compared to males. Additionally, the level of field dependence was related to vection intensity and duration in males but not in females. Variability in vection intensity was best explained by a mixture of biological, perceptual, cognitive, and personality variables. Taken together, these findings suggest that individual factors are important for understanding differences in vection susceptibility.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it