How a lack of haptic feedback affects eye-hand coordination and embodiment in virtual reality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intuitively, we know that how we perceive and act in the world is profoundly affected when the lights go out. But what happens to visuomotor control when our sense of touch is taken away? Notably this happens in Virtual Reality (VR) and for prosthesis users. We test this question by combining VR and hand-, motion- and eye-tracking to give and deprive full haptic feedback to individuals with normal hand function during a validated object interaction task. Returning haptic feedback in VR generated eye-hand coordination more similar to real-world interactions. Interestingly, VR users and prosthesis users have both reported reduced feelings of embodiment towards their limbs. Therefore, we also quantified the sense of embodiment which increased with haptic feedback. We further reported a correlation between eye-hand coordination and an individual's sense of embodiment suggesting that the embodiment is experienced as the synchronized reception of sensory information and that eye-hand coordination measures are an objective way to quantify these experiences.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".