Reaching in Several Realities: Motor and Cognitive Benefits of Different Visualization Technologies

Nicolas Wenk, Joaquin Penalver-Andres, Rara Palma, Karin A. Buetler, R. Müri, T. Nef, L. Marchal-Crespo
{"title":"Reaching in Several Realities: Motor and Cognitive Benefits of Different Visualization Technologies","authors":"Nicolas Wenk, Joaquin Penalver-Andres, Rara Palma, Karin A. Buetler, R. Müri, T. Nef, L. Marchal-Crespo","doi":"10.1109/ICORR.2019.8779366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is increasing interest in using virtual reality (VR) in robotic neurorehabilitation. However, the use of conventional VR displays (i.e., computer screens), implies several transformations between the real movements in 3D and their 2D virtual representations that might negatively impact the rehabilitation interventions. In this study, we compared the impact on movement quality and cognitive load of novel vs. standard visualization technologies: i) Immersive VR (IVR) head-mounted display (HMD), ii) Augmented reality (AR) HMD, and iii) Computer screen. Twenty healthy participants performed simultaneously a motor and a cognitive task. Goal-oriented reaching movements were recorded using an HTC Vive controller. The cognitive load was assessed by the accuracy on a simultaneous counting task.The movement quality improved when visualizing the movements in IVR, compared to the computer screen. These improvements were more evident for locations that required movements in several dimensions. We found a trend to higher movement quality in AR than Screen, but worse than IVR. No significant difference was observed between modalities for the cognitive load. These results provide encouraging evidence that VR interventions using HMDs might be more suited for reaching tasks in several dimensions than a computer screen. Technical limitations might still limit the beneficial effects of AR, both in movement quality and cognitive load.","PeriodicalId":130415,"journal":{"name":"2019 IEEE 16th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 IEEE 16th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICORR.2019.8779366","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

There is increasing interest in using virtual reality (VR) in robotic neurorehabilitation. However, the use of conventional VR displays (i.e., computer screens), implies several transformations between the real movements in 3D and their 2D virtual representations that might negatively impact the rehabilitation interventions. In this study, we compared the impact on movement quality and cognitive load of novel vs. standard visualization technologies: i) Immersive VR (IVR) head-mounted display (HMD), ii) Augmented reality (AR) HMD, and iii) Computer screen. Twenty healthy participants performed simultaneously a motor and a cognitive task. Goal-oriented reaching movements were recorded using an HTC Vive controller. The cognitive load was assessed by the accuracy on a simultaneous counting task.The movement quality improved when visualizing the movements in IVR, compared to the computer screen. These improvements were more evident for locations that required movements in several dimensions. We found a trend to higher movement quality in AR than Screen, but worse than IVR. No significant difference was observed between modalities for the cognitive load. These results provide encouraging evidence that VR interventions using HMDs might be more suited for reaching tasks in several dimensions than a computer screen. Technical limitations might still limit the beneficial effects of AR, both in movement quality and cognitive load.
到达几个现实:不同的可视化技术的运动和认知的好处
在机器人神经康复中使用虚拟现实(VR)的兴趣越来越大。然而,使用传统的虚拟现实显示器(即计算机屏幕)意味着在3D的真实运动和2D虚拟表示之间进行若干转换,这可能会对康复干预产生负面影响。在这项研究中,我们比较了新型和标准可视化技术对运动质量和认知负荷的影响:i)沉浸式VR (IVR)头戴式显示器(HMD), ii)增强现实(AR)头戴式显示器(HMD), iii)计算机屏幕。20名健康的参与者同时进行一项运动和认知任务。使用HTC Vive控制器记录目标导向的到达动作。认知负荷通过同时计数任务的准确性来评估。与计算机屏幕相比,在IVR中可视化运动时,运动质量得到了改善。这些改进对于需要在多个维度上移动的位置更为明显。我们发现AR的移动质量比Screen高,但比IVR差。认知负荷在不同模式间无显著差异。这些结果提供了令人鼓舞的证据,表明使用头戴式显示器的虚拟现实干预可能比计算机屏幕更适合在几个维度上完成任务。技术限制可能仍然会限制AR的有益效果,无论是在运动质量还是认知负荷方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信