虚拟现实轨迹制作过程中的认知-运动交互作用

Oran Ben Gal, G. Doniger, Maya Cohen, Y. Bahat, M. Beeri, G. Zeilig, M. Plotnik
{"title":"虚拟现实轨迹制作过程中的认知-运动交互作用","authors":"Oran Ben Gal, G. Doniger, Maya Cohen, Y. Bahat, M. Beeri, G. Zeilig, M. Plotnik","doi":"10.1109/ICVR46560.2019.8994386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is great interest in ecological virtual reality (VR-) based adaptations of traditional pen-and-paper neuropsychological tests. Such adaptations are designed to measure the same cognitive construct(s) as the original test but may also evaluate interactions between such constructs and other functions (e.g., motor), as occurs in daily life. Here we report on translation of the pen-and-paper Color Trails Test (CTT) to a VR-based head-mount device (HMD) implementation. Trails A is a measure of sustained attention, while Trails B measures divided attention. Participants were twenty-seven young (28.02±3.98 years) and twenty-nine middle-aged (55.41±6.60 years) healthy individuals. For young and middle-aged participants, respectively, mean VR-CTT Trails A completion times were 61.77 and 86.70 sec. Mean VR-CTT Trails B completion times were 113.25 and 154.00 sec, respectively. These completion times were significantly longer than those obtained for the pen-and-paper version (p<.001). The middle-aged group had longer completion times than young adults for both test formats (p<.001), with VR-CTT Trails B separating among the groups better than the corresponding pen-and-paper measure (p<.05). Supporting construct validity, completion times were correlated between pen-and-paper and VR-based versions (Trails A: r=.63; Trails B: r=.60, p’s<.001). VR-CTT motor performance was evaluated by quantifying the deviation of the actual reaching trajectories from the hand trajectories predicted by the minimal jerk model. For both age groups, deviations were greater for Trails B relative to Trails A (p<.001), consistent with a potential effect of divided attention on motor planning and execution. In sum, our VR-based HMD implementation of the CTT assesses similar cognitive constructs to the original pen-and-paper test (construct validity). Further, as suggested by longer completion times and substantial impact of cognitive demands upon motor performance, this VR-CTT affords enhanced ecological validity and added value by capturing cognitive-motor interactions associated with planning and execution of voluntary reaching movements during the task. We believe that such VR-based adaptations lie at the frontier of neuropsychological testing and will ultimately offer novel insights into our understanding of multimodal human function in the real world.","PeriodicalId":179905,"journal":{"name":"2019 International Conference on Virtual Rehabilitation (ICVR)","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive-motor interaction during virtual reality trail making\",\"authors\":\"Oran Ben Gal, G. Doniger, Maya Cohen, Y. Bahat, M. Beeri, G. Zeilig, M. Plotnik\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICVR46560.2019.8994386\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is great interest in ecological virtual reality (VR-) based adaptations of traditional pen-and-paper neuropsychological tests. Such adaptations are designed to measure the same cognitive construct(s) as the original test but may also evaluate interactions between such constructs and other functions (e.g., motor), as occurs in daily life. Here we report on translation of the pen-and-paper Color Trails Test (CTT) to a VR-based head-mount device (HMD) implementation. Trails A is a measure of sustained attention, while Trails B measures divided attention. Participants were twenty-seven young (28.02±3.98 years) and twenty-nine middle-aged (55.41±6.60 years) healthy individuals. For young and middle-aged participants, respectively, mean VR-CTT Trails A completion times were 61.77 and 86.70 sec. Mean VR-CTT Trails B completion times were 113.25 and 154.00 sec, respectively. These completion times were significantly longer than those obtained for the pen-and-paper version (p<.001). The middle-aged group had longer completion times than young adults for both test formats (p<.001), with VR-CTT Trails B separating among the groups better than the corresponding pen-and-paper measure (p<.05). Supporting construct validity, completion times were correlated between pen-and-paper and VR-based versions (Trails A: r=.63; Trails B: r=.60, p’s<.001). VR-CTT motor performance was evaluated by quantifying the deviation of the actual reaching trajectories from the hand trajectories predicted by the minimal jerk model. For both age groups, deviations were greater for Trails B relative to Trails A (p<.001), consistent with a potential effect of divided attention on motor planning and execution. In sum, our VR-based HMD implementation of the CTT assesses similar cognitive constructs to the original pen-and-paper test (construct validity). Further, as suggested by longer completion times and substantial impact of cognitive demands upon motor performance, this VR-CTT affords enhanced ecological validity and added value by capturing cognitive-motor interactions associated with planning and execution of voluntary reaching movements during the task. We believe that such VR-based adaptations lie at the frontier of neuropsychological testing and will ultimately offer novel insights into our understanding of multimodal human function in the real world.\",\"PeriodicalId\":179905,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2019 International Conference on Virtual Rehabilitation (ICVR)\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2019 International Conference on Virtual Rehabilitation (ICVR)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICVR46560.2019.8994386\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 International Conference on Virtual Rehabilitation (ICVR)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICVR46560.2019.8994386","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

人们对基于生态虚拟现实(VR- based)的传统纸笔神经心理测试产生了浓厚的兴趣。这种适应被设计用来测量与原始测试相同的认知结构,但也可以评估这些结构与日常生活中发生的其他功能(如运动)之间的相互作用。在这里,我们报告了笔和纸的颜色轨迹测试(CTT)的翻译到基于vr的头戴式设备(HMD)的实现。路径A衡量的是持续注意力,而路径B衡量的是分散注意力。参与者为年轻健康人27例(28.02±3.98岁),中年健康人29例(55.41±6.60岁)。青年和中年参与者的平均VR-CTT Trails A完成时间分别为61.77秒和86.70秒,平均VR-CTT Trails B完成时间分别为113.25秒和154.00秒。这些完成时间明显长于纸笔版本(p< 0.001)。中年组完成两种测试格式的时间都比年轻人长(p< 0.001), VR-CTT Trails B在组间的分离优于相应的笔和纸测量(p< 0.05)。支持构念效度、完成时间在纸笔和虚拟现实版本之间存在相关性(实验A: r= 0.63;小径B: r=。60 p <措施)。VR-CTT的运动性能是通过量化实际到达轨迹与最小抖动模型预测的手部轨迹的偏差来评估的。对于两个年龄组,路径B相对于路径A的偏差更大(p< 0.001),这与分散注意力对运动计划和执行的潜在影响一致。总之,我们基于vr的HMD CTT实现评估了与原始纸笔测试相似的认知构念(构念效度)。此外,正如较长的完成时间和认知需求对运动表现的重大影响所表明的那样,该VR-CTT通过捕捉与任务期间自愿伸手运动的计划和执行相关的认知-运动相互作用,提供了增强的生态有效性和附加价值。我们相信,这种基于vr的适应处于神经心理学测试的前沿,最终将为我们对现实世界中人类多模态功能的理解提供新的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cognitive-motor interaction during virtual reality trail making
There is great interest in ecological virtual reality (VR-) based adaptations of traditional pen-and-paper neuropsychological tests. Such adaptations are designed to measure the same cognitive construct(s) as the original test but may also evaluate interactions between such constructs and other functions (e.g., motor), as occurs in daily life. Here we report on translation of the pen-and-paper Color Trails Test (CTT) to a VR-based head-mount device (HMD) implementation. Trails A is a measure of sustained attention, while Trails B measures divided attention. Participants were twenty-seven young (28.02±3.98 years) and twenty-nine middle-aged (55.41±6.60 years) healthy individuals. For young and middle-aged participants, respectively, mean VR-CTT Trails A completion times were 61.77 and 86.70 sec. Mean VR-CTT Trails B completion times were 113.25 and 154.00 sec, respectively. These completion times were significantly longer than those obtained for the pen-and-paper version (p<.001). The middle-aged group had longer completion times than young adults for both test formats (p<.001), with VR-CTT Trails B separating among the groups better than the corresponding pen-and-paper measure (p<.05). Supporting construct validity, completion times were correlated between pen-and-paper and VR-based versions (Trails A: r=.63; Trails B: r=.60, p’s<.001). VR-CTT motor performance was evaluated by quantifying the deviation of the actual reaching trajectories from the hand trajectories predicted by the minimal jerk model. For both age groups, deviations were greater for Trails B relative to Trails A (p<.001), consistent with a potential effect of divided attention on motor planning and execution. In sum, our VR-based HMD implementation of the CTT assesses similar cognitive constructs to the original pen-and-paper test (construct validity). Further, as suggested by longer completion times and substantial impact of cognitive demands upon motor performance, this VR-CTT affords enhanced ecological validity and added value by capturing cognitive-motor interactions associated with planning and execution of voluntary reaching movements during the task. We believe that such VR-based adaptations lie at the frontier of neuropsychological testing and will ultimately offer novel insights into our understanding of multimodal human function in the real world.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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