通过像素蹬车:解码虚拟现实自行车研究的方法框架

IF 3.5 2区 工程技术 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Aislinn Eustace Dressler, Chris Bachmann
{"title":"通过像素蹬车:解码虚拟现实自行车研究的方法框架","authors":"Aislinn Eustace Dressler,&nbsp;Chris Bachmann","doi":"10.1016/j.trf.2025.04.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As cycling continues to grow in popularity and importance, virtual reality (VR) presents an opportunity to conduct safe and efficient studies on cyclist behaviours, opinions, and perceptions. The goal of this review is to develop an improved understanding of the methodological framework for conducting cycling simulator research. To do this, 50 VR cycling studies from 2020 to 2024 were reviewed, examining their study design and methodological considerations, technological setup and apparatuses, and data collection and evaluation techniques. From this analysis, it was found that there are many inconsistencies in the design and execution of VR cycling studies, including number of trials (range from 1 to 54), time in VR, participant sample sizes (range from 1 to 208), processes for calibration and validation, and data collection and evaluation techniques. The current lack of consistency within the field of VR cycling research presents a significant challenge, since changes in the methodological framework can influence the results and insights obtained. Even in recent years, conflicting results have been reported in the literature, and either no supporting evidence or conflicting evidence was found in this review for some commonly held beliefs about VR cycling research. In the future, studies are needed to investigate how the identified inconsistencies affect study results to move towards a more rigorous methodological framework for cycling simulator research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48355,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Part F-Traffic Psychology and Behaviour","volume":"112 ","pages":"Pages 256-273"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pedalling through Pixels: Decoding the methodological framework of virtual reality cycling research\",\"authors\":\"Aislinn Eustace Dressler,&nbsp;Chris Bachmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.trf.2025.04.011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>As cycling continues to grow in popularity and importance, virtual reality (VR) presents an opportunity to conduct safe and efficient studies on cyclist behaviours, opinions, and perceptions. The goal of this review is to develop an improved understanding of the methodological framework for conducting cycling simulator research. To do this, 50 VR cycling studies from 2020 to 2024 were reviewed, examining their study design and methodological considerations, technological setup and apparatuses, and data collection and evaluation techniques. From this analysis, it was found that there are many inconsistencies in the design and execution of VR cycling studies, including number of trials (range from 1 to 54), time in VR, participant sample sizes (range from 1 to 208), processes for calibration and validation, and data collection and evaluation techniques. The current lack of consistency within the field of VR cycling research presents a significant challenge, since changes in the methodological framework can influence the results and insights obtained. Even in recent years, conflicting results have been reported in the literature, and either no supporting evidence or conflicting evidence was found in this review for some commonly held beliefs about VR cycling research. In the future, studies are needed to investigate how the identified inconsistencies affect study results to move towards a more rigorous methodological framework for cycling simulator research.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48355,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transportation Research Part F-Traffic Psychology and Behaviour\",\"volume\":\"112 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 256-273\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transportation Research Part F-Traffic Psychology and Behaviour\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847825001378\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Part F-Traffic Psychology and Behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847825001378","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着骑自行车的普及和重要性不断提高,虚拟现实(VR)提供了一个机会,可以对骑自行车的人的行为、意见和看法进行安全有效的研究。这篇综述的目的是为了更好地理解进行自行车模拟器研究的方法框架。为此,我们回顾了2020年至2024年的50项VR自行车研究,检查了他们的研究设计和方法考虑因素、技术设置和设备、数据收集和评估技术。从这一分析中,我们发现在VR循环研究的设计和执行中存在许多不一致之处,包括试验数量(范围从1到54)、VR时间、参与者样本量(范围从1到208)、校准和验证过程以及数据收集和评估技术。目前,虚拟现实自行车研究领域缺乏一致性,这是一个重大挑战,因为方法框架的变化会影响所获得的结果和见解。即使在最近几年,文献中也报道了相互矛盾的结果,并且在本综述中没有发现支持VR骑行研究的一些普遍观点的证据或相互矛盾的证据。在未来,需要研究确定的不一致性如何影响研究结果,以走向更严格的自行车模拟器研究方法框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pedalling through Pixels: Decoding the methodological framework of virtual reality cycling research
As cycling continues to grow in popularity and importance, virtual reality (VR) presents an opportunity to conduct safe and efficient studies on cyclist behaviours, opinions, and perceptions. The goal of this review is to develop an improved understanding of the methodological framework for conducting cycling simulator research. To do this, 50 VR cycling studies from 2020 to 2024 were reviewed, examining their study design and methodological considerations, technological setup and apparatuses, and data collection and evaluation techniques. From this analysis, it was found that there are many inconsistencies in the design and execution of VR cycling studies, including number of trials (range from 1 to 54), time in VR, participant sample sizes (range from 1 to 208), processes for calibration and validation, and data collection and evaluation techniques. The current lack of consistency within the field of VR cycling research presents a significant challenge, since changes in the methodological framework can influence the results and insights obtained. Even in recent years, conflicting results have been reported in the literature, and either no supporting evidence or conflicting evidence was found in this review for some commonly held beliefs about VR cycling research. In the future, studies are needed to investigate how the identified inconsistencies affect study results to move towards a more rigorous methodological framework for cycling simulator research.
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
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
14.60%
发文量
239
审稿时长
71 days
期刊介绍: Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour focuses on the behavioural and psychological aspects of traffic and transport. The aim of the journal is to enhance theory development, improve the quality of empirical studies and to stimulate the application of research findings in practice. TRF provides a focus and a means of communication for the considerable amount of research activities that are now being carried out in this field. The journal provides a forum for transportation researchers, psychologists, ergonomists, engineers and policy-makers with an interest in traffic and transport psychology.
×
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