Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29504117›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of psychology (London, England : 1953)2018

Why and how to use virtual reality to study human social interaction: The challenges of exploring a new research landscape.

Xueni Pan, Antonia F de C Hamilton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 125 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
125citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

125 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

65 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Xueni PanDepartment of Computing, Goldsmiths College, University of London, UK.
Antonia F de C HamiltonInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, UCL, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8000-0219

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As virtual reality (VR) technology and systems become more commercially available and accessible, more and more psychologists are starting to integrate VR as part of their methods. This approach offers major advantages in experimental control, reproducibility, and ecological validity, but also has limitations and hidden pitfalls which may distract the novice user. This study aimed to guide the psychologist into the novel world of VR, reviewing available instrumentation and mapping the landscape of possible systems. We use examples of state-of-the-art research to describe challenges which research is now solving, including embodiment, uncanny valley, simulation sickness, presence, ethics, and experimental design. Finally, we propose that the biggest challenge for the field would be to build a fully interactive virtual human who can pass a VR Turing test - and that this could only be achieved if psychologists, VR technologists, and AI researchers work together.

Indexed as

Interpersonal RelationsResearch DesignVirtual RealityBehavioral ResearchHumansPsychologyReproducibility of Resultspsychologysocial interactionvirtual humansvirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID29504117
PMCPMC6055846

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.