Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31613927›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Real vs. immersive-virtual emotional experience: Analysis of psycho-physiological patterns in a free exploration of an art museum.

Javier Marín-Morales, Juan Luis Higuera-Trujillo, Alberto Greco, Jaime Guixeres, Carmen Llinares, Claudio Gentili, Enzo Pasquale Scilingo, Mariano Alcañiz, Gaetano Valenza

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. VR for Studying the Neuroscience of Emotional Responses.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors.

Javier Marín-MoralesInstituto de Investigación e Innovación en Bioingeniería, Universitat Politècnica de València, València, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-1271-2892
Juan Luis Higuera-TrujilloInstituto de Investigación e Innovación en Bioingeniería, Universitat Politècnica de València, València, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-1870-2388
Alberto GrecoBioengineering and Robotics Research Centre E Piaggio & Department of Information Engineering, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Jaime GuixeresInstituto de Investigación e Innovación en Bioingeniería, Universitat Politècnica de València, València, Spain.
Carmen LlinaresInstituto de Investigación e Innovación en Bioingeniería, Universitat Politècnica de València, València, Spain.
Claudio GentiliDepartment of General Psychology, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Enzo Pasquale ScilingoBioengineering and Robotics Research Centre E Piaggio & Department of Information Engineering, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Mariano AlcañizInstituto de Investigación e Innovación en Bioingeniería, Universitat Politècnica de València, València, Spain.
Gaetano ValenzaBioengineering and Robotics Research Centre E Piaggio & Department of Information Engineering, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Virtual reality is a powerful tool in human behaviour research. However, few studies compare its capacity to evoke the same emotional responses as in real scenarios. This study investigates psycho-physiological patterns evoked during the free exploration of an art museum and the museum virtualized through a 3D immersive virtual environment (IVE). An exploratory study involving 60 participants was performed, recording electroencephalographic and electrocardiographic signals using wearable devices. The real vs. virtual psychological comparison was performed using self-assessment emotional response tests, whereas the physiological comparison was performed through Support Vector Machine algorithms, endowed with an effective feature selection procedure for a set of state-of-the-art metrics quantifying cardiovascular and brain linear and nonlinear dynamics. We included an initial calibration phase, using standardized 2D and 360° emotional stimuli, to increase the accuracy of the model. The self-assessments of the physical and virtual museum support the use of IVEs in emotion research. The 2-class (high/low) system accuracy was 71.52% and 77.08% along the arousal and valence dimension, respectively, in the physical museum, and 75.00% and 71.08% in the virtual museum. The previously presented 360° stimuli contributed to increasing the accuracy in the virtual museum. Also, the real vs. virtual classifier accuracy was 95.27%, using only EEG mean phase coherency features, which demonstrates the high involvement of brain synchronization in emotional virtual reality processes. These findings provide an important contribution at a methodological level and to scientific knowledge, which will effectively guide future emotion elicitation and recognition systems using virtual reality.

Indexed as

AdultAlgorithmsBrainElectrocardiographyElectroencephalographyEmotionsFemaleHeartHumansMaleMuseumsNonlinear DynamicsSupport Vector MachineVirtual RealityWearable Electronic DevicesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31613927
PMCPMC6793875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.