ReviewFrontiers in systems neuroscience2022
Naturalistic neuroscience and virtual reality.
Review in Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Olfactory spatial memory: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Selective spatial attention to competing speakers in azimuth and depth: Evidence from real and virtual environments.Neuroimage. Reports · 2026Article
- Rethinking Naturalistic Movie Neuroimaging Through Film Form.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Mobile eye tracking in the real world: Best practices.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- From facing fears to experimental frontiers: immersive cinematic virtual reality environments as a catalyst for innovation in behavioral neuroscience.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- How can ethology inform the neuroscience of fear, aggression and dominance?Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2024Review
- Virtual Reality for the Rehabilitation of Acquired Cognitive Disorders: A Narrative Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Virtual reality (VR) is one of the techniques that became particularly popular in neuroscience over the past few decades. VR experiments feature a closed-loop between sensory stimulation and behavior. Participants interact with the stimuli and not just passively perceive them. Several senses can be stimulated at once, large-scale environments can be simulated as well as social interactions. All of this makes VR experiences more natural than those in traditional lab paradigms. Compared to the situation in field research, a VR simulation is highly controllable and reproducible, as required of a laboratory technique used in the search for neural correlates of perception and behavior. VR is therefore considered a middle ground between ecological validity and experimental control. In this review, I explore the potential of VR in eliciting naturalistic perception and behavior in humans and non-human animals. In this context, I give an overview of recent virtual reality approaches used in neuroscientific research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.