Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37053205›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

A reliable and robust online validation method for creating a novel 3D Affective Virtual Environment and Event Library (AVEL).

Ifigeneia Mavridou, Emili Balaguer-Ballester, Charles Nduka, Ellen Seiss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Ifigeneia MavridouCentre of Digital Entertainment, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3800-6531
Emili Balaguer-BallesterDepartment of Computing and Informatics, Faculty of Science and Technology and Interdisciplinary Neuroscience Research Centre, Bournemouth University, Poole, United Kingdom.
Charles NdukaEmteq Labs, Sussex Innovation Centre, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Ellen SeissDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Science and Technology and Interdisciplinary Neuroscience Research Centre, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper describes the development and validation of 3D Affective Virtual environments and Event Library (AVEL) for affect induction in Virtual Reality (VR) settings with an online survey; a cost-effective method for remote stimuli validation which has not been sufficiently explored. Three virtual office-replica environments were designed to induce negative, neutral and positive valence. Each virtual environment also had several affect inducing events/objects. The environments were validated using an online survey containing videos of the virtual environments and pictures of the events/objects. They survey was conducted with 67 participants. Participants were instructed to rate their perceived levels of valence and arousal for each virtual environment (VE), and separately for each event/object. They also rated their perceived levels of presence for each VE, and they were asked how well they remembered the events/objects presented in each VE. Finally, an alexithymia questionnaire was administered at the end of the survey. User ratings were analysed and successfully validated the expected affect and presence levels of each VE and affect ratings for each event/object. Our results demonstrate the effectiveness of the online validation of VE material in affective and cognitive neuroscience and wider research settings as a good scientific practice for future affect induction VR studies.

Indexed as

EnvironmentVirtual RealityArousalHumansMental RecallUser-Computer Interface

Identifiers

PMID37053205
PMCPMC10101521

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.