ArticleScientific reports2024
Prolonged exposure to mixed reality alters task performance in the unmediated environment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Cognitive Style and Evaluation Context on Hedonic and Sensory Perception of Café Latte: A Comparison of Sensory Booth, Real-Life, and Mixed Reality Environments.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparing Mixed Reality and Two-Dimensional Imaging in Mandibular Fracture Classification: A Prospective Randomized Study in Medical and Dental Students.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Adaptive Responses of Accommodation and Vergence Following Exposure to Augmented Reality in a Head-Mounted Display.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Relating visual and pictorial space: Integration of binocular disparity and motion parallax.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- The geometry of the vergence-accommodation conflict in mixed reality systems.Virtual reality · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The popularity of mixed reality (MR) technologies, including virtual (VR) and augmented (AR) reality, have advanced many training and skill development applications. If successful, these technologies could be valuable for high-impact professional training, like medical operations or sports, where the physical resources could be limited or inaccessible. Despite MR's potential, it is still unclear whether repeatedly performing a task in MR would affect performance in the same or related tasks in the physical environment. To investigate this issue, participants executed a series of visually-guided manual pointing movements in the physical world before and after spending one hour in VR or AR performing similar movements. Results showed that, due to the MR headsets' intrinsic perceptual geometry, movements executed in VR were shorter and movements executed in AR were longer than the veridical Euclidean distance. Crucially, the sensorimotor bias in MR conditions also manifested in the subsequent post-test pointing task; participants transferring from VR initially undershoot whereas those from AR overshoot the target in the physical environment. These findings call for careful consideration of MR-based training because the exposure to MR may perturb the sensorimotor processes in the physical environment and negatively impact performance accuracy and transfer of training from MR to UR.
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.