ArticleJournal of open psychology data2026
Data from in Rod We Trust - the Evaluation of a Virtual Rod and Frame Test as a Cybersickness Screening Instrument.
Article in Journal of open psychology data, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present data from a virtual Rod and Frame Test (RFT) used to screen for cybersickness and data from a gamified spatial orientation task (City) used as a reference for inducing cybersickness. Data include RFT and City performance, head tracking, self-reported cybersickness symptoms, and system logs. As cybersickness experiments are stressful, reusing this data reduces participant burden and supports ethical research. The dataset enables replication, further analyses (e.g., postural stability), and joint analyses. We further describe the open-source code for the Virtual Reality (VR) applications that make the logging rationale transparent. Moreover, this promotes efficient sampling, customizable scenarios, and methodological transparency.
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.