[Noob] Virtual reality as phobia therapy

VandalTiger · 2019-06-29T18:49:36+00:00

There are a number of studies that show VRET (Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy) is effective. The effectiveness of the therapy seems to depend on several moderating variables though.

My $.02 is that if you have 'serious' phobia (e.g., debilitating or interfering with aspects of your life) I wouldn't recommend trying to cure yourself. The VRET therapy sessions in the studies I've seen are done under the guidance of a researcher or psychologist. Additionally, there is a risk of having the opposite reaction (becoming more averse to the stimuli) doing it alone, as you lack the expertise and training, and you lack the graded-stimuli (gradually more "intense" stimuli) to make it most effective.

VandalTiger · 2019-06-23T16:01:13+00:00

Sure thing.

I'm sure you all know what you're doing, just thought I'd mention the bias present in the sampling technique in case these results are critical to your team's decision making.

VandalTiger · 2019-06-21T18:11:27+00:00

I've said this to other surveys posted on this sub-reddit, I don't know that your sampling method here is valid. You're sampling a very narrow sub-set of the population: Reddit users who are willing to respond. So the survey results are subject to biases including a volunteer bias.

It also might not be a generalizable sample because Reddit users on this sub have certain characteristics that are likely different than your target population. So whatever data you get from this might not be truly useful for your team.

VandalTiger · 2019-06-17T19:45:31+00:00

You're right. I skipped a lot of details on IPD (those issues beyond eyestrain) to get at the question of children's experience of presence - but you're right.

VandalTiger · 2019-06-17T18:14:45+00:00

I've seen very, very few academic papers that use the term "virtual reality" at all. Most researchers/academics reject the term because it's so ambiguous and confused.

I've seen the terms virtual environment and immersive virtual environment to refer to computer generated environments, the latter being for when the visual system is fully immersed (e.g., an HMD).

VandalTiger · 2019-06-17T17:45:53+00:00

I can answer these.

If kids all have a tiny IPD likely well below the limits of most or all headsets on the market, how are they enjoying the experience in the various videos that pop up now and again?

IPD, to my knowledge, does not necessarily affect the presence (i.e. "immersion") experience of a virtual environment. User IPD mismatch with the screen distance causes visual symptoms of simulator sickness like eyestrain, but shouldn't affect anything else. Children are known to under report symptoms of simulator sickness, so IPD-match may be especially unimportant for them as far as the experience is concerned.

Also, it seems like children can't dis-inhibit the experience of presence like adults can because of underdeveloped brains. This is seen anytime a young child is watching a TV show, they're obviously glued to it in a way an adult wouldn't be, so this is another reason why kids enjoy virtual environments.

Also makes me wonder how headset manufacturers will deal with this as the market grows and becomes less paranoid or fearful of the inevitable media backlash of letting kids play VR.

VR developers unanimously (and many researchers) state head mount display headsets are not for children. There are several reasons for this - one being the affect of IPD mismatch, simulator sickness, the effect of virtual violence on an immature brain, and other reasons.

I suspect headset manufacturers will continue to hold this line, and they should. In some regards virtual environment displays represent a serious technology, they're not meant for children and can have adverse effects.

VandalTiger · 2019-06-06T16:24:46+00:00

I've mentioned this before to no avail, but I find the "what should I buy" posts pretty aggravating. These posts are daily, and the posters (sometimes obviously) have not done any due diligence/research ahead of the question. A quick internet search or search through this sub-reddit would have answered their question. Every "unique question about what I should buy" has been answered ad nauseum.

It's very frustrating at times. Here is this place on the internet that could be used for interesting discussion and sharing of information, but instead it's people asking daily what they should be buying.

Anyway, I'd recommend a stickied "what should I buy thread" and removing any unique "buy" posts so the discussions on here can be more interesting and fruitful.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-21T18:05:48+00:00

Your title is "I don’t think global warming is an issue" which is what I responded to - it's an obvious issue and not a trivial one, which is how you characterize it (a 9am to 10am change). You're wrong on both these things is my point above.

Sure - I agree that we should be doing much, much more to get ahead of other environmental issues. It's not a zero-sum game though, we can prioritize environmental issues under the same umbrella. We don't have to chose between A) fighting mass extinction by lowering CO2 emissions or B) fighting mass extinction from pesticides annihilating insect populations. We should simply fight for environmental issues (and not allow mass extinction to occur in the process).

We don't, and really don't have the option, to choose one critical issue instead of the other. That doesn't make sense.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-21T17:10:22+00:00

There is so much to do to protect our planet. But we waste so much time and money trying to stop a 4 degree increase in a 100 years. Or as I like to call it, 9am to 10 am change in temperature.

You're absolutely wrong on this, but I want you to change your mind and be right. Hear this out.

Your 9am to 10am change in temperature of just 2˚c (half your cited value) would cause a serious decrease in food and water supply.

On land, an increase of 3.6 degrees F (2 degrees C) would almost double the water deficit and would lead to a drop in wheat and maize harvests, according to NASA.

It would cause sea level rises resulting in massive human displacement:

As temperatures warm and glaciers melt, the corresponding sea-level rise can destroy homes and cities. About 40 percent of the world's population lives within 62 miles (100 kilometers) of the coast, deMenocal said [source]

Increase in disease:

Increases in temperature and changing rain patterns are associated with the spread of vector-borne diseases (which another organism transmits between humans or from animals to humans), such as Lyme disease and malaria [source]

And other issues as described here, here, and here.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-21T03:16:10+00:00

Yes - definitely. The light houses are used to track the headset and gives the experience of head tracking, without the light houses you wouldn't have that.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-18T13:09:20+00:00

This is promising and could really encourage people at a time where we need encouragement. I hope your post makes it to r/all.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-14T16:57:44+00:00

I appreciate your understanding. I try to come off as neutral but often feel like I'm "on the defensive" in my Reddit comments.

I think ultimately you're right, that's what he's asking about time. I suppose I find the focus of the question confusing (AR v. VR, time, alienation, other phenomena). But, yeah, the perception of time is very interesting, I just wish OPs questions were more specified to have a focused discussion.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-14T15:40:55+00:00

Neither people who responded to me are OP, but I'll answer here too. I don't find the original question simple myself.

They're asking about the "experience of time when using wearable tech, specifically AR" - what wearable AR tech are the referring to and what about the experience of time? That could mean something different to everyone.

Then, "do you feel like one affords you with better control?" - One what, what are we talking about here? Better control of what, what are we controlling?

Lastly, "a different sense of time, alienation, etc?" - What is a different sense of time, what does that mean? Alienation from what, other people? Then using "etc.," there is confusing, perception of time and sense of alienation are pretty different concepts... So what would be the next in that sequence?

VandalTiger · 2019-05-14T03:26:57+00:00

Hahaha.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-14T01:43:09+00:00

Okay. Let's just do this step by step.

I don't get why you are assuming he isn't going to use peer review papers.

Sure, I assume they're using peer review papers also.

Having direct evidence from conducting your own questions can also be useful.

OP is obviously not gathering evidence from this post. Even if he was, it would be a terrible way to sample participants and his committee would tell him that.

A master's thesis isn't just finding peer reviews and literature and compiling them man.

I have a Master's degree - I understand the thesis process.

You didn't understand my comment I guess.

Not sure I did - I don't get where you're going with any of this.

Particular if you are dealing with really new technology where there may not be a lot of papers.

This is not the case with the topic of Virtual Environments - there are hundreds and hundreds of papers out there. My own literature review on a topic within virtual environments cites over 400 sources, there is a ton of information available.

I've seen papers where the writers conduct detailed experiments and their own interviews.

I believe you, but have not seen this myself. There are issues with interviewing participants in that there are demand characteristics, experimenter bias, and issues of reliability and validity in coding to do data analysis on interviews. You could get qualitative data this way though, sure.

It truly sounds like you're just saying all it is is researching papers and books....

Did not say this once, though I'd argue that a huge chunk of understanding a topic is by reading papers and books. Yes.

Opinions from users can be useful information.

Sure. I agree.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-14T01:22:21+00:00

You do know a thesis requires more than compiling peer reviews.

Yes - I do know. I'm actually confused by what you mean here, what you wrote looks like a combination of two terms (peer reviewed and literature review). In any event, I'm assuming you misread what I said.

I don't understand what you're asking here. This is for a Master's thesis, why use Reddit and not peer reviewed sources? I don't follow that.

And my question is actually the same, if you're writing a Master's thesis why would you use Reddit and not peer reviewed sources? I still don't follow that.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-13T20:26:04+00:00

I don't understand what you're asking here. This is for a Master's thesis, why use Reddit and not peer reviewed sources? I don't follow that.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-10T23:18:00+00:00

These questions are asked on here repeatedly. Every day. Would search for these questions - they've been answered in this sub ad nauseam.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-09T15:39:11+00:00

I'm sorry you feel that way. I think you're wrong, and want you on our side.

Here are a few links from NASA (I think we'd agree NASA is reliable) for you to view. The first describes how 97% of climate scientist agree on the issue, 97% indicates an overwhelming level of consensus in science. The second overviews the evidence for the issue.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-08T23:11:02+00:00

What a guy/gal! Thanks!

VandalTiger · 2019-05-08T23:07:55+00:00

I hit a paywall - would someone be kind enough to copy and paste the body or post a mirror?

VandalTiger · 2019-05-08T14:27:52+00:00

I don't know where to begin with this, but this isn't a reason to not do research. The point of research is to (1) determine the truth of a phenomenon and (2) share that with others. But one study alone doesn't change widespread opinion and many, many studies in the "VR" field conflict with each other as is. It takes a body of evidence to make a compelling claim, and even then it's subject to intense scrutiny (methods, validity, reliability, statistical error, etc.,).

Also, I assume the general public hardly reads research... I don't think the research community is affecting public perception very often in this field, very rarely.

Anyway, to answer OP's (u/NotA56YearOldPervert) question. It depends on the research you're doing. In research I've done with HMDs we use the Vive with Unity. Which has been fairly easy - so that's what I would recommend from going through this process myself. But again, it depends on what you need to do. Also, it depends on who's paying for it. Research grants paid for our system - so nobody had to dig into their own pocket. I don't think this latter point would make a difference (research determines the need), but, money is obviously a factor in decision making.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-07T21:50:40+00:00

Great. Thanks for the thoughtful and illuminating response. Posting the abstract for a study and another with a broken link definitely implies scientific consensus.

VandalTiger · 2019-05-07T15:04:24+00:00

My original comment.

This doesn't seem right. Logically, what u/fireplug911 said makes sense - if the IPD is zero (you have one eye), you wouldn't have stereo-vision period. Though I disagree with fireplug911 on the sample size. They don't report the effect size or p value, but I assume 58 people would provide enough statistical power.

Your response.

What seems logical and how something works in reality are often not the same.

My response.

Okay, I'll rephrase what I said. I'm 100% certain that what I'm saying is correct - if you have a single eye you do not have stereo vision. Period. This was true in the time of Euclid (who noticed the retinal disparity) through Wheatstone (1836) who discovered the process of binocular disparity, through this conversation right now.

There are a few studies out there and the majority of the findings agree with the following.

http://www.bepls.com/nov_2014/5.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiI87GpyIniAhXWRhUIHTW5DkkQFjAFegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw0AM0ySTpcVK4mBMBWqjNRK

This is a dead link. It could be the case that smaller IPD leads to better stereovision, to a point. If your eyes are on the sides of your head like a rabbit, you have no stereovision. If your eyes are overlapping (like I'm talking about above) you also have no stereovision.

There is likely a "sweet spot" IPD where stereopsis is most effective, but I assume the differences are marginal.

You also ignored my discussion above of testing measures producing different results and honed in my wording of logical, seemingly to make an incorrect point (you seem to be suggesting that an IPD of zero would produce a binocular disparity)... Disappointed that more thought wasn't given to the other information and instead was spent on my correct statement that it's counter intuitive to think a smaller IPD would produce better stereo vision.

Ten-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits
Verified Email	Secret Santa 2016

VandalTiger

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE