Search

Advancements in virtual reality (VR) technology now allow for the creation of highly immersive virtual environments and for systems to be commercially available at an affordable price. Despite increased availability, this access does not ensure that VR is appropriate for training for all motor skills. Before the implementation of VR for training sport-related skills takes place, it must first be established whether VR utilization is appropriate. To this end, it is crucial to better understand the mechanisms that drive learning in these new environments which will allow for optimization of VR to best facilitate transfer of learned skills to the real world. In this study we sought to examine how a skill acquired in VR compares to one acquired in the real world (RW), utilizing training to complete a dart-throwing task in either a virtual or real environment. We adopted a perceptual-motor approach in this study, employing measures of task performance (i.e., accuracy), as well as of perception (i.e., visual symptoms and oculomotor behavior) and motor behaviors (i.e., throwing kinematics and coordination). Critically, the VR-trained group performed significantly worse in terms of throwing accuracy compared to both the RW-trained group and their own baseline performance. In terms of perception, the VR-trained group reported greater acute visual symptoms compared to the RW-trained group, though oculomotor behaviors were largely the same across groups. In terms of motor behaviors, the VR-trained group exhibited different dart-throwing kinematics during training, but in the follow-up test adapted their throwing pattern to one similar to the RW-trained group. In total, VR training impaired real-world task performance, suggesting that virtual environments may offer different learning constraints compared to the real world. These results thus emphasize the need to better understand how some elements of virtual learning environments detract from transfer of an acquired sport skill to the real world. Additional work is warranted to further understand how perceptual-motor behaviors are acquired differently in virtual spaces.

The purpose of this study is to examine the potential relationship between tonic accommodation (TA), near work induced TA-adaptation and the steady state closed-loop accommodation response (AR). Forty-two graduate students participated in the study. Various aspects of their accommodation system were objectively measured using an open-field infrared auto-refractor (Grand Seiko WAM-5500). Tonic accommodation was assessed in a completely dark environment. The association between TA and closed-loop AR was assessed using linear regression correlations and t -test comparisons. Initial mean baseline TA was 1.84 diopter (D) (SD ± 1.29 D) with a wide distribution range (−0.43 D to 5.14 D). For monocular visual tasks, baseline TA was significantly correlated with the closed-loop AR. The slope of the best fit line indicated that closed-loop AR varied by approximately 0.3 D for every 1 D change in TA. This ratio was consistent across a variety of viewing distances and different near work tasks, including both static targets and continuous reading. Binocular reading conditions weakened the correlation between baseline TA and AR, although results remained statistically significant. The 10 min near reading task with a 3 D demand did not reveal significant near work induced TA-adaptation for either monocular or binocular conditions. Consistently, the TA-adaptation did not show any correlation with AR during reading. This study found a strong association between open-loop TA and closed-loop AR across a variety of viewing distances and different near work tasks. Difference between the correlations under monocular and binocular reading condition suggests a potential role for vergence compensation during binocular closed-loop AR.

How well can observers selectively attend only to dots that are lighter or darker than the background when all dot intensities are present? Observers estimated centroids of briefly flashed, sparse clouds of 8 or 16 dots, ranging in intensity from dark black to bright white on a gray background. Attention instructions were to equally weight: (i) dots brighter than the background, assigning zero weight to others; (ii) dots darker than the background, assigning zero weight to others; (iii) all dots. For each observer, a quantitative estimate of the operational attention filter (the weight exerted in the centroid estimates as a function of dot intensity) was derived for each attention instruction in each dot condition. Attended dots typically have 4× the weights of unattended dots. Whereas observers performed remarkably well in estimating centroids and achieving the three required attention filters, they achieved higher accuracy when equally weighing all dots than when selectively attending to dots of only one contrast polarity. Although their attention filters are similar, individual observers use significantly different parameters in their centroid computations. The complete model of performance enables perceptual measurements of observers' attention filters for shades of gray that are as accurate as physical measurements of color filters.