↓ Skip to main content

Ecological validity of virtual environments to assess human navigation ability

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Ecological validity of virtual environments to assess human navigation ability
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00637
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ineke J. M. van der Ham, Annemarie M. E. Faber, Matthijs Venselaar, Marc J. van Kreveld, Maarten Löffler

Abstract

Route memory is frequently assessed in virtual environments. These environments can be presented in a fully controlled manner and are easy to use. Yet they lack the physical involvement that participants have when navigating real environments. For some aspects of route memory this may result in reduced performance in virtual environments. We assessed route memory performance in four different environments: real, virtual, virtual with directional information (compass), and hybrid. In the hybrid environment, participants walked the route outside on an open field, while all route information (i.e., path, landmarks) was shown simultaneously on a handheld tablet computer. Results indicate that performance in the real life environment was better than in the virtual conditions for tasks relying on survey knowledge, like pointing to start and end point, and map drawing. Performance in the hybrid condition however, hardly differed from real life performance. Performance in the virtual environment did not benefit from directional information. Given these findings, the hybrid condition may offer the best of both worlds: the performance level is comparable to that of real life for route memory, yet it offers full control of visual input during route learning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 108 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 23%
Student > Master 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 19 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 30%
Computer Science 12 11%
Neuroscience 9 8%
Engineering 9 8%
Environmental Science 4 4%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 27 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 October 2019.
All research outputs
#6,606,643
of 25,090,809 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,375
of 33,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,054
of 272,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#189
of 529 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,090,809 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,879 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 272,185 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 529 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.