In virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) for anxiety disorders, sense of presence in the virtual environment is considered the principal mechanism that enables anxiety to be felt. Existing studies on the relation between sense of presence and level of anxiety, however, have yielded mixed results on the correlation between the two. In this meta-analysis, we reviewed publications on VRET for anxiety that included self-reported presence and anxiety. The comprehensive search of the literature identified 33 publications with a total of 1196 participants. The correlation between self-reported sense of presence and anxiety was extracted and meta-analyzed. Potential moderators such as technology characteristics, sample characteristics including age, gender and clinical status, disorder characteristics and study design characteristics such as measurements were also examined. The random effects analysis showed a medium effect size for the correlation between sense of presence and anxiety (r = .28; 95% CI: 0.18–0.38). Moderation analyses revealed that the effect size of the correlation differed across different anxiety disorders, with a large effect size for fear of animals (r = .50; 95% CI: 0.30–0.66) and a no to small effect size for social anxiety disorder (r = .001; 95% CI: −0.19–0.19). Further, the correlation between anxiety and presence was stronger in studies with participants who met criteria for an anxiety disorder than in studies with a non-clinical population. Trackers with six degrees of freedom and displays with a larger field of view resulted in higher effect sizes, compared to trackers with three degrees of freedom and displays with a smaller field of view. In addition, no difference in effect size was found for the type of presence measurement and the type of anxiety measurement. This meta-analysis confirms the positive relation between sense of presence and anxiety and demonstrates that this relation can be affected by various moderating factors.

No abstract

Our forward-facing eyes allow us the advantage of binocular visual information: using the tiny differences between right and left eye views to learn about depth and location in three dimensions. Our visual systems also contain specialized mechanisms to detect motion-in-depth from binocular vision, but the nature of these mechanisms remains controversial. Binocular motion-in-depth perception could theoretically be based on first detecting binocular disparity and then monitoring how it changes over time. The alternative is to monitor the motion in the right and left eye separately and then compare these motion signals. Here we used an individual differences approach to test whether the two sources of information are processed via dissociated mechanisms, and to measure the relative importance of those mechanisms. Our results suggest the existence of two distinct mechanisms, each contributing to the perception of motion-in-depth in most observers. Additionally, for the first time, we demonstrate the relative prevalence of the two mechanisms within a normal population. In general, visual systems appear to rely mostly on the mechanism sensitive to changing binocular disparity, but perception of motion-in-depth is augmented by the presence of a less sensitive mechanism that uses interocular velocity differences. Occasionally, we find observers with the opposite pattern of sensitivity. More generally this work showcases the power of the individual differences approach in studying the functional organization of cognitive systems.

When an object moves in three dimensions, the two eyes' views of the world deliver slightly different information to the visual system, providing binocular cues to depth and motion-in-depth. This short review describes the two main sources of binocular information, namely, changing disparity over time and interocular velocity differences; this could be used for the perception of motion-in-depth. We discuss the evidence obtained in recent years on the extent to which each of them is used in human vision. We also highlight outstanding questions and issues in the field that have yet to be addressed.

We measured discrimination thresholds for sinusoidal gratings using active dynamic touch. In the first experiment we measured the thresholds for amplitude discrimination as a function of amplitude and spatial period. Thresholds ranged between 10.8%, and 15.8% of the standard amplitude. We showed that amplitude differences as small as 2 microm can be detected. We found that Weber fractions for amplitude discrimination are constant over a range of amplitudes, but are influenced by the spatial period of the grating; discrimination improved with increasing spatial period. In the second experiment we determined the thresholds for spatial-period discrimination. We used the same design as in the first experiment. Weber fractions ranged from 6.4% to 11.8%. Amplitude was found to have no effect on the Weber fractions for spatial-period discrimination. However, the spatial period had an effect on the Weber fractions: larger spatial periods yielded lower Weber fractions.