↓ Skip to main content

Model of Illusions and Virtual Reality

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
70 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
321 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
Model of Illusions and Virtual Reality
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01125
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mar Gonzalez-Franco, Jaron Lanier

Abstract

In Virtual Reality (VR) it is possible to induce illusions in which users report and behave as if they have entered into altered situations and identities. The effect can be robust enough for participants to respond "realistically," meaning behaviors are altered as if subjects had been exposed to the scenarios in reality. The circumstances in which such VR illusions take place were first introduced in the 80's. Since then, rigorous empirical evidence has explored a wide set of illusory experiences in VR. Here, we compile this research and propose a neuroscientific model explaining the underlying perceptual and cognitive mechanisms that enable illusions in VR. Furthermore, we describe the minimum instrumentation requirements to support illusory experiences in VR, and discuss the importance and shortcomings of the generic model.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 70 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 321 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 321 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 59 18%
Student > Bachelor 39 12%
Student > Master 36 11%
Researcher 30 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 5%
Other 48 15%
Unknown 92 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 63 20%
Psychology 43 13%
Engineering 23 7%
Arts and Humanities 16 5%
Neuroscience 14 4%
Other 59 18%
Unknown 103 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. 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 24 May 2022.
All research outputs
#880,067
of 25,809,907 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#1,855
of 34,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,823
of 328,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#46
of 610 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,809,907 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,800 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 328,593 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 610 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.