| Literature DB >> 26366305 |
Tobias Vogt1, Rainer Herpers2, Christopher D Askew3, David Scherfgen4, Heiko K Strüder1, Stefan Schneider5.
Abstract
Virtual reality environments are increasingly being used to encourage individuals to exercise more regularly, including as part of treatment those with mental health or neurological disorders. The success of virtual environments likely depends on whether a sense of presence can be established, where participants become fully immersed in the virtual environment. Exposure to virtual environments is associated with physiological responses, including cortical activation changes. Whether the addition of a real exercise within a virtual environment alters sense of presence perception, or the accompanying physiological changes, is not known. In a randomized and controlled study design, moderate-intensity Exercise (i.e., self-paced cycling) and No-Exercise (i.e., automatic propulsion) trials were performed within three levels of virtual environment exposure. Each trial was 5 minutes in duration and was followed by posttrial assessments of heart rate, perceived sense of presence, EEG, and mental state. Changes in psychological strain and physical state were generally mirrored by neural activation patterns. Furthermore, these changes indicated that exercise augments the demands of virtual environment exposures and this likely contributed to an enhanced sense of presence.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26366305 PMCID: PMC4558453 DOI: 10.1155/2015/523250
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neural Plast ISSN: 1687-5443 Impact factor: 3.599
Figure 1Randomized (indicated by rolling arrows) and controlled study design. Exercise and No-Exercise trials were conducted within three levels of virtual environment exposure (Control; OSM: one-screen mode; TSM: three-screen mode). Mental state (MS), heart rate (HR), sense of presence (SP), and EEG measurements were made at rest and following each trial.
Figure 2Overhead view of the Immersion Square system, including three screens (bold black lines, each 260.0 cm wide) with a participant seated on a cycling ergometer (black head and darker grey schematic). The participant's visual field (depicted by the lighter grey zone and if the head turns left/right the dashed lighter grey zone) was centred between 125.0 and 175.0 cm from the front screen.
Heart rate [bpm].
| Rest | Control | OSM | TSM | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No-Exercise | 75.22 ± 1.79 | 90.17 ± 2.70 | 90.11 ± 3.02 | 90.22 ± 3.07 |
| Exercise | 122.89 ± 5.21 | 126.00 ± 5.14 | 121.89 ± 5.16 |
Heart rate (bpm) was measured before (rest) and following No-Exercise (automatic drive) and Exercise (moderate cycling) trials within three levels of virtual environment exposure (Control; OSM: one-screen mode; TSM: three-screen mode). ∗ indicates a significant difference compared with rest (p < 0.05); † indicates a significant difference between Exercise and No-Exercise trials (p < 0.05). Data are mean ± SEM (n = 18).
Perceived sense of presence [absolute values].
| Control | OSM | TSM | |
|---|---|---|---|
| No-Exercise | 0.22 ± 0.13 | 3.44 ± 0.41 | 5.44 ± 0.46 |
| Exercise | 0.06 ± 0.06 | 4.67 ± 0.41 | 7.22 ± 0.34 |
Perceived sense of presence, expressed as absolute values (scale: 0 = no sense of presence at all, 10 = full sense of presence), was measured before (rest) and following No-Exercise (automatic drive) and Exercise (moderate cycling) trials within three levels of virtual environment exposure (Control; OSM: one-screen mode; TSM: three-screen mode). ∗ indicates a significant difference compared with Control (p < 0.05); §difference compared with OSM (p < 0.05); †difference between Exercise and No-Exercise trials (p < 0.05). Data are mean ± SEM (n = 18).
Mental state [%].
| PEPS | MOT | PSYCH | |
|---|---|---|---|
| No-Exercise | |||
| Control | 8.82 ± 6.56 | −1.25 ± 5.55 | −2.68 ± 6.16 |
| OSM | −1.46 ± 6.39† | 26.09 ± 8.22 | 6.77 ± 5.64 |
| TSM | 3.85 ± 6.65 | 22.94 ± 7.08 | 3.47 ± 8.54† |
| Exercise | |||
| Control | −2.07 ± 4.76 | 10.46 ± 7.98 | −1.55 ± 4.86 |
| OSM | 26.09 ± 8.22 | 3.02 ± 7.26 | 21.73 ± 10.63 |
| TSM | 22.94 ± 7.08 | 5.27 ± 6.80 | 34.76 ± 8.66 |
Mental state, expressed as relative (%) changes from rest for perceived physical state (PEPS), motivational state (MOT), and psychological strain (PSYCH). Mental state assessments were measured before (rest) and following No-Exercise (automatic drive) and Exercise (moderate cycling) trials within three levels of virtual environment exposure (Control; OSM: one-screen mode; TSM: three-screen mode). ∗ indicates a significant difference compared with Control (p < 0.05); †difference between Exercise and No-Exercise trials (p < 0.05); †•trend between Exercise and No-Exercise trials (p < 0.1). Data are mean ± SEM (n = 18).
Figure 3Mean alpha activity (7.5–12.5 Hz), expressed as relative (%) changes over global (G; black lines) and frontal (F; grey lines) electrode sites. Mean EEG activity was measured before (rest) and following No-Exercise (automatic drive) and Exercise (moderate cycling) trials within three levels of virtual environment exposure (Control; OSM: one-screen mode; TSM: three-screen mode). ∗ indicates a significant difference compared with Control (p < 0.05); † indicates difference between Exercise and No-Exercise trials (p < 0.05); § indicates difference between F and G (p < 0.05). Data are mean ± 0.95 CI (n = 18).
Figure 4Mean beta activity (12.5–35.0 Hz), expressed as relative change (%) from rest over global (G; black lines) and frontal (F; grey lines) electrode sites. Mean EEG activity was measured before (rest) and following No-Exercise (automatic drive) and Exercise (moderate cycling) trials within three levels of virtual environment exposure (Control; OSM: one-screen mode; TSM: three-screen mode). ∗ ∙ indicates a trend compared with Control (p < 0.1); †∙ indicates difference between Exercise and No-Exercise trials (p < 0.1); §∙ indicates difference between F and G (p < 0.05). Data are mean ± 0.95 CI (n = 18).
| No-Exercise | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AlphaG | AlphaF | BetaG | BetaF | PEPS | MOT | PSYCH | SP | HR | |
| AlphaG |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| AlphaF |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| BetaG |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| BetaF |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| PEPS |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| MOT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| PSYCH |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| SP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| HR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Coefficient of positive correlations between cortical neural oscillations (alphaG: global mean alpha activity; alphaF: frontal mean alpha activity; betaG: global mean beta activity; betaF: frontal mean beta activity), mental state (PEPS: perceived physical state; MOT: motivational state; PSYCH: psychological strain), sense of presence (SP), and heart rate (HR) for No-Exercise trial. ∗• indicates a trend (p < 0.1); ∗ indicates a significant correlation (p < 0.05).
| Exercise | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AlphaG | AlphaF | BetaG | BetaF | PEPS | MOT | PSYCH | SP | HR | |
| AlphaG |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| AlphaF |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| BetaG |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| BetaF |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| PEPS |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| MOT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| PSYCH |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| SP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| HR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Coefficient of positive correlations between cortical neural oscillations (alphaG: global mean alpha activity; alphaF: frontal mean alpha activity; betaG: global mean beta activity; betaF: frontal mean beta activity), mental state (PEPS: perceived physical state; MOT: motivational state; PSYCH: psychological strain), sense of presence (SP), and heart rate (HR) for Exercise trial. ∗• indicates a trend (p < 0.1); ∗ indicates a significant correlation (p < 0.05).