Understanding how people behave when facing hazardous situations, how intrinsic and extrinsic factors influence the risk taking (RT) decision making process and to what extent it is possible to modify their reactions externally, are questions that have long interested academics and society in general. In the spheres, among others, of Occupational Safety and Health (OSH), the military, finance and sociology, this topic has multidisciplinary implications because we all constantly face RT situations. Researchers have hitherto assessed RT profiles by conducting questionnaires prior to and after the presentation of stimuli; however, this can lead to the production of biased, non-realistic, RT profiles. This is due to the reflexive nature of choosing an answer in a questionnaire, which is remote from the reactive, emotional and impulsive decision making processes inherent to real, risky situations. One way to address this question is to exploit VR capabilities to generate immersive environments that recreate realistic seeming but simulated hazardous situations. We propose VR as the next-generation tool to study RT processes, taking advantage of the big four families of metrics which can provide objective assessment methods with high ecological validity: the real-world risks approach (high presence VR environments triggering real-world reactions), embodied interactions (more natural interactions eliciting more natural behaviors), stealth assessment (unnoticed real-time assessments offering efficient behavioral metrics) and physiological real-time measurement (physiological signals avoiding subjective bias). Additionally, VR can provide an invaluable tool, after the assessment phase, to train in skills related to RT due to its transferability to real-world situations.

Risk taking (RT) is an essential component in decision-making process that depicts the propensity to make risky decisions. RT assessment has traditionally focused on self-report questionnaires. These classical tools have shown clear distance from real-life responses. Behavioral tasks assess human behavior with more fidelity, but still show some limitations related to transferability. A way to overcome these constraints is to take advantage from virtual reality (VR), to recreate real-simulated situations that might arise from performance-based assessments, supporting RT research. This article presents results of a pilot study in which 41 individuals explored a gamified VR environment: the Spheres & Shield Maze Task (SSMT). By eliciting implicit behavioral measures, we found relationships between scores obtained in the SSMT and self-reported risk-related constructs, as engagement in risky behaviors and marijuana consumption. We conclude that decontextualized Virtual Reality Serious Games are appropriate to assess RT, since they could be used as a cross-disciplinary tool to assess individuals' capabilities under the stealth assessment paradigm.

No abstract

Virtual and augmented reality have been used to diagnose and treat several mental health disorders for decades. Technological advances in these fields have facilitated the availability of commercial solutions for end customers and practitioners. However, there are still some barriers and limitations that prevent these technologies from being widely used by professionals on a daily basis. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed a variety of new scenarios in which these technologies could play an essential role, like providing remote treatment. Disorders that traditionally had received less attention are also getting in the spotlight, such as depression or obsessive-compulsive disorder. Improvements in equipment and hardware, like Mixed Reality Head Mounted Displays, could help open new opportunities in the mental health field. Extended reality (XR) is an umbrella term meant to comprise Virtual reality (VR), mixed reality (MR), and augmented reality (AR). While XR applications are eminently visual, other senses are being explored in literature around multisensory interactions, such as auditory, olfactory, or haptic feedback. Applying such stimuli within XR experiences around mental disorders is still under-explored and could greatly enrich the therapeutic experience. This manuscript reviews recent research regarding the use of XR for mental health scenarios, highlighting trends, and potential applications as well as areas for improvement. It also discusses future challenges and research areas in upcoming topics such as the use of wearables, multisensory, and multimodal interaction. The main goal of this paper is to unpack how these technologies could be applied to XR scenarios for mental health to exploit their full potential and follow the path of other health technologies by promoting personalized medicine.

A defining virtual reality (VR) metric is the sense of presence, a complex, multidimensional psychophysical construct that represents how intense is the sensation of actually being there, inside the virtual environment (VE), forgetting how technology mediates the experience. Our paper explores how locomotion influences presence, studying two different ways of artificial movement along the VE: walking-in-place (through head bobbing detection) and indirect walking (through touchpad). To evaluate that influence, a narrative-neutral maze was created, from where 41 participants (N=41) had to escape. Measuring presence is a controversial topic since there is not a single, objective measure but a wide range of metrics depending on the different theoretical basis. For this reason, we have used for the first time, representative metrics from all three traditional dimensions of presence: subjective presence (SP) (self-reported through questionnaires), behavioral presence (BP) (obtained from unconscious reactions while inside the VE), and physiological presence (PP) [usually measured using heart rate or electrodermal activity (EDA)]. SP was measured with the ITC-SOPI questionnaire, BP by collecting the participants’ reactions, and PP by using a bracelet that registered EDA. The results show two main findings: (i) There is no correlation between the different presence metrics. This opens the door to a simpler way of measuring presence in an objective, reliable way. (ii) There is no significant difference between the two locomotion techniques for any of the three metrics, which shows that the authenticity of VR does not rely on how you move within the VE.