2017
DOI: 10.3389/fict.2017.00013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Virtual Reality Training for Public Speaking—A QUEST-VR Framework Validation

Abstract: Good public speaking skills are essential in many professions as well as everyday life, but speech anxiety is a common problem. While it is established that public speaking training in virtual reality (VR) is effective, comprehensive studies on the underlying factors that contribute to this success are rare. The "quality evaluation of user-system interaction in virtual reality" framework for evaluation of VR applications is presented that includes system features, user factors, and moderating variables. Based … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
21
0
4

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
1
21
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Directly germane to this hypothesis, studies (Joinson, 2004 ; Hertel et al, 2008 ; Hammick and Lee, 2014 ) consistently show that less socially oriented individuals prefer interacting through a medium that is considered to be “leaner” (e.g., text-based CMC), while more socially oriented individuals prefer to interact via a “richer” modality (e.g., FtF). Similarly, Poeschl ( 2017 ) found that perceiving the virtual audience to be more socially present tended to lead to a worse speech-giving performance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Directly germane to this hypothesis, studies (Joinson, 2004 ; Hertel et al, 2008 ; Hammick and Lee, 2014 ) consistently show that less socially oriented individuals prefer interacting through a medium that is considered to be “leaner” (e.g., text-based CMC), while more socially oriented individuals prefer to interact via a “richer” modality (e.g., FtF). Similarly, Poeschl ( 2017 ) found that perceiving the virtual audience to be more socially present tended to lead to a worse speech-giving performance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Subsequently, in the eligibility phase, each title and summary of articles were analyzed according to the inclusion (IC4, IC5) and exclusion (EX4, EX5) criteria. Finally, in the included phase, the final analysis sample was determined for the systematic review (n = 13) [48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60]. The search was conducted on 5 January, 2020.…”
Section: Data Collection and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Journal h-Index [49,58,60] Annual Review of Cybertherapy and Telemedicine 8 [50,59] Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 50 [57] Frontiers in ICT 15 [48] IET Software 13 [55] International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning 19 [53] International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 4 [56] Research on Social Work Practice 27 [54] Technology and Health Care 18 [51] Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health 26 [52] Journal of Anxiety Disorders 47…”
Section: Referencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the task difficulty also affects the presenter's reaction to the virtual audience. Poeschl Sandra [16] concluded that there were less cognitive resources left to notice in difficult tasks. However, the ability to concentrate was independent of the task difficulty.…”
Section: Related Work 21 Public Speaking Training Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%