Virtual Unreality – Promise vs. Performance of Technology in Anatomy Education

Abstract

A number of studies have shown that computer generated, interactive, 3D projections (a type of virtual reality or VR) of human anatomy have serious handicaps when compared to ordinary physical models. The mechanism underlying the deficiency is not clear. In the present study we replicated the finding of a large benefit for physical models over equivalent VR; amounting to an effect size of 1.38. We then showed, with a series of experiments, that the advantage is not a consequence of haptic (touch) feedback, or “transfer appropriate processing” (Learning in 3D is more effective when tested in 3D). Instead, it appears that the advantage of the physical model is entirely a result of binocular vision; restricting viewing to one eye extinguishes the advantage. Additional testing with the Microsoft HoloLens, using an exact duplicate of the physical model rendered as a mixed reality (MR) object, showed performance equal to the 3D projection and equal to the physical model when learned and tested with monocular vision and much worse than the physical model. The 10–20 fold cost of using VR and MR learning objects over the physical models does not appear to be justified given the cost and inferior performance in increasing anatomic knowledge.Support or Funding InformationPaul R. MacPherson Institute for Leadership, Innovation and Excellence in Teaching and the Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.