Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, University Hospital of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Disabil Rehabil. 2013 Aug;35(16):1371-9. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2012.738761. Epub 2012 Dec 17.
An increasing number of studies address the use of virtual environments (VE) in the cognitive assessment of spatial abilities. However, the differences between learning in a VE and a real environment (RE) remain controversial.
To compare the topographical behavior and spatial representations of patients with traumatic brain injury navigating in a real environment and in a virtual reproduction of this environment.
Twenty-seven subjects with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury were consecutively included and allocated to one of two groups. The subjects were taught the same route in either the virtual environment or the real environment and had to recall it twice immediately after learning the route and once after a delay. At the end of these sessions, the subjects were asked to complete three representational tests: a map test, a map recognition test recognition and a scene arrangement test.
No significant difference was found between the two groups with regards to demographics, severity of brain injury or episodic memory. As a main result, the number of error rates did not significantly differ between the real and virtual environment [F (1, 25) = 0.679; p = 0.4176)]. Scores on the scene arrangement test were higher in the real environment [U = 32.5; p = 0.01].
Although spatial representations probably differ between the real and virtual environment, virtual reality remains a trusty assessment tool for spatial abilities.
越来越多的研究关注虚拟环境（VE）在空间能力认知评估中的应用。然而，在 VE 中学习和在真实环境（RE）中学习之间的差异仍然存在争议。
比较在真实环境和虚拟环境中导航的创伤性脑损伤患者的地形行为和空间表现。
连续纳入 27 名中度至重度创伤性脑损伤患者，并将其分配到两组之一。受试者在虚拟环境或真实环境中学习相同的路线，并在学习路线后立即进行两次回忆，然后延迟一次进行回忆。在这些课程结束时，要求受试者完成三个表示性测试：地图测试、地图识别测试和场景安排测试。
两组在人口统计学、脑损伤严重程度或情景记忆方面没有显著差异。作为主要结果，真实环境和虚拟环境之间的错误率没有显著差异[F（1, 25）= 0.679；p = 0.4176)]。场景安排测试的分数在真实环境中更高[U = 32.5；p = 0.01]。
尽管真实环境和虚拟环境中的空间表示可能存在差异，但虚拟现实仍然是一种可靠的空间能力评估工具。
