Advertisement

Virtual Stealth Assessment: A New Methodological Approach for Assessing Psychological Needs

  • Irene Alice Chicchi GiglioliEmail author
  • Elena Parra
  • Georgina Cardenas-Lopez
  • Giuseppe Riva
  • Mariano Alcañiz Raya
Conference paper
  • 973 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10622)

Abstract

In the past decade, the use of technology is extensively increased. Technological systems as virtual reality represent nowadays novel and efficacy tools in several areas, such as in psychology and education. Realism, sense of presence, engagement, experimental control, and ecological validity represent some of the advantages than traditional methods based on paper and pencil tests. Furthermore, psychological research gathering information about a person relative to specific attributes, such as abilities, personality, and cognitive competences is usually conducted using pre-test-post-test designs. Such traditional assessments are not able to catch and examine the dynamic and composite performances and behaviours in run. Virtual stealth assessment could provide a valid and reliable method for evaluating real behaviours in real-time during the virtual experience. In this article, we proposed stealth assessment as a new methodological approach to study the Grawe’s model on the basic psychological needs by using virtual immersive environments, providing the theoretical development of the model on one psychological need with the relative virtual game.

Keywords

Virtual reality Sense of presence Stealth assessment Evidence-centered design Psychological needs Attachment 

Notes

Acknowledgment

The work has been promoted by the call for support for mobility 2016 within the Program for Training Researchers of the Universitat Politecnica de Valencia.

References

  1. 1.
    North, M.M., North, S.M.: Virtual reality therapy for treatment of psychological disorders. In: Maheu, M., Drude, K., Wright, S. (eds.) Career Paths in Telemental Health, pp. 263–268. Springer, Cham (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Valmaggia, L.R., Latif, L., Kempton, M.J., Rus-Calafell, M.: Virtual reality in the psychological treatment for mental health problems: an systematic review of recent evidence. Psychiatry Res. 236, 189–195 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Freeman, D., Reeve, S., Robinson, A., Ehlers, A., Clark, D., Spanlang, B., Slater, M.: Virtual reality in the assessment, understanding, and treatment of mental health disorders. Psychol. Med. 47(14), 2393–2400 (2017). doi: 10.1017/S003329171700040X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Riva, G.: Virtual reality in eating disorders and obesity: state of the art and future directions. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 8, 351 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Côté, S., Bouchard, S.: Virtual reality exposure for phobias: a critical review. J. CyberTher. Rehabil. 1, 75–91 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gorini, A., Riva, G.: The potential of Virtual Reality as anxiety management tool: a randomized controlled study in a sample of patients affected by Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Trials 9, 1745–6215 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Parsons, T.D., Rizzo, A.A.: Affective outcomes of virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety and specific phobias: a meta analysis. J. Behav. Ther. Exp. Psychiatry 39, 250–261 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rizzo, A., Buckwalter, J.C., Van der Zaag, C.: Virtual environment applications in clinical neuropsychology. In: Stanney, K.M. (ed.) The Handbook of Virtual Environments, pp. 1027–1064. Erlbaum Publishing, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Navarro, M.D., Lloréns, R., Noé, E., Ferri, J., Alcaniz, M.: Validation of a low-cost virtual reality system for training street-crossing. A comparative study in healthy, neglected and non-neglected stroke individuals. Neuropsychol. Rehabil. 23(4), 597–618 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Llorens, R., Noé, E., Ferri, J., Alcañiz, M.: Videogame-based group therapy to improve self-awareness and social skills after traumatic brain injury. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 12(1), 37 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lloréns, R., Gil-Gómez, J.A., Alcañiz, M., Colomer, C., Noé, E.: Improvement in balance using a virtual reality-based stepping exercise: a randomized controlled trial involving individuals with chronic stroke. Clin. Rehabil. 29(3), 261–268 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lloréns, R., Noé, E., Colomer, C., Alcañiz, M.: Effectiveness, usability, and cost-benefit of a virtual reality–based telerehabilitation program for balance recovery after stroke: A randomized controlled trial. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 96(3), 418–425 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Colomer, C., Llorens, R., Noé, E., Alcañiz, M.: Effect of a mixed reality-based intervention on arm, hand, and finger function on chronic stroke. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 13(1), 45 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ravitz, P., Maunder, R., Hunter, J., Sthankiya, B., Lancee, W.: Adult attachment measures: a 25-year review. J. Psychosom. Res. 69(4), 419–432 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carmines, E.G., Zeller, R.A.: Reliability and Validity Assessment, vol. 17. Sage publications, Newbury Park (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Parsons, T.D.: Virtual reality for enhanced ecological validity and experimental control in the clinical, affective and social neurosciences. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 9, 660 (2015). doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00660 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Slater, M., Lotto, B., Arnold, M.M., Sanchez-Vives, M.V.: How we experience immersive virtual environments: the concept of presence and its measurement. Anuario de psicología/UB J. Psychol. 40(2), 193–210 (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shute, V.J.: Stealth assessment in computer-based games to support learning. Comput. Games Instr. 55(2), 503–524 (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shute, V.J., Ventura, M., Bauer, M., Zapata-Rivera, D.: Melding the power of serious games and embedded assessment to monitor and foster learning. Serious Games: Mech. Eff. 2, 295–321 (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grawe, K.: Neuropsychotherapy. Erlbaum, London (2006)
Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grawe, K.: Neuropsychotherapy: How the Neurosciences Inform Effective Psychotherapy. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Alcañiz, M., Lozano, J.A., Rey, B.: Technological background of VR. In: Riva, G., Botella, C., Legereon, P., Optale, G. (eds.) Cybertherapy: Internet and Virtual Reality as Assessment and Rehabilitation Tools for Clinical Psychology and Neuroscience. IOS Press, Ámsterdam (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schneider, S.M., Hood, L.E.: Virtual reality: a distraction intervention for chemotherapy. Oncol. Nurs. Forum 34(1), 39 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Slater, M.: Place illusion and plausibility can lead to realistic behaviour in immersive virtual environments. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 364(1535), 3549–3557 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    O’Brien, H.L., Toms, E.G.: What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 59(6), 938–955 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shute, V.J.: Focus on formative feedback. Rev. Educ. Res. 78(1), 153–189 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mislevy, R.J., Steinberg, L.S., Almond, R.G.: On the structure of educational assessment. Meas.: Interdisc. Res. Perspect. 1(1), 3–62 (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    McDougall, W.: An Introduction to Social Psychology. Psychology Press, Methuen (1908). Original work publishedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Freud, S.: Beyond the Pleasure Principle. Hogarth, London (1920)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Murray, H.: Explorations in Personality. Oxford University Press, New York (1938)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Maslow, A.: Motivation and Personality. Harper & Row, New York (1954)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Baumeister, R.F., Leary, M.R.: The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol. Bull. 117, 497–529 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L.: Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am. Psychol. 55, 68–78 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bowlby, J.: Attachment. Attachment and loss, vol. 1 (1969)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bowlby, J.: A Secure Base: Clinical Applications Of Attachment Theory. Taylor & Francis, Abingdon (2005)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pallini, S., Laghi, F.: Attention and attachment related behavior toward professional caregivers in child care centers: a new measure for toddlers. J. Genet. Psychol.: Res. Theor. Hum. Dev. 173, 158–174 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Carlson, S.M., Beck, D.M.: Symbols as tools in the development of executive function. In A. Winsler, C. PFernyhough & I. Montero (Eds.), Private speech, executive functioning, and the development of verbal self-regulation. (pp. 163–175). New York: Cambridge University Press (2009)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sullivan, J.R., Riccio, C.A., Castillo, C.L.: Concurrent validity of the tower tasks as measures of executive function in adults: A meta-analysis. Applied Neuropsychology 16, 62–75 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bowlby, J.: Attachment and Loss: Separation: Anxiety and anger, vol. 2. Basic Book, New York (1973)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ainsworth, M.D.S.: Attachment and other affectional bonds across the life cycle. In: Parkes, C.M., Stevenson-Hinde, J., Marris, P. (eds.) Attachment Across the Life Cycle, pp. 33–51. Routledge, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Cassidy, J., Kobak, R.R.: Avoidance and its relationship with other defensive processes. In: Belsky, J., Nezworski, T. (eds.) Clinical Implications of Attachment, pp. 300–323. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1988)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fraley, R.C., Garner, J.P., Shaver, P.R.: Adult attachment and the defensive regulation of attention and memory: examining the role of preemptive and postemptive defensive processes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 79, 816–826 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Shaver, P.R., Mikulincer, M.: Attachment-related psychodynamics. Attach. Hum. Dev. 4, 133–161 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instituto de Investigación e Innovación en Bioingeniería (I3B)Universitat Politècnica de ValènciaValènciaSpain
  2. 2.Laboratorio de Enseñanza Virtual y Ciberpsicología, Facultad de PsicologíaUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoMéxicoUSA
  3. 3.Dipartimento di PsicologiaUniversità Cattolica del Sacro CuoreMilanItaly
  4. 4.Applied Technology for Neuro-Psychology LabIRCCS Istituto Auxologico ItalianoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations