Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Anatomy Research International
Volume 2017, Article ID 1493135, 7 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/1493135
Research Article

Stereopsis, Visuospatial Ability, and Virtual Reality in Anatomy Learning

Department of Anatomy, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 GA Nijmegen, Netherlands

Correspondence should be addressed to Jan-Maarten Luursema; ln.cmuduobdar@amesruul.netraam-naj

Received 16 December 2016; Revised 9 March 2017; Accepted 30 April 2017; Published 1 June 2017

Academic Editor: Udo Schumacher

Copyright © 2017 Jan-Maarten Luursema et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. J. Steuer, “Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence,” Journal of Communication, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 73–93, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. K. Yammine and C. Violato, “A meta-analysis of the educational effectiveness of three-dimensional visualization technologies in teaching anatomy,” Anatomical Sciences Education, vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 525–538, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. H. Brenton, J. Hernandez, F. Bello et al., “Using multimedia and Web3D to enhance anatomy teaching,” Computers & Education, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 32–53, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. R. B. Trelease, “Essential E-Learning and M-Learning Methods for Teaching Anatomy,” in In Teaching Anatomy, pp. 247–258, Springer, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  5. A. X. Garg, G. R. Norman, K. W. Eva, L. Spero, and S. Sharan, “Is there any real virtue of virtual reality?: The minor role of multiple orientations in learning anatomy from computers,” Academic Medicine, vol. 77, no. 10, pp. S97–S99, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. A. J. Levinson, B. Weaver, S. Garside, H. McGinn, and G. R. Norman, “Virtual reality and brain anatomy: A randomised trial of e-learning instructional designs,” Medical Education, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 495–501, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. J.-M. Luursema, W. B. Verwey, P. A. M. Kommers, R. H. Geelkerken, and H. J. Vos, “Optimizing conditions for computer-assisted anatomical learning,” Interacting with Computers, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 1123–1138, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. D. T. Nicholson, C. Chalk, W. R. J. Funnell, and S. J. Daniel, “Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomised controlled study of a computer-generated three-dimensional anatomical ear model,” Medical Education, vol. 40, no. 11, pp. 1081–1087, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. H. M. Huang, S. S. Liaw, and C. M. Lai, “Exploring learner acceptance of the use of virtual reality in medical education: a case study of desktop and projection-based display systems,” Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 3–19, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. M. F. Bradshaw, A. D. Parton, and R. A. Eagle, “The interaction of binocular disparity and motion parallax in determining perceived depth and perceived size,” Perception, vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 1317–1331, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. M. A. Goodale, “Transforming vision into action,” Vision Research, vol. 51, no. 13, pp. 1567–1587, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  12. D. Preece, S. B. Williams, R. Lam, and R. Weller, “"Let's Get Physical": advantages of a physical model over 3d computer models and textbooks in learning imaging anatomy,” Anatomical Sciences Education, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 216–224, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. Z. Khot, K. Quinlan, G. R. Norman, and B. Wainman, “The relative effectiveness of computer‐based and traditional resources for education in anatomy,” Anatomical Sciences Education, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 211–215, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. M. Hegarty, M. Keehner, C. Cohen, D. R. Montello, and Y. Lippa, “The role of spatial cognition in medicine: Applications for selecting and training professionals,” in In Applied spatial cognition: From Research to Cognitive Technology, G. Allen, Ed., Allen Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, G, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  15. G. Lu, L. K. Shark, G. Hall, and U. Zeshan, “Immersive manipulation of virtual objects through glove-based hand gesture interaction,” Virtual Reality, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 243–252, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. R. C. Gur, D. Alsop, D. Glahn et al., “An fMRI study of sex differences in regional activation to a verbal and a spatial task,” Brain and Language, vol. 74, no. 2, pp. 157–170, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. J. M. Luursema, W. B. Verwey, P. A. M. Kommers, and J.-H. Annema, “The role of stereopsis in virtual anatomical learning,” Interacting with Computers, vol. 20, no. 4-5, pp. 455–460, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. M. Peters, B. Laeng, K. Latham, M. Jackson, R. Zaiyouna, and C. Richardson, “A redrawn vandenberg and kuse mental rotations test - different versions and factors that affect performance,” Brain and Cognition, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 39–58, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. S. G. Vandenberg and A. R. Kuse, “Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization,” Perceptual and Motor Skills, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 599–604, 1978. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. R. B. Ekstrom, J. W. French, H. H. Harman, and D. Dermen, “Manual for kit of factor referenced cognitive tests,” in Educational Testing Service Princeton, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ, 1976. View at Google Scholar
  21. G. Mather, Foundations of Perception, Taylor & Francis, 2006.
  22. E. Birch, C. Williams, J. Drover et al., “Randot Preschool Stereoacuity Test: Normative data and validity,” Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 23–26, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. J. Leppink, F. Paas, C. P. M. Van der Vleuten, T. Van Gog, and J. J. G. Van Merriënboer, “Development of an instrument for measuring different types of cognitive load,” Behavior Research Methods, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 1058–1072, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. S. Mathôt, D. Schreij, and J. Theeuwes, “OpenSesame: an open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences,” Behavior Research Methods, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 314–324, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. J. Holland, R. O'Sullivan, and R. Arnett, “Is a picture worth a thousand words: an analysis of the difficulty and discrimination parameters of illustrated vs. text-alone vignettes in histology multiple choice questions,” BMC Medical Education, vol. 15, no. 1, article 184, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. M. A. Vorstenbosch, T. P. Klaassen, J. G. Kooloos, S. M. Bolhuis, and R. F. Laan, “Do images influence assessment in anatomy? Exploring the effect of images on item difficulty and item discrimination,” Anatomical Sciences Education, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 29–41, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. B. A. Klinteberg, S. E. Levander, and D. Schalling, “Cognitive sex differences: speed and problem-solving strategies on computerized neuropsychological tasks,” Perceptual and Motor Skills, vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 683–697, 1988. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus