Sunday, December 6, 2015

Phobias and anxiety disorders treated in virtual environments help patients to feel more comfortable by creating a safe environment where the patient can be repeatedly exposed to the stimulus of their fear

Source: popsci.com
Virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) is an alternative to standard in vivo (real life) exposure therapy that can make treatment of phobias and anxiety disorders more efficient, affordable, and comfortable for patients.

Exposure therapy is defined a psychotherapy that utilizes the repetition of real, visualized, or simulated exposure to a feared situation, traumatic event/memory, or object in order to achieve habituation. 

In lay-man's terms, it is a form of therapy that asks the patient to face their fear repeatedly so that they can get used to it or conquer it.

Traditionally, exposure was achieved through in vivo, or real life, confrontation or through visualized confrontation (where the patient has to visualize or imagine a confrontation).

VRET introduces an alternative that can be considered the best of both worlds as it allows for a virtual confrontation experience where human-computer interaction can allow the user to become an active participant in a computer generated three dimensional environment.


The two major techniques used to immerse patients into a virtual environment are a head mounted display (HDM), or a computer automatic virtual environment (CAVE).





For VRET to be successful, there are three conditions that need to be met, according to the theory of Foa and Kozak.

The first of these conditions is that participants need to feel as if they are a present and first person active player in the environment instead of feeling as if they are a third person viewer watching a movie.

The second condition is that the virtual environment must be able to elicit emotional reactions from the patient and must be able to cause them actual distress and anxiety. Should the environment not be able to elicit a strong enough reaction, then being exposed to it cannot help the patient make any progress because they are not actively being exposed to their fear.

The third condition states that the effects of the therapy must transfer from the virtual environment to the real world. Extinction of the phobia and the co-occurring cognitive changes must generalize to real-life situations so that the patient will feel a decrease in desire to avoid them or less anxiety when encountering them.

VRET has been found to be a successful alternative to real exposure therapy in treating common phobias such as of fear of heights, flying,and spiders, and PTSD

VRET is still a relatively unknown treatment method and though the general public may question its validity, it has been found to be better than, or on par with, in vivo and visualization therapy.

In a study on the treatment of acrophobia, or fear of heights, it was found that VRET is a relatively cheap and effective alternative to in vivo therapy. The patients who underwent VRET had comparable results and post treatment benefits. 

Similar results were found when studying the treatment of fear of flying (FOF). VRET and in vivo exposure were essentially equivalent post treatment on standardized questionnaires, willingness to fly, anxiety ratings during the flight, self-ratings of improvement, and patient satisfaction with treatment.

VRET was also found to be effective in treating post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) for world trade center survivors and vietnam war veterans.

Source: Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy for WTC PTSD: A Case Report
In a case study of a world trade center survivor,  VRET was shown to decrease the patient's Subjective Units of Distress after each therapy session and after completion of treatment, the patient no longer qualified for PTSD, Major Depression, or any other psychiatric disorder when examined by a third party independent assessor.

A case study of Vietnam war veterans also found similar results. The patient was exposed to two virtual environments, a virtual Huey helicopter flying over a virtual Vietnam and a clearing surrounded by jungle. After treatment the patient experienced a 34% decrease on clinician-rated PTSD and a 45% decrease on self-rated PTSD and these treatment gains were maintained even after a 6-month followup.

A meta-analysis of current data available on VRET concluded that "VRET has potential for the treatment of anxiety and several specific phobias” and it can successfully reduce anxiety and phobia symptoms in patients.

Advantages of virtual reality therapy include cost, increased safety, control, confidentially, and unlimited repetitions exposure to feared situations

VRET, as aforementioned, can be considered to be the best of both worlds because it offers a middle ground between the cost-effectiveness and safety of visualization and the life-like exposure of in vivo therapy. 

For example, in vivo exposure therapy for phobias such as fear of flying can be expensive but VRET  is comparatively cheaper than buying plane ticket every time and offers the patient a greater chance of reimbursement from insurance as the sessions would be much shorter, making the total cost much more bearable for the patient.

VRET can also allow for countless repetitions and attempts because all you need to do is restart the computer to recreate the simulation once again. In vivo therapy does not allow for recreation with as much ease.

In vivo cannot let the doctor control the degree of exposure (ex. increase or decrease the number and size of spiders a patient with arachnophobia sees) and exercise complete dominion over all external factors like VRET can either.

Dr. Kent Norman, professor of psychology at University of Maryland, explains how VRET allows for customization of the environment as well (ex. is the spider in the bedroom or the kitchen).


Since therapy is always conducted in the office there is less danger of confidentiality breaches or of public interference in treatment (ex. meeting a friend while outside for treatment).

Scheduling is also much more convenient and can be done with a higher frequency due to comparatively small amount of logistics that have to be taken care of in VRET.

The disadvantages to virtual reality exposure therapy are that you can have technological difficulties with the computer, its effectiveness is dependent on the patient, the technology required is expensive to manufacture, and administration requires doctors to have extra training and certification

When utilizing VRET, a major part of the treatment system is dependent on the computer. This means that technical problems are likely to occur and cause issues.

Should there be a glitch in the system, the flow of the session can be interrupted or the patient could suffer side effects. This means that proper administration of this treatment will require a lot of technological maintenance.

Though the sessions might be comparatively cheaper to in vivo, they are by no means cheap in and of themselves. The hardware and software required to construct a virtual reality experience is very expensive and not produced commonly or on large scales.

This also makes it extremely difficult to produce environments that are specifically tailored to the patient because the creation of such an environment would require the expertise of an actual video game developer who could write the script and create an entire story. 

As a result it has to be carefully judged when VR exposure therapy is the best treatment route as not all patients are good candidates on whom this treatment can have a noticeable effect.

Due to these complications, administration of this treatment will require doctors to undergo an extra stage of training and preparation, which is an extra expense. This also makes finding trained and competent professionals more difficult for patients. 

Dr. Norman Kent summarizes some of these pros and cons in the following interview. He also introduces the problem of virtual reality sickness that 20% - 30% of people have, which consists of nausea, headaches, and eye aches.


Regardless of these disadvantages, Virtual reality is a viable treatment option for phobias and requires further research and more societal acceptance so that in the future, it can have a greater positive impact on phobia treatment .

VRET exposure therapy requires more research so that it can be streamlined into a more flawless method of treatment. There is also a need for more research on how to distinguish patients upon whom VR exposure therapy is most likely to yield results. 

We also need to support the further development of VR technology (such as Occulus Rift) in general because they could have possible benefits in medical treatment.

According to Dr. Kent, attention also needs to be given to augmented reality, which differs from virtual reality in that it alters the real world in some useful way instead of creating a completely new virtual world.  


Augmented reality provides the potential to have a higher transfer rate of treatment effects from the virtual world into the real world. 

VRET contains the potential to give way to an era where phobias and anxiety disorders could possibly be treated in the home of the patient with the long distance guidance of a doctor, or even on the battlefield or on the site of a disastrous or traumatic event.

It is up to us as a society to ensure that the right steps are taken so that this treatment method can be explored to its fullest and all its potential benefits reaped. 


Thursday, December 3, 2015

FINAL TASK 3: Thursday work session

"Phobias and anxiety disorders treated in virtual environments help patients to feel more comfortable."

Virtual reality exposure therapy (VERT) is an alternative to standard in vivo (real life) exposure therapy that can make treatment of phobia and anxiety disorders more efficient, affordable, and comfortable for patients.

Exposure therapy is defined a psychotherapy that utilizes the repetition of real, visualized, or simulated exposure to a feared situation, traumatic event/memory, or object in order to achieve habituation. 

In lay-man's terms, it is a form of therapy that asks the patient to face their fear repeatedly so that they can get used to it or conquer it. 

Traditionally, exposure was achieved in vivo, or real confrontation and through visualized confrontation (where the patient has to visualize or imagine a confrontation). VERT introduces an alternative that can be considered the best of both words as it allows for a virtual confrontation experience where human-computer interaction can allow the user to become an active participant in a computer generated three dimensional environment.

VERT has been found to be successful alternative to real exposure therapy in treatment common phobias such as of fear of heights, flying, and spiders

VERT is still a relatively unknown treatment method and though the general public may question its validity, it has been found to be better than, or on par with, in vivo and visualization.

In a study on the treatment of acrophobia, or fear of heights, it was found that VERT is a relatively cheap and effective alternative to in vivo therapy. The patients who underwent VERT had comparable results and post treatment benefits. 

Similar results were found when studying the treatment of fear of flying (FOF). VERT and in vivo exposure were essentially equivalent post treatment on standardized questionnaires, willingness to fly, anxiety ratings during the flight, self-ratings of improvement, and patient satisfaction with treatment. 

A meta-analysis of current data available on VERT concluded that "VRET has potential for the treatment of anxiety and several specific phobias” and it can successfully reduce anxiety and phobia symptoms in patients. 

Advantages of virtual reality therapy include cost, increased safety, control, confidentially, and, unlimited repetitions exposure to feared situations

VERT, as aforementioned, can be considered to be the best of both worlds because it offers a middle ground between the cost-effectiveness and safety of visualization and the life-like  exposure off in vivo therapy. 

For example, in vivo exposure therapy for phobias such as fear of flying can be expensive but VERT exposure therapy is comparatively cheaper than buying plane ticket every time an offers the patient a greater chance of or reimbursement from insurance as the sessions would be much shorter, making the total cost much more bearable for the patient.




Sunday, November 29, 2015

Preliminary explanatory headline: Virtual reality can be used to treat phobias and panic and anxiety disorders by creating a virtual environment where the patient can be repeatedly exposed to the stimulus of their fear and trained to become more accustomed to it (I am debating whether or not the underlined part is necessary as it makes the headline a bit long)
  • I will begin by introducing what virtual reality is in the context of psychological treatment (maybe provide an embedded link for the benefit of those who wish to know more or require clarification)
    • “VR offers a human-computer interaction paradigm in which users are no longer simply external observers of images on a computer screen but are active participants within a computer-generated three-dimensional virtual world. In virtual environments, the user experiences a sense of presence or immersion in the virtual environment. A sense of presence is also essential for conducting exposure therapy “– Rothbaum 2009
  • I will also define exposure therapy (provide an embedded link for the benefit of those who wish to know more or require clarification)
    • “psychotherapy that involves repeated real, visualized, or simulated exposure to or confrontation with a feared situation or object or a traumatic event or memory in order to achieve habituation and that is used especially in the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorder, or phobias” – Merriam Webster Medical Dictionary 
  • Then there will a brief introduction on how virtual reality and exposure therapy overlap
    • Virtual reality exposure therapy is an alternate to in vivo or real life exposure to the stimulus that triggers a fearful reaction in the patient. For example, if you are afraid of spiders, the instead of confronting a real spider right off the bat, the patient has the choice to confront a virtual spider in a virtual environment that the psychologist will create and control. 
    • Before the emergence of virtual reality 
First subheading: Virtual reality exposure therapy has been found to be as successful as in vivo exposure therapy 
  • I will cite the following three studies and briefly summarize their methods and conclusions
    • Virtual reality treatment versus exposure in vivo: a comparative evaluation in acrophobia - Emmelkamp PM1, Krijn M, Hulsbosch AM, de Vries S, Schuemie MJ, van der Mast CA
      • Found that for treating acrophobia VR is a relatively cheap and effective alternative to in vivo therapy. Study composed of 33 patients suffering from the phobia and the virtual environment was based off the real environment 
    • Virtual reality exposure therapy and standard (in vivo) exposure therapy in the treatment of fear of flying - Rothbaum BO1, Anderson P, Zimand E, Hodges L, Lang D, Wilson J
      • This study exposed 75 patients to either VR exposure therapy (VRE), Standard in vivo exposure therapy (SE), or placed them on a wait list (WL) where they completed randomly assigned treatment following the waiting period (25 patients per treatment method). It was found that VRE and SE were essentially equivalent post treatment on standardized questionnaires, willingness to fly, anxiety ratings during the flight, self-ratings of improvement, and patient satisfaction with treatment. VRE was also fond superior to WL on all counts. Treatment gains were found to be maintained on follow- up assessments after 6 and 12 months 
    • Affective outcomes of virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety and specific phobias: A meta-analysis - Thomas D. Parsons, Albert A. Rizzo
      • “Given the currently available data, it appears that VRET is relatively effective from a psychotherapeutic standpoint in carefully selected patients. VRET can reduce anxiety and phobia symptoms …The meta-analytic findings parallel qualitative reviews revealing that VRET has potential for the treatment of anxiety and several specific phobias.”
Video interview here:
  • Virtual reality is still  a relatively new treatment method that not many know about. Could you briefly summarize its possible pros and cons?
  • What do you think about the future of virtual reality in treatment? Do you believe that its going to advance to the point that it will replace standard in vivo exposure therapy or not? 
    • Or do you think that it will become a preliminary stage of treatment that can be used to get patients on the right track for treatment and then followed up with in vivo treatement? 
  • What are some of the tings that a doctor considers when creating a possible virtual environment for therapy? What kinds of precautions are taken to ensure the patients safety?
Third subheading: Advantages of virtual reality therapy include cost, increased safety, control, and confidentially, convenience and ease of scheduling, and unlimited repetitions exposure to feared situations
  • In vivo exposure therapy for phobias such as fear of flying can be expensive but VR exposure therapy is comparatively cheaper than buying plane ticket every time 
    • There is also a greater chance for reimbursement from insurance as the sessions would be much shorter and the total cost will be much more bearable for the patient
  • VR exposure therapy also can allow for countless repetitions and attempts because all you need to do is restart the computer to recreate the simulation once again. In vivo therapy does not allow for this with as much ease 
    • VR exposure therapy also lets the doctor control the degree of exposure (ex. increase or decrease the number and size of spiders a patient with arachnophobia sees) and exercise complete dominion over all external factors as the treatment can always be conducted in the office
    • It also makes scheduling much easier and can allow for multiple sessions on a weekly or monthly basis so that the patient can be treated faster
  • Since therapy is always conducted in the office there is less danger of confidentially breaches or of public interference in treatment (ex. meeting a friend while outside for treatment)
Fourth subheading: The disadvantages to virtual reality exposure therapy are that you can have technological difficulties with the computer, its effectiveness is dependent on the patient, the technology required is expensive to manufacture, and administration requires doctors to have extra training and certification
  • Should there be a glitch in the system, the flow of the session can be interrupted or the patient could suffer side effects. Proper administration of this treatment will require a lot of technological maintenance 
  • Thought the sessions might be comparatively cheaper to in vivo, they are by no means cheap. The hardware and the creation of a virtual environment is expensive to create 
  • As a result it has to be carefully judged when VR exposure therapy is a the best treatment route as not all patients are good candidates on whom this treatment will have effects
  • Administration of this treatment will require doctors to undergo an extra state of training and preparation (which is also an expense) 
Fifth subheading: Virtual reality is a viable treatment option for phobias and requires further research and more societal acceptance so that in the future, it can have a greater positive impact on phobia treatment 
  • VR exposure therapy requires more research so that it can be stream lined into a more flawless method of treatment
    • There is also a need for more research upon how to distinguish patients upon whom VR exposure therapy is most likely to yield results 
    • For this to occur it needs to gain more name recognition and societal acceptance – informative literature that can be given to the general public could help partially resolve this problem 
    • We also need to support the further development of VR technology (such as Occulus Rift) in general because they could have possible benefits in medical treatment 


Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Simple interactivity in multimedia explanations lessens overload and helps students to learn better

In a quest to make the simple PowerPoint more effective, researchers have found that the proper incorporation of simple user interaction (in this case control over the pace of the multimedia explanation) in a multimedia explanation (technical term for a PowerPoint that attempts to explain a cause and effect system), can strengthen their conceptual understanding and help them learn more deeply by decreasing the cognitive load the user experiences, a finding which is in agreement with cognitive load theory

Since cognitive load refers to the amount of information that a person's working memory can hold at one time, decreasing it decreases the amount of stress placed on the brain and helps the user learn. 

Proper incorporation of user interactivity is required to effectively decrease the load though, and according to this this study the Part-Whole presentation was found to be the proper method. 

The Part-Whole presentation method follows the principles of progressive method building and allows learners to first build component models that represent how every individual part of the system works, and then integrate these component models into a casual model that puts every part together into a coherent cause-and-effect chain. 

This research is being done to solve the long enduring problem of being bombarded with too much information all at once and comprehending very little

Why is this important? Because every student is familiar with the PowerPoint's information chocked slides supplemented by pictures, diagrams, and whatever else your professor deems of enough importance to be featured on the big screen of his classroom.

Every student is also familiar with the vicious cycle of racing against time to mindlessly copy down (or type up) all the information before the next slide is pulled up and another concept, another chunk of information, is thrown at them, repeating this process till the end of class rolls around and they walk out with structure-less notes and a partial, vague understanding of the content they just “learned.”

In an attempt to solve this problem ,the goal of this research was to explore the possible effects of incorporating simple user interactivity on “cognitive processing during learning and the cognitive outcome of learning.” The researchers began with the hypothesis that simple user interaction would lessen the cognitive load on the user’s working memory and thus, allow them to build a more comprehensive mental model of the system and learn concepts more deeply.

The study used two groups and exposed them to four different treatments to find the best method of integrating interaction in multimedia presentations

The study consisted of two experiments in which 60 learners were split into four groups and exposed to two 140-second, 16 part multimedia explanations on lightning formation. There were two types of presentations in this study – whole, which is a continuous animated narration that plays the entire presentation with no user input, and part, which is when the material is presented part by part and transition between parts is under the user’s control. 

Researchers proposed that part presentations would give learners more time and opportunity to fully process and relate pieces of information, as opposed to an equivalent whole presentation that only allows for a specific amount of time on each slide. 

In experiment one, learners either received a whole presentation followed by a part presentation (Whole-Part), or a part presentation followed by a whole presentation (Part-Whole). 

In experiment two learners received either a whole presentation followed by another whole presentation (Whole-Whole), or a part presentation followed by another part presentation (Part-Part). Learners in both experiments were asked to take a cognitive load rating test after each individual presentation and then take a retention test and a transfer after viewing both presentations.

The study's results showed that the Part-Whole presentation method leads to the least amount of cognitive load on the user

The results of the study showed that the Part-Whole and the Part-Part groups had higher mean transfer test scores than the Whole-Part and the Whole-Whole groups, proving that allowing learners to control the speed of the information and move from slide to slide at their own pace helps them learn information so that they can effectively apply it. 

The increase in mean rating score in the Part-Whole group and the decrease in the Whole-Part group supports the conclusion that learners perceived a decrease in cognitive load when shown a part presentation.

It should be noted that the retention tests across all four groups were similar which indicates that both types of presentations were equally effective in helping students recall the major ideas and concepts of the topic.

These results have to be effectively applied in classroom settings by professors so that learners can glean the most information possible from presentations

These results reflect what every student who has left blank spaces in their notes during lecture has said - "if only I could slow things down and look and that slide longer." Students find it easier when they can review material at their own pace, which means that the incorporation of interactivity in presentations can definitely help learning.

But, simply incorporating interactivity will not improve learning. It is when interactivity is incorporated so that cognitive load is decreased and the two state construction of a casual model is allowed to take place that understanding can be impacted in a positive manner.

This research calls for educators to divert from the conventional method of Whole-Part presentations and to give students control of the pace during the first viewing so that they can learn in the best way possible. But, putting this into practice brings the problems of students assuming that they have all the information necessary in the PowerPoint so not coming to class, or students moving too fast through the PowerPoint.

Educators need to find a way to reconcile these pros and cons and try to develop a plan that can allow them to implement the results of research without adverse affects so that students can have the most effective learning experience possible. 


Monday, September 7, 2015

A look at the harsh treatment, long hrs, & low pay of motorcycle delivery boys who make up India's eCommerce industry

The plight of service providers is often ignored because people take them for granted and don't fully comprehend how much difficulty they might be undergoing in order to satisfy the needs of their customers. I would share this article in order to raise awareness of the deplorable employment conditions of motorcycle delivery boys in India so that people could not only become aware of their struggles, but also so that this article could inspire further thought about what other service providers that readers might take for granted and what they, as customers, could do to help make their lives a little bit easier.

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/big-picture-the-last-mile-boys/