PCI Registered Reports

Announcements

Please note: To accommodate reviewer and recommender holiday schedules, we will be closed to submissions from 1st July — 1st September. During this time, reviewers will be able to submit reviews and recommenders will issue decisions, but no new or revised submissions can be made by authors. The one exception to this rule is that authors using the scheduled track who submit their initial Stage 1 snapshot prior to 1st July can choose a date within the shutdown period to submit their full Stage 1 manuscript.

We are recruiting recommenders (editors) from all research fields!

Your feedback matters! If you have authored or reviewed a Registered Report at Peer Community in Registered Reports, then please take 5 minutes to leave anonymous feedback about your experience, and view community ratings.

Back

602

Title

Does ‘virtuality’ affect the role of prior expectations in perception and action? Comparing predictive grip and lifting forces in real and virtual environmentsuse asterix (*) to get italics

Authors

David J. Harris, Tom Arthur, & Gavin BuckinghamPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

Year

2024

Picture

Abstract

<p>Recent theories in cognitive science propose that prior expectations strongly influence how individuals perceive the world and control their actions. This influence is particularly relevant in novel sensory environments, such as virtual reality (VR). This registered report outlines a study examining the impact of VR on prediction-related sensory perception and motor control during object lifting. We aim to test two competing hypotheses: the Low-Precision Priors (LPP) hypothesis suggests reduced influence of prior expectations in VR due to the novelty and uncertainty of the context, while the High-Precision Priors (HPP) hypothesis posits increased reliance on predictions relative to current sensory information due to sensory uncertainty. We will employ weight illusion tasks (the size-weight and material-weight illusions) to isolate the effects of expectations on perception and action to test whether VR alters the influence of prior expectations on weight perception and fingertip forces. This research addresses crucial questions about how virtual environments impact predictive sensorimotor control and has implications for applications of VR technologies to training and rehabilitation.</p>

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these data (if you have any problems with the deposit of your data, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org).

You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these scripts (if you have any problems with the deposit of your scripts, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org).

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI, SWHID or URL) giving public access to these codes (if you have any problems with the deposit of your codes, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org).

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Keywords

virtual reality; prior; size-weight illusion; motor learning

Methods that require specific expertise (optional)

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Thematic fields

Life Sciences

Suggested reviewers - Suggest up to 10 reviewers (provide names and Email addresses). (Optional)

No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Registered Reports. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct

Opposed reviewers - Suggest up to 5 people not to invite as reviewers. (Optional)

e.g. John Doe [john@doe.com]

Submission date

2023-11-22 12:25:57

Recommender

Robert McIntosh

Reviewers

Ben van Buren

or Register
Submit a report